Monkey Business

First, here’s a little tidbit to worry you.  If you don’t own or look after an animal you may be a latent or overt speciesist. Yes, you heard me right, I said speciesist.  A speciesist practices speciesism which is a prejudice against nonhuman animals.  How do you like them bananas?

I bet you think I made that word up.  Well, I didn’t. (http://www.richardryder.co.uk/speciesism.html) I ran into it in an essay on animal art which I downloaded from the internet.  It was a pretty silly essay to my mind but it clearly illustrates the idea that however incredible, some people will believe anything they can think.

Now, I’m all for letting people believe what they will but I find it disconcerting when they try to get me to believe that what they say is true.  Let me give you an example.

The essay informs us that: “From December 16, 1997 to January 10, 1998 a most unusual art exhibit was on display at the Terrain Gallery in San Francisco. What was unusual about the art is that it was the expressions of life as seen through the eyes, emotions and imaginations of two lowland gorillas. The artwork on display included a number of paintings representing a favorite creative and emotional outlet for gorillas Koko and Michael. The two gorillas, because they have learned to communicate with humans through the use of sign language, have brought into serious doubt that human beings are the only species that understand abstract concepts."(http://www.koko.org/news/121697.html)

Well, saying so, don’t make it so but if you’re a doubting Thomas like me then the author has a painful sounding epithet to abuse you with.  You’re a speciesist.  How serious such an accusation is depends on how popular the idea becomes.  I doubt if it will gain much currency because unlike terms such as racist and sexist, it is difficult to say. 

I have no problems with those who take what has come to be known as ‘monkey art’ seriously.  Indeed, that gorillas, elephants and cats have produced art works promotes the argument that art criticism need not be harnessed to anthropomorphic concerns.  A work of art is not intended to be a pictorial diary of an artist’s psyche or emotional stability though some may desire to interpret it as such. 

I suspect, however, the stated essayist and others of a like mind have a different agenda.  Art is not their priority. Rather, their goal is to promote an extreme form of animal rights. But maybe I’m wrong, you tell me?  The essay argues that the ghost of speciesism will surely haunt us even if the ideas are shown to be fancifully presented.  It then goes on to point out that “Dr. Francine Patterson and Wendy Gordon use the art of the gorillas to help make a case for the personhood of gorillas.”  Who’s making a monkey of whom? 

Launt Thompson
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?field-keywords=Launt+Thompson&url=search-alias%3Daps&x=16&y=9