Is it always wrong to use anthropomorphic rhetoric to compare animals with ourselves? Dutch primatologist Frans de Waal would say no. Anthropomorphization often drastically and comically misrepresents animal behavior and has long been condemned by scientists who describe it as a bane to the objective nature of empirical research. In Ted Hughes’ poem “The Jaguar,” he describes parrots who “shriek as if they were on fire, or strut / Like cheap tarts to attract the stroller with the nut.” Once again, this description is likely a gross mischaracterization of the parrot’s shriek, one that could just as easily be of joy as of pain. Beyond Disney classics, instances of anthropomorphic description can be found in poetry, literature, and even scientific research. With hyenas, anthropomorphization reveals itself in their hysterical cackling and deranged demeanor. It’s a product of one of the most fraught terms in the study of animal behavior: anthropomorphism.Īnthropomorphism is the act of imparting something (often an animal) with human characteristics. They impressed their creepy-goofiness upon me so much that I was shocked to discover the classic hyena laugh is not actually an expression of mirth-and real hyenas’ eyeballs don’t madly roll around in their sockets, either.Īt first glance, this may seem an innocuous observation, but the trope of hyenas as presented in The Lion King is the result of misinterpreted and mischaracterized animal conduct. The crazy dogs terrified me for years and permanently shaped my view on the hyena as an animal. The trio of hyenas - Shenzi, Banzai, and Ed, henchmen to chief antagonist Scar-never fail to rile youngsters who watch this animated classic. Grinning ear to ear, the wily-eyed canines of Walt Disney’s cartoon savanna evince maniacal joy as they dance and cackle.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |