Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Animal Kingdom Storms Reality TV and the Documentary Industry

By Alicia Rebensdorf, AlterNet. Posted August 27, 2007.


With the rise of "reality" TV shows like Meerkat Manor and the explosion of animal documentaries such as Arctic Circle, wildlife is finding new popularity in Hollywood -- but so is the dangerous idea that nature exists to entertain us.
More stories by Alicia Rebensdorf

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Earlier this month, black and white billboard portraits of the family don were erected throughout New York City. They advertised a popular mob drama known for its sex, murder and conflicted loyalties. The caption: Tony's Out. Flowers' In. The third season of Animal Planet's Meerkat Manor was officially here.

But Flowers isn't the only furry film star that's in. Lapping at the success of movies March of the Penguins and Winged Migration, a wave of feature-length nature documentaries is coming soon to a theater near you. August saw the release of Arctic Tale, a touching story of a baby walrus' and polar bears' first year. It will be followed by The Elephants of the Okavango, the touching story of an eight-week-old elephant calf's journey through the desert. And there's also Turtle's Song, a touching story of a loggerhead turtle's journey from egg to ocean and Earth, which follows four migrating animals and their broods.

The upright, big-eyed Meerkats will have a big year. Following the success of the Meerkat Manor, both the BBC and the Discovery Network have feature-length Meerkat films in production. The cinematographer of Winged Migration is also at work on Les Animaux Amoreux. The subtle anthropomorphism of the French title is a bludgeon in its English translation: Animals in Love.

The cuddliness of these protagonists has inspired Desson Thomson of the Washington Post to name the trend the rise of the "fuzzumentary."

The name is equally descriptive, however, of the genre's blurring of traditional documentaries with Hollywoodized narratives. Arctic Tale used composite animals to create a fictional story of a polar cub it named Nanu and a walrus pup Seela. The Elephants of the Okavango publicity promotes the emotional range of its infant star, Jani, and Queen of the Kalahari, which is structured as a prequel to the Meerkat Manor series, is sure to follow the show's soap format with named cast members and telenova narration: "Finally, young Daisy tries to join the group unnoticed, but it's not going to work. She reeks of Carlos' aftershave. Despite her attempts to apologize, the group is confused and angry."

Though more overt than the TV documentaries from the Mutual of Omaha-sponsored Wild Kingdom series on Animal Planet, this is not an entirely new phenomenon. As Watching Wildlife author Cynthia Chris points out, while we tend to think of nature programming as unmediated, historically "wildlife film narration has ascribed to a fairly conservative set of ideological values." They portray the nuclear family as a firm social unit and cast those outside this unit as antagonists. Their girl-meets-boy narratives suggest universality on uniquely human social constructions. They also tend to favors species whose looks we can relate to and whose behavior can seem to match our own.

But this new genre, critics say, pushes that sort of moralizing even further. As Thomson writes, "Nature does not exist purely to entertain children. And these bears and walruses -- which would devour us if given half a chance -- are not fuzzy toys soft-shoe shuffling across a rapidly melting snow stage." Also, as exhibited in the fuss around the March of the Penguins, when some on the right lauded the bird's conservative values and progressives shot back with evidence of their one-season matrimony, these quasidocumentaries can manipulate animals' inherently apolitical behavior into powerful political agendas.

I was recently watching an episode of Meerkat Manor in which one of the females (they called her Tosca) had given birth to a litter of pups. The narrator, Sean Astin, who played one of the hobbits in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, called her "the wayward daughter," and said the baby-daddy was likely from a rival Meerkat gang. According to his script, Tosca was kicked out of the den for reproducing without "her mother's permission." Never mind the question of just how a meerkat green lights a pregnancy, it seemed he stopped just short of calling her a slut. It might have been a little hypocritical to accuse others of anthropomorphism while I talked back to the TV, telling a certain hobbit he was a condescending prude. Still, I cared to remind: She's a meerkat. Getting knocked up is her primary purpose in life.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: animal documentary, reality tv, arctic circle, meerkat manor

Alicia Rebensdorf is a freelance writer and author of Chick Flick Road Kill: A Behind the Scenes Odyssey into Movie-Made America.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Food chain violence
Posted by: Davidco on Aug 27, 2007 4:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on the other hand has for decades been a staple of corporate supported TV programming. The message that violence is natural and that the way of the world is 'might makes right where only the strong survive' has always been an implicit promotion of laissez faire economics and realpolitik foreign relations.

From the days when there were only three corporate channels, children began swimming in this propaganda soup which divides the world into predators and victims. A glance at youtube favorites shows this brutalizing propaganda has become conventional wisdom and a fully acquired taste by young adulthood.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nature Does Not Exist to Entertain Us
Posted by: vasumurti on Aug 27, 2007 7:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Animals do not exist to entertain us. Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment.

Animal rights, a secular, moral philosophy, may be at odds with traditional religious thinking (e.g., human "dominion" over other animals), but this is equally true of democracy and representative government in place of the divine right of kings, the separation of church and state, the abolition of human slavery, the emancipation of women, birth control, the sexual revolution, lesbian and gay rights, and perhaps every kind of social progress since the end of the Dark Ages and the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment.

Some of the greatest figures in human history have been in favor of ethical vegetarianism and animal rights. These include: Albert Einstein, Leonardo da Vinci, Leo Tolstoy, Mohandas Gandhi, Alice Walker, George Bernard Shaw, Robert Browning, Percy Shelley, Voltaire, Thomas Hardy, Rachel Carson, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Victor Hugo, John Stuart Mill, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Pythagoras, Susan B. Anthony, Albert Schweitzer, Isaac Bashevis Singer, Gertrude Stein, Frederick Douglass, Francis Bacon, William Wordsworth, the Buddha, Mark Twain, and Henry David Thoreau.

In his 1975 book Animal Liberation, Peter Singer writes:

“A liberation movement is a demand for an end to prejudice and discrimination based upon an arbitrary characteristic like race or sex. The classic instance is the Black Liberation movement. The immediate appeal of this movement, and its initial, if limited, success, made it a model for other oppressed groups. We soon became familiar with Gay Liberation and movements on behalf of American Indians and Spanish speaking Americans. When a majority group —women— began their campaign some thought we had come to the end of the road.”

Singer writes: “We have to speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves. You can appreciate how serious this handicap is by asking yourself how long blacks would have had to wait for equal rights if they had not been able to stand up for themselves and demand it. The less able a group is to stand up and organize against oppression, the more easily it is oppressed.”

Singer admits: “’Animal Liberation’ may sound more like a parody of other liberation movements than a serious objective.” He notes that when Mary Wollstonecraft, a forerunner of today’s feminists, published A Vindication of the Rights of Women in 1792, “her views were widely regarded as absurd.”

In a parody entitled A Vindication of the Rights of Brutes, Thomas Taylor, a distinguished Cambridge philosopher, tried to refute Mary Wollstonecraft by demonstrating that if women could be given liberation, then animals could be given liberation, too. And since this is “absurd” it must be equally “absurd” to give women liberation.

We find an identical line of thought in contemporary American society among some pro-choicers when it comes to extending human rights to the unborn:

“Abortion and slavery? Not even close.
A fetus isn’t human. If you believe it’s
wrong to eat meat, should your morality
be imposed upon everyone else?”

What if both practices (killing animals and killing unborn humans) are equally reprehensible? What if (like the movements in the 18th and 19th centuries to emancipate women and free the slaves) we are really talking about two very similar moral campaigns —animal rights and prenatal rights?

Peter Singer concludes in Animal Liberation that “by ceasing to rear and kill animals for food, we can make extra food available for humans that, properly distributed, it would eliminate starvation and malnutrition from this planet. Animal Liberation is Human Liberation, too.”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» ditto Posted by: veggiegrrrl
Dark side of 'animal entertainment' is being brought to light by Michael Vick's
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Aug 27, 2007 9:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
recent plea. Dog fights, and other 'blood sports', are increasingly becoming more popular again. Of course this is nothing new in that 'blood sports' such as dog fights, bull baiting, bear baiting, hare coursing, bull fighting, cock fighting were popular in ancient times most countries (latin and asian countries excepted) finally outlawed them and the were frowned upon by most people. However they are becoming more popular again and not all of the popularity can be blamed on the immigrants from countries, like Mexico, that enjoy cock fighting and other 'blood sports'. As with Vick it is shown that they are becoming popular with native-born Americans also. Hopefully the recent events will turn people's attention to this problem. Yes, animal 'documentaries' are bad since they claim animals live/think/love like humans and teach children false science but let us get rid of the real violent 'entertainment' before we start focusing on Flipper and Lassie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's speciesism Posted by: veggiegrrrl
Better some entertainment than ignorance towards nature
Posted by: Jimbo33 on Aug 27, 2007 11:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's better that people learn something about our nature or the one in South America or elsewhere with some entertainment instead watching some stupid celebrities going to the restroom in a moronic Reality TV show.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

not sure what's being said here, but I diagree with at least some of it
Posted by: Drclaw on Aug 27, 2007 1:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This essay seems all over the place, and I don't get the central point, but some of it is poorly thought out or expressed. Or, perhaps the writer is ignorant of some basic biology and is projecting.

In fact, communal animals often repress each other's reproduction and discipline miscreants. (they also commit rape, steal each other's food and kill their or anothers children). I am not sure of the tone of how it was presented in meerkat manner, but the behavior that is described happens often. Is the "slut" connection implied or inferred? I have no idea-my point is that, although we should be careful of language that implies value judgements from a human reference point, some humanization is not a bad thing. The African environmentalist Baba Dioum said: "In the end, we will only conserve what we love. We will only love what we understand" A good fuzzumentory produces both of these outcomes and we should be wary of tossing out the baby with the bathwater.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Baboon Channel, et. al.
Posted by: pzzp on Aug 27, 2007 1:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can expect animal content of cast media to grow as the natural relationship of most Americans to wildlife becomes increasingly remote due to decline and extinction of species. In due course, animal experiences will be limited to the confines of zoos and TV screens. Have you watched the Aquarium Channel lately?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Older than you think
Posted by: YogiBear on Aug 28, 2007 12:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Though more overt than the TV documentaries from the Mutual of Omaha-sponsored Wild Kingdom series on Animal Planet, this is not an entirely new phenomenon.

Anyone ever go to a zoo?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Animals & People
Posted by: Jeff Hoffman on Aug 28, 2007 4:49 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually, people are animals, too, but I digress. There are two incorrect statements in this article.

"... bears and walruses ... would devour us if given half a chance" This is the competitive, survivalist view of nature and it's completely false in this case. Neither bears nor walruses eat people, with rare exceptions. Black bears avoid people if at all possible. Brown bears might attack if provoked, the problem is that only those who have experience with them know what provokes them. Polar bears are the only ones that generally attack humans on sight -- they must realize how much humans are destroying the planet -- but they do not normally eat people. The point is, humans are the ones that attack animals without provocation, not the other way around as stated by Desson Thomson of the Washington Post.

"As far as we've has come in studying animal behavior, we still have little idea of an animal's emotional cognizance." Well, yes, if you allow modern science to limit your knowledge by merely studying animals. How about also interacting with them? I felt more emotionally close to my first horse than to any person, and we understood each other very well. Author Alicia Rebensdorf would do well to attempt a little interaction and empathy with non-humans instead of assuming that we can know nothing about how they feel or think. Those of us who've worked with animals and who have some empathy can tell you that animals share many emotions and feelings with people. For example, horses can be extremely jealous. Of course, people cannot, or at least should not, have this level of interaction with wild animals, but wild animals can still be watched and in some cases interacted with on a limited basis. Recognizing non-human emotions or feelings is not anthropomorphizing; it is instead highly anthropocentric to assume that only humans have feelings or emotions.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"we don't place any value on life that we can't identify with"
Posted by: K.J. on Aug 31, 2007 10:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The posting above hits the spot exactly. This is the real problem--that animals we don't personally identify with are only fit for disposal by eating or destroying their habitat. Dogs being killed for sport? A horrific tragedy. An obscure species of fish vanishing forever because we "need" another vacation resort? Hey, we're creating jobs.

Worse, this attitude extends beyond alien species to alien cultures--to people. A bomb explodes in the London Underground and we follow it anxiously in the news, send emails of condolences to strangers, worry about whether we're safe in our own public spaces. Thousands die in a weather-related event or genocide, and we shrug: wow, that's really too bad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

why not? sounds great
Posted by: kkmedia on Sep 1, 2007 12:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
leather and fur is always great leather jackets The essential one-step product for Il migliore Casino Online complete leather care. URAD NEUTRAL buy cigarettes |brings back and revives the original buy diamond earingscolor and is remarkable buy cigarettes online |leather and fur is always great leathers to casino bonus |mint condition. Also, it offers efficient casino and poker no problems, Casino en línea casino and poker no problems. Whether used as a simple shoe polish, as a cleaner for golf shoes or as a Best Online Casino Review
das beste internet casino internet casinos ,best casino best online casinos casino spielen blog for all | conditioner for Best Online Casino leather and fur is always greatblog for all |car interior, URAD will surpass Das beste casino | any other product as to ease of use, best online casinos | dry time and leather and fur is always great on leather furniture and saddles, and URAD COLOR to bring a Das beste casino | better shine and hide scuff marks casino and poker no problems.
online Casino bonus | Livonia transmission repair shop Michigan | best online casino bonus usa leather and fur is always great casino links and casino and poker no problems on we also have online casino links and more like cigarette links exchange always great| tamiflu, viagra, cialis buy tamiflu, viagra, buy cialis | pharmacy links | link directory, free link exchange | casinos accepting US players | Il migliore Casino Online leather and fur is always greatjudaica, kotel, menora

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]