/ ALES FILIP AND ROMAN MUSIL “FROM CHRIST--TO AN ORANGUTAN" Notes on the Thematic Range of the Work of Gabriel von Max Thoughts tent flock together however, seldom do they tein such harmony asin your case, Go forgive ‘re bt just can telp laughing as nk of that fam Chrit—t an orangutan! it comforts met belive thot people may perceive that a monkey sas vine, creoted by God alone But, no: mastof them just wont understand, including the painters, as one of them knows the world as you do: from he very spl things up tothe most sohistcted ones. —Nicolaus Lehmann! ‘The work of Gabre! Max was promoted and spread not only in Europe but aso ‘overseas, especialy by Nicolaus Lehmann (1827-1906), who was also the author of the fst teatise on Max: Originally fram the north of Germany, the young Lehmann setledinPrague—the metropolis ofthe Bohemian kingdom and Mar’ bithplace—and began a carer as a bookstore clerk He was a successful sel-made man who quickly became a prominent art dealer, traveling all ver Europe, rom te Bits sles to Rusia He owned a graphic art and print shop in Prague as well as an art gallery, where many a painting by Max would be displayed. Lehmann also commissioned paintings by Max forhimsel including three noteworthy works depicting Jesus Christ: Chrstutop auf dem Schweisstuch der Hl. Veronika (Chriss Head on St, Veronicas Vel), the so-called vera ikon [true image], 1874 (page 69); Christus enveckt ‘ain Techteren (The Rising of ars’ Daughter) 1875, 1878, 1888 (page 31); and Es ist vllbact! (it Is Finished), 181, Lehmann even held the cooyriht for these paintings, which enabled him to publish and cistibute their reproductions andhe also took them on exhibition tous. When te paintings had become famous, Leann sald them at great profit it was Chris's Heod on St, Veronicas Vel, which Created the ilsion of eyes both open and shut, that was accorded the widest international reception cn is first exibition tour, i was Seen by thousands of people in Berlin, London, Saint Petersburg and Vienna’ When te painting was cispayed inthe capital ofthe Russian Empire in 1879, Lehmann offered to sel it to the Russian czar Alexander I the czar refused, however, forthe price, 80,000 rubles, was overwhelming, When it was displayed in Vatican City the painting was praised by Pope Leo Xilas“a deeply elaborate symbolcal work ofa which contributed to Lehmanns deeper interest in Max's paintings on religous themes‘ n the above-quoted letter to Max, Lehmann reflects on the ting of 2 painters new theme, monkeys, namely, Schmerzvegessen Il (Pain Forgotten il), 1875, hs pai dead orangutan If we may paraphrase Lehmann, Gabriel von Max was capable of depicting the world from the very low to the high (je, from the material to the spiritual) and also from prehistoric reminiscence to contemporaneous events. According to the academic hierarchy of arlstic genres that was still mare or less valdin Max’ day paintings on religious and historical themes were thought to belong to the paramount branch of visual arts, while paintings of monkeys, often comic, were regarded as rather inferior. The questions, why id Max dedicate his talent toan “inferior genre’ to suchan extent that he even earned the label Afenmaier (monkey painter), in contrast to his eater sobriquet, Madonnenmoler (Madonna painter)? Most likly it was because painting moakeys enabled him to develop scenes ofan imaginary world inhabited by creatures both comic and gifted with reason, to match anecdotal rarratives with reflections on the theory of evolution, and, ast but not east, to make use of his cm experience asa longtime breeder of monkeys Inthe Czech ands, hough influenced by Lehmann, Max was honored mainly asa painter of religious and psychic motis and the beauty of soul women, while his paintings of monkeys were hardly noticed The tradition of European painting often associated the depiction of monkeys with caricature and with the grotesque, In paintings of both primates and humans, it was assumed thatthe ugly monkey was predestined to serve as a comic mirror ceflecting the vulnerabilities and vies of humans? Max did rot neglect the aspect of humor in his paintings of monkeys, maybe to satisy the expecta of irony often based on the contradiction between the panting title and what was actually depicted Thus the pintng ofa monkey witha flasks titled Entsaqung (Renunciation, after 1900 (page 53), anda picture of monkeys that hve knocked over @ vases called Botoniter (The Botanists), after 900 (pages 66-67). In another painting, 2 pianist-monkey seems to play one of Felix Mendelssohn-Barthody's works; on examining the ttle closely, however, we discover thatthe painting is called ether Led ohne Wort (Song Without Words) or Lied ohne Werte (Worthless Song), after 1900 (page 79), which may be interpreted as Max’ iri 1s ofthe viewing public; however, he employed a great dea ynmentary on human culture. Viewers of Max's paintings may also be surprised by the visual pun arising from the contrast between the ttle of another ofthe artists small paintings, Stearerdckkehr (Return ofthe Starlings), after 1900 (page 54), and what is actully depicted, as the action takes place outside ofthe frame. Instead of watching a lack of starlings returning to their northern rookeres from the south at the beginning of spring, we see only a distinguished macaque monitoring their nest The ideological message Max sought to convey emphasized the closeness of primates and humans and supported te evolutionist approach tothe origin of man. His monkeys are humanized by varius means: they ae given humn names and painted in traditional portrait postures such as in Susorne, after 1900 (page 78), or they ae painted to arouse empathy suchas in Souee Efahungen Biter Experiences), after 1900 (page 75) First and foremost, they are preccupid by actives attributed exclusively to humans: rs, polities, and scence, evident in Theaterrtiter Theater Crit), ca. 1890; Diplo ca 1890; and Af vor Sklete (Monkey in Front ofa Skeletor, ca 1900. Gabriel von Max ays ° 49 Gabriel von Max. Cristo auf dem Scweisstuch der Hi, Vronito Cheis's Head ont Veronicas Vel, 1874 Giton canvas, Gemanisches Nationalmuseum, Deutsches Kunstarchiv, Nuremberg, Nachlass (state of, Mas Gabriel von, \B46650 Gabriel von Mas. Ahasvous ander Leche lene Kindes (Rhasver by a Childs Corps, 1875, Oilon canvas. 38 9/16 x 47 Vin, (98 x120 cm). National Galery in Prague Proto: Oto Palin I Jindtich tyes. Zab nu rogran seis, 1934, Gelatin siver print. 123/16 x 115/13 in. 3130 cm). Museum of Decorative Aris in Prague, ev no, GF-1706. human traits of character over animal physiognomy, thus diverting attention from scientific observation and examination, He takes monkeys out ofthe animal world and transfers them across the imaginary border separating the animal and human worlds. Tisllusion is further strengthened by hs meticulous, naturalist panting style, often employing trompe foil. In fat twas neither monkeys nor humans Max was depcting—it was an entirely new species the “true homunculus” that became the cbect ofthe Painter's breeding interest* One characteristic feature ofthis new entity i its ability to assume the attributes ofthe observer, or the “beholder ofthe gaze,” thus becoming an active agent in control fits environment? Walt Disney’ cartoon characters for example, are based on the principe ofan “animal homunculus” analogous to Max's “true homunculus.” Monkeys play the role of observers in one of Max's most famous paintings, originally titled Kranzchen and later known as Affen ols Kunstrchter (Monkeys as Art Critics), 1889 (page 76). The ision in this case consists ofthe presence of several monkey species that, n reality, could never accept being together in such a small space. The improbable (monkeys examining a painting) is made probable here by means of verst panting effects and the painter’ ability to render the image of living animals {eventhough he used only photos of dead monkeys fixed in position instead of ive modes)" Max also used verist effects and trompeIoeiin his religious paintings for example, in Christ’ Head on St Veronica's Veil and Votigemélde (Madonrentid) (Votive Painting Madonna), 1888, butin these cases, aways with idealization. The illusion in Monkeys os Art Critics goes further yet, as Max addresses the illusion of painting itself as a depictive medium by presenting viewers with only the frame and the ‘back ofthe painting canvas This “trick” had first been employedin the Netherlands in the seventeenth century and was perceived by art historians as a symptom of criss in this form of visual art Silay, technical innovations inthe nineteenth century elicited symptoms of crisis in painting. However, the invention of photography, for example, di not mean that “from today, painting is dead” (a statement erroneously attributed to Paul Delaroche, a painter whom Max much admired)" On the contrary, thedemand for paintings remained so high that Max sometimes coud satisfy his customers only by accepting ther rather debased tastes (as seen in characte heads he produced that are visibly trivial and sentimental). Max took his revenge on the public with Monkeys as Art Cites, as demonstrated by the expert-wannabe expressions on the monkeys, Paradoxically enough this panting met with great success, enabling Max to reproduce the moti in some of his futue paintings, namely, ‘Atelrbsuch (Visit the Atelier), 1890s, and Affe cls Maler ein Bild betrachtend (Die Kunsbichter) (Monkeys as Painters Studying a Picture), 1890s tis sinilarly conceived painting Osingedenten (in Remembrance of You), after 1900 (page 77), recalls the poem Teue (Fathulnes) by the German poet and composer Peter Cornelius (1824-1874). The {itl and metaphorical visualization of blossoms of memories" tat lve on in song, tears, and dreams indicate tis ove that isthe subject, notte picture beng viewed as such The vivid depiction of the reactions of onlookers became one of the strong tools used by naturalist painters who were Mar‘s contemporaries. For example, the German Protestant painter Fritz von Uhde applied this principle to his famous picture Lasse de Kinlen zu mir kommen (Let the Little Ones Come to Me), 1884, depicting Christin a peasants house surrounded by both children and adults, who register his presence with diferent degrees of attention. When Max considered developing a similar ‘moti he wanted to include animals (the “litle ones” in his understanding of the bilical nation) inthe crowd approaching the Savior. Max considered painting Chit surrounded by women and children but embraced by a chimpanzee, However he realized could be considered blasphem.* (One exceptional feature of Max's oeuvre was the merger of art and anthropology (both natural and cultura). The first painting that bears witness to this quality is Der Anatom (The Anatomist), 1869 (pages 12-13), which marks the beginning of the so-called scientific gente. In appearance, Max's scientist recalls Rembrandt's elders. The “beautiful dead” (2 partially naked young woman) is ving (on the autopsy table in front ofthe anatomist, who looks at her with a melancholy gesture. In its a sculpture and the picture as a depiction ofan artist and his work of atin the sense ofthe Pygmalion myth" This interpretation may ritenes, her body resembles marble; the corpse may thus be set be supported by an until ecently, unknown, smaller version of The Anatomist which depicts an almost 1 82 Gabriel von Max. The Analonist (The Anatomy Suto ofoSculptuceAcader) «a, 1869.Oilon canvas 175/163 10 in. (44.126 em) Pate collection Photo: Oto Palin3 CarlMart. The Secret of if, 1879. Oiton canvas, 66% 9. (16764 x 2413om) Bequest of ohn Ringing, 1936. Colection aftheJobn and Mabe Ringing Museum of Act the tte Art Museum of Fria a Ehisionof lida State University, identical oder man inthe anatomy studio of a sculpture academy (page 71. The strong contrast between wo characters in Th Aa reaches its pakin another painting by Ma, Ase en der Leiche eines Kindes (Ahasver by a Child's Corpse), 1875 (page 70), in which a dead child lies on an autopsy table, covered by 2 veil, with a flower somebody has laid beside it. The child's peaceful rest is insharp contest the desert situation of Ahasve he Wandering Jew, conderedto wander the earth until the Last Judgment. These motifs were exploited later by Max’s apprentice Carl Marr (who ‘was originally from Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and later settled in Munich) in his painting Das Geheimnis des Lebens (The Secret of Life), 1879.” In this picture, Ahasver meditates somberly on the dead body of ‘a beautiful girl cast up on the seashore, Just as Martyrerin am Kreuz (The Christian Martyr), 1867 (page '59), marked the beginning of Max's artistic career, The Secret of Life brought Marr his first success, and he later became the most prominent of all Max’s apprentices. Max's The Anatomist is a work of such ‘prominence that it has literally been made common property, as, for example, in the photographs of Sindh ys and ao Fr, who, inthe 1930s ndindependeof each be, petrrphed the painting's popular, “fun far’ version (page 70). Styrskj’s photograph of the Zab mud (Frogman) ‘series was displayed in the first exhibition of the Surrealists in Czechoslovakia; thus, Max's melancholic and dreamt imagery encunteredSureaism, Max's scientific genre is linked not only with romanticist stylization but also with allegory, as demonstrated by another of his paintings, Der Viisetor (The Vivsecto), 1883 (pages 84-85). Thepeak ofthe scientific genre may be seen inthe series of his paintings on spiritualist themes ofthe 1880s and 1890s, in which Max, convinced tha spiritualism ranked among the exactsciences, applied vrism, although these works drew their mais from mystical visions built on te extraordinary mental skis of Christan visionaries of the nineteenth century—the beatified Katharina Emmerich, the stigmatized Maria Moere, and Frederke Hauffe, known asthe Seeres of Pevorst. Max’ friend Carl du Prel was convinced that these visionaries were endowed with a higher level of sensation, which he called a "sensation threshold shit”® ‘The romantics stylzation does nat mean that Max. tok a historcizing approach, with perhaps one exception, the painting Herestreigen (Autumn Dance), 1874. The English art critic Joseph Bevington ‘Atkinson was the ist to note ths feature of Max‘s work® Although Max kept within the boundaries of the Munich School and developed a technique of painting tonal values against a dark background, he used historeiing references with a great deal of restraint. The influential German crtc Friedrich Pecht appreciated Max‘ ability to dojustice to contemporary sociallfe and claimed that inmany ofthe artist's pictures on social themes, he “shows best the poetic potential and inimitablty of his world view:”" Pecht included inthis group the paintings of the early 1870s, such as The Anatomist, Vrblat! (Faded Blossom!) Stilleben (am Spinett) (Still ‘stergarten (Nun in the Cloister Garden) He notes only two examples of Max's works ofthe scientific ‘genre that continue the tradition of The Anatomist—the paintings Gistergruss (Spirit Greeting), 1879, {Girl ata Spinet), and, frst and foremost, Die Nonne im B 54 Gabriel von Max. Verteibung ou em Parades (The Expulsion from Paradise), 2, 1895. Cilon canvas. Location unksav,55 Gabviel von Max. “sit possible to build a beautiful face onan orangutan shu? ca, 1895, ink on paper. 95/87 11/16in (245x195 cm) Germanisches Ntionalmuseum, Deutsches Kunstarchv, Nuremberg Nachlass (Estate of), Max, Gabriel von, LB-46 56 Heievich Mas, Dead capuchin monkey, ca 1870. Albumen print on card 1211/16 9N/Din. (32.2242 cm), Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Deutsches Kunstarchiy, Nuremberg, Nachlas (Estate of), Max, Gabriel vor 8-45, 57 Gabriel von Max. Biter Experiences, alter 1900, The Dauton-He Calecton he tame Lar Pade th ‘and Die estaische Jungfrau Anna Katharina Emmerich (The Ecstatic Virgin Anna Katharina Emmerich), 1885 ® (page 41)—even though, for their iconographic innovativeness, these works (together with the monkey genre) could be considered Max‘s most original contribution to the visual arts. Yet these works had to wat along time for their appreciation, not only in the circles of people interested in spiritualism but also inthe context ofthe rediscovery of nineteenth-century art Twocutstanding paintings demonstrate the convergence of Max's religious and historical paintings and his monkey genre, and reflect his belief in the unity and indvisibilty of Creation: Pehecanthropus cals (page 89), conceived as the prehistoric Holy Family, which Max painted asa snteth-bithday present for Ernst Haecel in 1894, and Vertetung aus dem Paradies (The Expulsion from Paradise), ca, 1895, preserved only ina black-and-white photograph, in which Adam and Eve have the physiognomy of sprchistoric peopl (page 73).* In this respect, Max founda predecessor in the French painter Fernand Corman, who in 1880 displayed the painting Coin, which features biblical figures dressed in furs ike prehistoric hunters Max's desire to achieve this coherence canbe seen from the drawings preserved inhis estat: n one, Kann mann ber den Orangschdel en shines Gescht construire? he tried to find an answer to the question of whether is possible to “build” a beautiful face (inthe classical sense ofthe word) on an orangutan skallInthis drawing he brought the evolutionary line that rns from a monkey toanideal human being to an ironic end. This ine was fist demonstrate atthe end ofthe eighteenth century in drawings of skulls and faces by the anatomist and surgeon Petrus Camper” whose ideal was the head of Apollo Belvedere, while for Max, the ideal was an absurd Apollo withthe skull of an. orangutan, "4Gabriel von Mar Af ier 1885. O1on iin (G4 x107Sem), Munich Byeiche Stastsgemdlesanmiungen sgualesanmiungen- esouce NY. rt vo Ma. neon You 1900. The Davtr-Ho Colton,KARIN ALTHAUS Previous pages 60, 61 Gabriel von Max. Susanne after 1900, TheDautor-Ho Calecton, (Gari von Max. Song Without Words / Worthless Song, after 1900. The Dauiton- Ho Collection DER VIVISEKTOR (THE VIVISECTOR) Gabriel von Max'interestinnineteenth- century scientific conceptsis displayednot onlyinhs personal colections and nates but aso in individual paintings. Der Vivsettor (The Vivisecter) (pages 84-85), hich was rst exhibited in 1883, a unique workin his respect, in both the theme and its intention, hich was to openly crcize a method of research. It shows how Max trie to finda pictorial frm with which to express scientific matters. Only two other paintings belong inthis group of works: Der ‘Anatom (The Anatorist), 1869 (pages 12-13), and Phecontropus aus, 1896 (page 89). However, The Anatom is less about current mecical findings than about a revival ofan artistic tradition of taking inspiration from themes pertaining to anatomy and pathology itecanthopus alas, onthe other hand, san attempt to translate the lates anthropological finds and the knowledge gained fom them inorder to visualize the missing link between ape and man. The Visector differs from these two paintings in its approach. It portrays @ phenomenon of Contemporary medical research—-vivsection, quit litrlly the dissection of ive people and animals, here exemple inthe form ofa lve dog. What is more iti @ visual lament agsnst this practice, painted at atime when the ethical side of animal experiments was a controversial topic In 1876, Great Britain passed the Cruety to Animals Act, the fist legislation to requte a license for carrying out experiments on vertebrates. Similar animal protection acs followed in Bavaria in 1880 and in Prussia in 1885? Like many artists inthe ate nineteenth century, Max used allegories inorder to visualize 2 theme for which no icngraphy existed atthe time, A female figure, a symbol of compassion, has stolen a smal dog from the dissecting table. The scales inher lft hand show that in matters regarding the dissection of lve animals inthe name of scientific progress, the heart should carry more weight than the bain, On the top scale, the cared illustration of Cain and Abel also makes a connection between the topic ofvvisecton and archetypal ratricde. Max musters alls talets asa painter to convey tis dificult visual message and bestows on his bearded scientist features reminiscent of @ Rembrandt figure, whereas he pains the young woman in a pre-Raphaeite style The resutis a fascinating picture, yet atthe same time, isin need of elucidation, Max was aware of this dificult, and ten years later he wrote about how he had developed the painting and explained att was meant t igi twas a profound conviction that led met paint The Vivisecto in 1883, A buyer had promised to doa large etching and to dedicat this to Queen Victoria who, as one knows, hopes to be able to put an end tothe aberration of vivisectionin England ands leading this Endeavour. However, the Premise did nat come to fruition. The panting depicts a modern, unfeeling physiologist who, as if enoying a quiet Sunday afternoon, has just etereda lve spaniel to his cient torture ack’ in order to ct through the nerves ofits spinal cord and observe the animal's pain However, the Brodigy of compassion snatches away the fatally injured tle dog from the astounded scholar ‘and demonstrates withthe scales that a golden heart carries more weight inthe sight of God than a golden bran. Cain and Abel are depicted om the exterior surface ofthe scales with thesymbolic sentence: Cain, where is your brother Abel etc. [.]P.S. Please don't make any changes to this text, so that it conforms with what I have, should there be any private or public queries? Even though the work was commissioned by an unknown buyer, Max painted it with "a profound ." Throughout his life, he openly opposed vivisection and monitored developments on the subject, as canbe seen in many o is written cecords. These include information from the Welbund ‘gegen die Vivisektion, Deutsche Hauptstelle Dresden (International Antivivisection Alliance, German Central Office Dresden), which lustratedvvisection practices ofthe tim in graphic drawings, as well as various statements in privat records that testy to his abhorence. Two cases in point “Now the natural scientists and Vivisectors are meeting in Munich—these materialists all have a lot to answer for: the miserableness of Christianity is the result" or “Shame on every religion that calmly accepts vivisection!"? convctior ‘The painting provoked the necessary interest In 1883, shortly aftr it was finished, it was shown at the royal Odeonin the Special Exhibition ofthe Works of Professor Gabriel Max, organized by. A. Fleischmann's k. Hof-Buch- und Kunsthandlung in Munich. leaflet appeared atthe same time clearly cementing the painting’ position as the main work of the presentation. Since Max did not feel that it communicated the painting's stand against vivisection strongly enough, he wrote “how stupid” and added exclamation points and question marks next to a remark that spoke of "Seemingly [undefined several times by Max) gruesome, and heartless research’ The painting appeared in numerous exhibitions and ‘provoked tremendous discussion; at times, extreme descriptions were used to convey its message more clearly. The subject of discussion was not only the function ofthe painting as propaganda but aso the use of allegory as a means of representation. A vivid exemple ofthis dispute was published in the Bayreuther Blatter begins witha discussion of vivsection influenced by Richard Wagner, one of its prominent opponents. The article focuses onthe vvisection discussions inthe Prussian parliament in 1884, in which the ‘proponents of vvisection” Rudolf Virchow and Emil du Boris-Reymond submitted their “well-known plea" in favor of the practice. The opponents’ case ultimately found support in the Gosser Eri (Gosser Decree) of 1885, which, however, did not impose license restrictions or penalties for noncompliance. After this introduction, there are excerpts from a letter sent tothe editors by O. Gerschberg a resident of Hamburg, which reports on the "great interest in Max's Vvisectorina current att exhibition” and provides 3 polemical description: ‘The painting shows us a tall elegant female figure bathed in light, of delightfully pure beauty and gentle grandeur—an allegory of compassion...) Her slightly raised lft hand holds a pair ‘of scales. Inthe fst dish one sees a human brain witha laurel wreath, which is sent shooting down by the counterweight in the other dish: a heart full of ity. [..J The woman's right arm protectively cradles the litle dog in a blood-stained cloth that has just been snatched from the torture of vivsecton. The dog's dul defeated eyes clearly express the extreme exhaustion of the litle creature and the effect ofthe dreadful suffering to which it has been submited, The stil‘muzzled head rests tiredly on the crossed paws. There cannat be anything more convincing than the devotion ofthis litle cresture so near death ater the martyrdom it has to gone through to express the case against the inhuman behavior carried out on The editors felt obliged to insert this “warm-hearted point” adding “that, however, an artwork appeared to have been created here that speaks tothe viewer eye to eye,” which “makes one forget the question regarding the aesthetic justification ofthe ‘allegory" and directly expresses a profound ‘moral truth, A subsequent sentence seems to anticipate the possible objection of “ignorant experts,” asking “what does an allegory have to doin art? (..] what does the artist have todo with vivisection? Che critics can} not understand thatthe artistas the true observer, one caled to understand the soul of humanity and express its truth—had spoken himself” ‘The opponents of vvisection hoped that this work, with its “material symbolism that conveys horror and dismay as wea touches a person's hear....isnot only destined to support the agitation against vivisection, but does it very successfully” Shortly after the painting was finished, it was reproduced in De graphischenKanst, which apparently rested ina court case for Max because the Bruckmann publishing company had obtained the painting’ copyright from the buyer® Later, around 1900, when the active opponents of vvisection tried to extend their influence, they again requested permission to reproduce the picture from the artist? Gabriel von Max continued to support the International Antvivisection Alliance, which was chaired by Emst von Weber. It was Weber's book Die Foterkammern der Wissenschaft (Torture Chambers of Science), published in 1879, that had sparked discussion about vivisection in Germany. Max also Worked in support of animal protection in his daly ite, This is evidenced, for example, in tw letters he crafted. In one, he requested the owner ofa Villa Orient not to keep his monkeys in such gruesome conditions, and in the other, he requested the government to stop the "horrible grind ofthe od, blind horses working in the snow" Compassion toward every creature, in other words including toward animals, was certainly not anormal attitude inthe nineteenth century. Darwin's claim that there was 2 clear relationship between people and animals was of tremendous significance inthis centuries-long. debate as to whether or not animals had souls or could feel pain, Arthur Schopenhauer, a philosopher ‘much respected by Mar, also spoke out strongly in support of animal protection in light ofthe “identity ‘ofthe essential nature in animal and human phenomena,"* ‘Max's biographer Nicolaus Mann described Max as a painter whose intentions were also guided by bis compassion toward his fellow man and other creatures, “Particularly significant depictions of animals which ..J appeal to our feelings are his Schmerzvergessen [Pain Forgotten], an orangutan that dies from home sickness and yearning fo his own kind, as wel as a similar picture entitled Mignon, (1 And his Vivisector, in which the goddess of compassion takes away @ wounded dog (.., testifies ‘to Max’ feelings forthe albeit only dawning minds of animals and their demands on the human 82