Nature, with a capital N

Throughout A Foray Into the Worlds of Animals and Humans, Uexkull chronicles the differences between organisms, singular to multicellular, levels of perception. All the while, he attempts to maintain a purely biological stance with regards to the functionality of each individual species. He warns against the application of anthropomorphism upon the animals he discusses, because doing so will give the reader a misconception that the world inhabitants possess human agency, what he discusses in the “goal and plan” theory. With a series of experiments meant to draw attention to the biological reasons one might attribute human-like characteristics to an animal, Uexkull is able to eradicate for instance, the “motherly” attending of a hen to her chick in trouble. Proving that sound perception is the reason a hen would react to her offspring in such a way, Uexkull continues to implore the cessation of “the will-o’-the-wisp of the goal in our observation of environments” (86).

However, this is easier said than done. Contemporary cultures, particularly with types of media, primarily books and film, perpetuate the notion that animals are capable of feeling and have a will and moral conscience. Take for instance, Disney’s The Lion King.

best. movie. ever.

Let me be the first to admit, this movie has me in tears every single time I watch it. Why? Because I feel for the characters because they feel just the way I do. They struggle with loneliness, anger, love, displacement, and the general pains of non-belonging. On an even more basic level, over and over again I willingly suspend my disbelief to fully believe that Simba, the adolescent angst-ridden orphaned lion, won’t gobble up Timon (meerkat) and Pumba (warthog) for a tasty snack before he claims his rightful spot as king of the jungle.

sadly this.

not this. hakuna matata?

Uexkull would not be pleased with the abundance of ways in which media culture confuses instincts, biologically determined behaviors and emotion. Giogio Agamben points out how easy it would have been for Uexkull to continue with the tick’s behavioral analysis and mistakenly comment about how the “tick loves the taste of the blood, or that she at least possesses a sense to perceive its flavor” (Agamben 46).

Clearly, the overall goal of Uexkull’s work is to indicate that the world in which we live should not be confused with the way we humans live. In a much more complex way, the message of his work indicates a “to each, their own” mentality. Subjectivity on individual scales is the way the world functions. Perception, time and space interact differently depending on the subject, and it is the subject which constitutes what that might be. This applies to interaction even more intricate than division between different species. Instead, differing sensations occur between members of the same species. No living thing perceives the exact same as another.

However, a continuing theme throughout Uexkull’s work is troubling to his theory of individual subjectivity and non-anthropomorphism. He constantly uses the term “Nature,” with a capital “N.” Uexkull repeatedly names this entity as functioning in a perfect way, according to its grand plan. “The life of the tick” he quotes, “…is led purely according to Nature’s plan” (Uexkull 86). He continues to theorize that “perhaps certain acts of the highest mammals will turn out to be goal-oriented actions which themselves are part of Nature’s overall plan” (86). So what constitutes a “highest mammal?” I fear exploring this would turn into a whole new object lesson, so for now that is to be continued. Uexkull escapes without ever defining what he believes Nature truly entails. From the way he uses it, it indicates a belief that the environments, and all the little subjective beings living within it, coexist with and for one another. It also indicates a subtle anthropomorphic mentality. Nature is the puppet master controlling the ways in which creatures great and small interact, always present to right the path when it veers off course.

This calls to mind another Lion King reference. The world order is thrown off kilter when Scar (Simba’s villainous uncle) kills Mufasa (Simba’s father) and claims his place at the top of the food chain.

Scar's posse.

The movie progresses, the Pridelands become a barren land where the grass can’t grow and insects can’t feed which means the bug eaters die, etc…etc… Good news though: The magical forces of Nature, with a capital N, intervene to nudge and inspire Simba to set his world back according to the ultimate plan. The visuals are reinforced by the theme song “Circle of Life.” The message is this: great and small, we all have our place to contribute to the working world order to produce harmonious interactions with a bit of give and take. Once again, “Nature” acts as the controlling agent, making sure the cycle maintains the status quo.

boom. order restored.