One complaint, which doesn't detract from the movie, but echoes something I've been thinking about lately.
A lot of the scenes with horses were very obviously fake. They were digitally animated horses. Same with the elephants and lions, though that's pretty common nowadays. But fake horses?
I understand why things like lions and elephants would be digital instead of real. They Are big and powerful, and an accident could be very bad. But horses? Sure, accidents happen sometimes on horses. But so many more people know how to work with horses! And horses can be so well trained. Plus there are always weird accidents involved in filming.
It's not like they horses were doing anything unreal (like flying, or jumping off cliffs). So why were they fake?
It worries me because it's already getting hard for horse people to find work. Technology is driving a lot of animal skills to extinction.
I'll start off by saying that this is a very touchy topic, because of the history behind it.
Animals used in film and entertainment have been very cruelly treated in the past. They can be injured (even killed) while making a movie. And of course large animals can be dangerous to humans.
But when people start to replace real animals with fake ones, it has other effects. Like I mentioned, it drives people (those that work with animals) out of jobs. And while there may have been some cruel methods of animal "training" (more like breaking) in the past, it is not always that way. There are very humane methods of animal training. And we are losing opportunities to display that.
But I think a bigger, though less visible problem, is that it's a further gulf between people and nature. We're replacing real animals with fake, computer generated ones. It takes away the value of real living breathing creatures.
There is no substitute for seeing a real animal with your own eyes.
Every week at the zoo when the tiger walks inside and people see him up close, everyone gasps in awe. He walks in of his own free will, because he knows that if he comes inside, he'll get treats. Though sometimes if he's fast asleep, he might not hear the call. The lions don't really care enough about treats to come inside, but they will occasionally.
And in the evening when the first giraffe walks into the barn, there are murmurs of joy at seeing such a beautiful, amazing creature less than ten feet away.
One thing good zoos are starting to do, which makes sense is called "protected contact." It means that for potentially dangerous animals, there is always a barrier between the animal and the humans working with them. It makes sense. Even the best trained tiger is so big and strong that it could hurt someone by accident. At trainers that lose focus for even a moment could trigger a tiger's instincts. Plenty of keepers admit that all their accidents were their own fault. But no matter how careful you are, human error will always happen at some point.
But it's still got that underlining thing about separating humans from animals and nature. It's just my opinion, but since I've taken some strange risks, I think it's worth that risk to work hands-on with animals. It seems like it must make the bond all that stronger, and I don't want that kind of bond to disappear (Disclaimer - this is not the zoos opinion, and I have never worked hands on with any big dangerous animals, other than horses XD so take this with a grain of salt).
Every time I see events with real animals disappear, it hurts. Like when they took away the rainforest exhibit from our county fair. You could see animals there that you'd probably never see anywhere else. Like a binturong.
I think it does more damage to take away animals, because people will not care about them nearly as much if they can't meet them face to face. Plus it also gives animal keepers the opportunity to teach people about animals, and how to protect them.
As long as we're using methods that are kind to the animals. Any place that is cruel to animals must go away.
Circuses. I'm not really familiar with how they train their animals.
In the past circuses have treated animals horribly. Bad food, small cages, cruel training methods.
But surely there are kind ways to keep and train circus animals? Is it too expensive to give circus animals all the space and care they need? I don't know. I'm not as sure about this one. Some animals definitely don't belong in circus-like settings. But could kind circuses work?
Especially if they also teach people about the animals.
That's what good zoos do. They keep healthy animal populations in human care, which is insurance if anything happens to those animals in the wild. And in far to many cases, wild animals are in terrible danger. Some populations of animals have only been saved because there were some of of them in human care.
Plus zoos give people the opportunity to see animals, fall in love with them, and learn about them and the dangers they face.
Good zoos are here to help the animals, not to treat animals like mindless display pieces for people to gawk at.
Pets.
There are more tigers owned privately than there are wild tigers (there are only about 3,000 wild tigers left, and that's including all 6 species of tiger).
It's still legal to own animals like this in some states. Lions, tigers, chimpanzees (you can't actually obtain chimps as pets anymore, but you can keep any chimps you already own @_@ )
Most of the people that own a pet tiger have absolutely no business caring for an animal like that. They just want to look tough or rich or something. There are sanctuaries that take in hundreds of bears and wolves and big cats that have been neglected and abused.
But in other places there are people that are legitimately trying to help endangered animals. They have the space and resources to care for them, but are tied in knots trying to make it work legally.
I think the main thing is that people should not be allowed to have an animal unless they are prepared to care for that animal through its entire life. So for tortoises that can live over 100 years, you probably have no business owning one since that animal will outlive you.
Or people think it would be fun to buy a little lion cub. But that cub will not stay little for long. It will grow up and become a huge and powerful predator. The chimpanzees at our zoo were all in this boat. They were all kept as pets when they were babies. They were dressed in human clothes and treated like human babies. But they are not humans. They don't act like humans. And they do not grow up to be humans. So when they grow up, the people don't want to keep them anymore.
If you have a huge amount of space and all of the resources to care for and train an animal through its entire life, including good diet, full medical care, and social interactions (some animals need others of their species), maybe you can think about owning one.
This also goes for domestic animals. Even cats and dogs. If you can't afford their basic care, or vet care when it's needed, don't get an animal. It is not okay to buy a bunny for your kid on Easter unless that kid is prepared to care for the bunny all 10+ years of its life.
Other animals like ball pythons can live 30+ years. Your life can change a lot in that time. You may go through school and marriage and parenthood, and still have your python.
I have a ball python. I've had him 10 years. And I intend to keep him for as long as he lives. I love him. And I'd recommend ball pythons as pets, but only if you can commit to them for 30 years. And that is a significant chunk of your life.
There is a book I read that had a fitting quote. If you tame something, you owe your life to it. Because by taming it, you have taken away its ability to care for itself.
So, there's my rant. Animals are wonderful companions. They can change your life. But they are a lot of work, and not everyone is capable of caring for animals.
So, go hug your animals and let them know that you'll take care of them forever.
No comments:
Post a Comment