How Does Tomi Ungerer Use Animals In Scientific Illustration?

     The book uses animals instead of human characters and this is personification. The book has three main types of animals that each symbolizes the different cultures during the Holocaust. The Jews are symbolized as mice, the Nazi Germans as cats, and the Poles as pigs. The reason why Spiegelman uses animals instead of humans is because he wants to give the reader a better understanding of what type of animal symbolizes the different types of social classes that are being addressed.

Human beings are considered to be the greatest creations that were given knowledge, skills and power to rule over the entire planet. However, at the same time, their relationship with other animals and its implications in human civilization cannot be denied. Historically, it is proven that for thousands of years, human beings have developed close contact with animals who were their means of living and at the same time often, great companions. Considering the great significance of animals in the lives of human beings, often their relationships were portrayed in literature by authors. It was meant to help the global community to have a clear understanding of the impact that animals have in the lives of human beings which is very much significant.

“It is important that artists are not outside the equation, we don’t stand on the sidelines. Artists are part of the story of a response, we cannot stand aside and let others make the response.” - Anish Kapoor. In the literary work Animal Farm by George Orwell, a farm ran by animals was used to make a political statement about the corruption of the Soviet Union, while this is a unique topic many artists have used their works to share their opinions on corrupt political/social systems.

Elie Wiesel uses animal imagery when Idek is beating Elie, the Kapos choose which Jews they like, and when the sirens go off. Elie spent more time in Buna then he did in any other camp. On the fourth day in Buna, when the Jews were standing outside of their tents, the Kapos arrived and started to

Anthropomorphism plays a crucial part on the child’s developing mind. Between the ages of three and five years old, children become exposed to anthromorphic depictions when beginning to learn about real-life animals. This skewed view of the natural world and how children are taught to interpret it may be why children become confused when faced with real animals because of the human qualities are not really present. Throughout the article the author discuses different cross-cultural and experimental studies to show the different ways that children responded to various representations of animals. For example, a child that has a pet at home may be more likely to tell the difference between anthromorphism and real-life animals as opposed to a child who does not have a pet. Other studies have

In chapter four of Melissa Milgrom’s Still Life, How the Orangutan Got Its Skin, Milgrom gains access to the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History (SNMNH) and its workshop where taxidermy specialists prepare and create mounts for museum displays. Throughout this chapter, she makes several points about people taking extreme measures out of love for preserving animals. These points are very similar to those found in the documentary The Elephant in the Living Room, where exotic pet owners, such as Terry Brumfield, do crazy things out of love for their pets.

This can be linked to The Hunchback in the Park, where several pieces of evidence of animal imagery which have the same effect can be found. Examples of this include ‘Like the park birds he came early’ and ‘Through the loud zoo of the willow groves’. In addition, animals only communicate very basically, without the complexity that humans do. By referring to the two characters as animals in the poems, both poets exemplify how isolated the characters are from a normal society.

Probably one of the most important uses of animal imagery in the book comes early on, when McMurphy describes the group sessions as a “pecking party”. McMurphy explains a pecking party to Acutes as:

185). Kathy has empathy with the animals, suggesting that “For all their busy, metallic features, there was something sweet and vulnerable about each of them” (Never, p. 185, 2005). The animals are thus represented as vulnerable figures of liminality, with their hybridity expressed in the fact that they are neither the archetypal image of a domestic pet, nor a robotic automaton, but an unsettling combination of the two. Ishiguro therefore fuses art and the bio-technic, with Kathy’s empathetic feelings towards Tommy’s creations suggesting that empathy should be applied as unreservedly to the inhuman. Therefore, Ishiguro uses the figures of the animals to indicate the paradoxically artificial nature of art, gesturing towards the limitations that we impose on creativity by associating art and empathy solely with the category of the ‘human.’ As H.G. Wells’ The Ireland of Doctor Moreau proposes, why is it acceptable to “burn out all the animal” (Wells, 1896, p. 59) – to subjugate the other, for the benefit of the human – but not to subject those we label human to the same treatment? As recent eco-criticism has charged, this appears to be related to the connection between scientific advancement and “the domination and expropriation of nature” (Birke, 1994, p. 134). In Ishiguro’s

The animals themselves are used to enhance certain characteristics. c. Orwell used allegory as a rhetorical device and order to write a satire type book. He did this because it is much easier to form a critique with this medium. It's easier for people to see the absurdity in something if they are shown humor and parallelism rather than regular data.

The animal and nature imagery provides another important point in the tale. Nature is bestowed as a power of virtue and truth. Much of the book’s animal imagery is ironic. Despite this society is troubled with technology and ignores nature, many formidable mechanical tools are designed after or called for animals, such as the Electric-Eyed Snake machine and the Mechanical

However, it is still important to realize how taxidermy collections compare to new modern technology, which changed the way people are educated about nature and the wildlife it encompasses. “The process of preserving skins can be traced back to the beginnings of civilization, and despite changing social attitudes to the display and use of an animal's dead body, a great deal of information is gained annually by the study of this preserved material assembled in museum collections (“Types of Collections”, natsca.org).” Taxidermy collections are so diverse in subjects from game animals, to pachyderms, and even to the smallest of insects. The diverse collections hold within them great research potential, including a world of excitement and liveliness not expected from something dead. The advantages taxidermy has over growing technology not only lies in its overwhelming amount of information it provides, but the legitimate aura of realism it gives off. Mariel Carr said it best, “And I have to say even today when I can easily look up thousands of photographs of these animals online there’s something thrilling about standing inches away from a polar bear who could definitely kill me if alive.” When trying to educate people, captivation is key. It gets the audience to listen, recognize, and address the issues or themes trying to be expressed. Taxidermy

Walton Ford creates paintings that are based on the style of the naturalist style of John James Audubon. Audubon was a naturalist who studied the biodiversity and anatomy of animals in their habitat or by examining a dead specimen. Ford uses the style of Audubon, however, unlike Audubon, Ford does not make the subject of the painting life-size and proportional to the real life animals.(Ford, Artnet) Ford does this to make the art seem more conceptual, rather than logical and realistic. (Ford, Art21)

In his 2014 poem, Fred Chappell and “The Felines of Heaven”, along with Billy Collins, “The Revenant”, his 2005 poem, compare in ways simple but also complex. Just looking at the titles and how they are together about animals. The reasoning behind putting animals in poems was blurry to me but after research, I discovered that “Ultimately, animals offer poets a mirror through which to explore themselves, an unwitting foil used to understand what it means to be human. Sometimes the comparison ultimately reveals a dissatisfaction with humanity” (“Poems about Animals and Pets”). Poets use animals to show the audience the emotion of affection, how humans feel, and that humanity is declining. I appreciate and admire how poets use these animals

In conclusion, many Romantic poets showed a fascination with nature, and especially with animals. They used animals as symbols for many things, or for another way of viewing the world, but no matter what the use, animals played a major part in the works of Romantic poets.