The article “WHY LOOK AT ANIMALS” is offering a clear picture of how we’ve looked at animals differently over the course of our development and industrial revolutions. The author John Berger has wonderfully shown how real animals have disappeared from our society and what remains in the modern zoo & pet culture are in no way the same animals that we used to admire & have contributed significantly to our developments in the past. In his writing he exemplifies how through the course of our economic development we’ve not only marginalized animals but ironically ourselves as well.
The author starts his analysis from the time when humans were nothing but hunter-gatherers. Back then humans looked at animals with great awe and wonder which inspired many cave arts at that time. These arts are a clear proof of how marvellous & ferocious animals were before humans started to domesticate them for various needs. The look between animal and a human being then was different in every sense of the word. Then, the animal used to see human as any other species, it did not reserve a special look for human (Berger, 1980, pp. 4,5). The look between animal & men were about non-comprehension for each other (Berger, 1980, p. 5). Something that has changed in modern times. After we learned to farm and building settlements then animals were either domesticated or looked at as magical, oracular beings depending on their nature. The Hindus envisaged the earth being carried on the back of an elephant and the elephant on the back of a giant tortoise (Berger, 1980, p. 8). Similar fantasies can be found in other cultures around the world. This shows us that at the most primitive stage of our knowledge, we attached mystical values to animals while looking at them. Our understanding and perception about them were purely from observation & imagination.
The writer then goes on to analyse previous famous literary works on the subject. ‘History of Animals’ by Aristotle is the first major scientific work on the comparative relation between man & animal. In his book the great scholar makes an argument that most human qualities & attitudes exist in animals as well. They only differ quantitatively. As in humans have more or less of a given quality compared to an animal. This level of anthropomorphism was later challenged by Descartes. He argued that as animals are soulless, they are more likely to be compared to machines. Both the Human body & animal body function as like a machine. It is the soul that makes humans different from all the other animals. This was Descartes’s philosophy. During the first stages of the industrial revolution animals were used as machines (Berger, 1980, p. 13). During this time animals were mostly looked at as raw materials for different industries. There were many industries that used these animals in inhumane ways. These animals were isolated & confined for life. From birth till death, they lived and served for these giant factories. John Berger quotes from Susan George’s ‘How the Other Half Dies’ as proof of this statement in page 13 of his book. This mechanical view of animal’s work capacity was later applied to that of workers (Berger, 1980, p. 13). When poor human beings started to replace these animals as a tool for industrialists. Berger (1980) then claims how “nearly all modern techniques of social conditioning were first established with animal experiments” (p. 13). This makes one think, how similar we are to these animals that we so cleverly are exploiting. How we are just another species living and enjoying mother nature’s resources. But due to our vanity we rose to an imagined pedestal of superiority and stared ruling over all the other species.
The invention of public zoos is an interesting period in human history. The British first established a zoo in London in 1828 (Berger, 1980, p. 21). During this time animals started to disappear from society & daily lives of the people. Automobiles, conveyor belts started taking their place. So, to demonstrate spirit of exploration and colonial superiority the British started to bring exotic animals from these colonized lands to London for the public to behold (Berger, 1980, p. 21). Here at the advent of modern consumerism we humans started marginalizing animals because of industrial revolution. Horse carried caravans were no longer needed. Elephants were no longer necessary for transport nor heavy lifting. Their only use to humans then became purely for entertainment. Zoo & Circus culture started booming as society kept alienating animals from their daily lives. As a result, the true nature of these animals started to disappear. In captivity their behaviour is far from normal. In fact, their behaviour is somewhat like men living in ghettos, shanty towns, prisons, madhouses (Berger, 1980, p. 26).
Now a days pet culture has become incredibly popular. Never in the history of mankind has there been such massive use of animals other than for productive or consumptive purposes. As we have distanced ourselves from nature, forests & real animals and confined ourselves into urban cities with nuclear families with tiny apartments we’ve created a void within our minds. A void that is being filled by adopting these animals, who offer companionship, affection & a sense of connection to something other than just mere tools for capitalism. Berger (1980) explains this “The pet offers its owner a mirror to a part that is otherwise never reflected” (p. 15). The pet and it’s owner both sacrifice personal independence. The owner does so by choice in order to fill his void, but the pet animal is now just being used for fulfilling emotional needs.
While describing the artworks of Grandville, Berger further explains this similarity between humans & animal confinement culture. “Animals and populace are becoming synonymous, which is to say the animals are fading away” (Berger, 1980, p. 19). In his arts, Grandville cleverly shows how synonyms humans and animals have become in this modern era. A bear is depicted as a good father to his cub, the dog in the dog pounds is like a man in a cage, a vulture is portrayed as a rapacious landlord and so on. This forces the viewer to look at animal from a very different perspective. A perspective that is not very familiar to modern humans, who is no longer capable of seeing an animal as another children of nature who has every right to be free.
So, we see from the very beginning of this review of this great article that the writer does an excellent job in showing how the look between man & animal has changed over time and it is only the human who is responsible for this drastic change. The animals that we have as our pets & the one’s in zoos can never give us the look that existed between the animals & our ancestors when they were nothing but hunter-gatherers.
Critique
The author John Berger was too critical towards zoo culture. Their originating purpose may have been ill but in modern times there are different forms of zoos. Zoos, that save animals. They do not captivate these animals for recreational uses. These zoos create the best possible environment for breeding and saving rare species of animals, animals who are about to go extinct otherwise. They are not fed in jail like cells with miniscule amount of real natural environment around them. After breeding and reaching a certain age if they are deemed worthy of surviving in the wild, they are freed. These special purpose zoos should have been acknowledged by the author. But he did not mention them in his article and protested their unrealistic portrayal of animals.
Moreover, one other issue Berger did not mention in his analysis of human & animal co-existence history is the fact that how vital of a role animals have had for the war culture. Humans have used many types of animals for wars before the invention of guns and tanks. Elephants, Horses were an integral part of human imperialistic period. Thousands of wars have been fought where billions of animals have died alongside humans. Animals that served for the expansion of an empire. Animals that were war companions of human soldiers. This enormous use of animals when they were more than just tools or entertainment for us, is not discussed at length in this article by John Berger.
This article has discussed at great length about how animals have contributed to our development. Berger protests how we used them as machines, as sources of food, as our companions & for entertainment. The article should have acknowledged their use as battle equipment as well. Not only we’ve alienated them from our society but also our conflicts. In this context such use deserves to be mentioned.
References
Berger, J. 1980. Why Look at Animals? in About Looking. Pantheon Books. Pp. 3–28.
