January 08, 2004
I've always had a problem with zoos. The way they were historically constructed embodied a colonial gazing at the wild and the exotic, which ignored the maltreatment of the caged animals.
I came to hate Zoos as a child. I saw this representation of exhibiting nature as a site of cruelty for the lions, tigers, monkeys and polar bears.
The zoo has been reinvented. The Monarto Zoological Park near Murray Bridge in South Australia is a haven for endangered animals. It is primarily about animal welfare and conservation. Steve Urwin's Australia Zoo is quite different. It is primarily about selling an updated pioneer image of wilderness for the tourist market. The primary concern is to make money.

Leunig
Good to see Leunig siding with the animals against the media-driven stuntman. Someone needs to highlight their moral status in the entertainment business.
Update
More on the inability of Steve Irwin and Australia Zoo here. It's a piece that says that Irwin, the khakis-clad showbiz personality, cannot take criticism even of his cornball wildlife programs. And those who have a different view of wildlife conservation (eg crocodile farming) are dismissed as the "Hitlers of wildlife".
When will we hear the old line of tall poppies being cut down by ratbags filled with envy and resentment?
|
I understand your sentiments Gary but on balance I'd still favour the interaction of humans with real animals via circuses and zoos. The day when human experience of animals is simply a pixel image, may have more dire long term consequences for the animal world.