HUMANITY’S POWER

OVER NATURE

Ryan Connor
October 4, 2021
 1

Whether the final product of humanistic interpretations of the natural world are artistic or

scientific, each reflection represents a different aspect of specific individuals’ interactions with

nature and how their culture, placement in both the social and natural hierarchy, and religious

beliefs impact their written or drawn rendition of natural objects across the world. Humanity’s

flawed power over the natural world has, and forever shall, render artistic interpretations of

natural objects as imperfect and biased.

Humanity’s unique ability to create physical recreations of natural objects: photographs,

paintings, or, in this case, drawings, highlights the uniquity of the human species. In drawing,

there is power. Drawings are used to inform, teach, and influence humanity. From propaganda

pieces to in-class doodles, every drawing has its own meaning, that meaning is influenced by the

personality and perceptions of the artist. An example of this influence would be the corn

drawings we completed in class. Though they were intended to recreate real corn as accurately as

possible, some, mine specifically, strew far from a realistic copy of the corn.

The power, or, perhaps, the beauty in the corn drawings was the birth of a new object

through the inspiration of the real, tangible corn. Despite my attempt to draw the corn as

accurately as possible, it was more akin to a cactus, succulent, or, by one account, a demon.

Though the title of “demon” seems harsh, the truth is there. The viewers’ interpretation of the

drawing is where the power can be found. Though drawings can be aimed at swaying its

audiences’ opinion one way or another, it truly is up to the viewer to interpret their opinion.

Therein lies the power of drawing, but also art as a whole. It can be used to unify or divide,

inspire or scare, inform or confuse. Though art is for the artist, the viewers and consumers of

artwork retain a massive role as well.

 2

Following this mode of thought, the creation of art, alongside how the individual views

art, is based largely in personal beliefs and culture. For horticulturist, a corn drawing may be

seen as a specimen, a piece of a larger family. For an indigenous native, corn may be seen with

importance, a staple crop in their daily diet. For the modern citizen, corn may be nothing more

than a vegetable at the grocery store, seemingly unimportant. This biased view of depictions

extends to all aspects of humanity’s view of nature. A map of the new world, though largely

inaccurate, was seen as the “devil country” by Spanish colonizers and as home to natives. Every

event, every action, every aspect of the world is seen differently by different people.

Religion plays a massive role in the creation of artwork, especially in premodern times.

Mary Louise Pratt’s “Arts of the Contact Zones”1 provides an example. The depiction of Adam

and Eve and their connection to the sun and the moon, two well-known natural objects,

highlights the influence of religion when referencing the natural world. Pratt’s description of “the

Contact Zone” as a combination of multiple cultures is an apt observation to make. The

transculturation of Guaman Poma’s work, however, is overshadowed by the common themes of

natural power when viewed through a religious lens. The sun and moon have been seen as points

of power throughout global religions for centuries. The Christian view that Jesus, the son, is the

light of the world compares to the idea that the sun is the light of the world. This provides a

comparative example to Guaman Poma’s belief that Adam, under the sun, had power over Eve,

under the moon. The struggle between light and dark, Adam and Eve, man and woman, all

reflect a hierarchical, humanistic view of the natural world.

1
Mary Louise Pratt, “Arts of the Contact Zone,” 2-4
 3

While religion such a large role in both literal and artistic interpretations of the natural

world, the simple power that humanity leads to a sense of superiority over nature. Taxidermy

serves as an example of this superiority complex which humanity has over nature. The entire

concept of preserving living beings as “artwork” shows how detached humanity has strewn from

its original form. The ability to permanently suspend living beings in unmoving dioramas as a

result of taxidermy is wildly unnatural. As seen in the hawk diorama from the Bell Museum,

birds, some of the most majestic and fascinating creatures on the planet, can be trapped in time;

affixed permanently in a position of a human’s choosing.

The concept of “artistic taxidermy” as explored in Rachel Poliquin’s The Breathless Zoo2

represents the common western assumption of superiority. The irony in creating scenes of

bravery, survival, and the daily life of animals through taxidermy cannot be understated. In order

to elicit emotions such as individualism and freedom in the viewer, one had to kill, process, and

mount a wild animal, thus taking its individualism and freedom away. The willingness to quite

literally kill in order to create art displays the shallowness of humanity’s view of nature. As

opposed to in older eras, nature is no longer something to be feared – it is no longer a force in

most people’s daily lives. It is, sadly, a relic of the past.

While not truly considered taxidermy, the imagery and description of coral as a form of

art found in Patrick Mauriès’ Cabinets of Curiosities3 shows another relationship between nature

and art. The combination of the mineral and vegetable aspects of coral shows that, to some

degree, there is still life in the stillness of art. As opposed to the taxidermy of larger, less static

creatures, coral serves as a continuation of life after death. One example shown in Cabinets of

Curiosities is the crucifixion of Christ through coral. While coral is a fitting material when it
2
Rachel Poliquin, The Breathless Zoo: Taxidermy and the Cultures of Longing, 93-95
3
Patrick Mauriès, Cabinets of Curiosities, 90-93
 4

comes to everlasting life, again, the idea that one must kill a living being in order to create

artwork comes into play. This requirement, to kill in order to create, exposes more of the human

flaws in the creation of art. Art that requires the death of a living, healthy being should never

have been, and never should be, the standard methodology. As moving as the piece may be, is it

worth the lives of natural creatures?

The coral, alongside the common practice of taxidermy, follow the same idea that

humanity has power over life and death. This notion is flawed and arrogant. To kill without

necessity is not found often in the natural world. To kill in order to create art is essentially non-

existent.

Through religion or simple human desire, the power humanity has over the natural world

is frightening. Never before has any other animal to kill simply for its own pleasure or ulterior

motives. Through the religious lens we can see the common themes across the world. Nature is

powerful, it impacts individual and cultural beliefs. In the modern era, however, nature is quickly

losing its power. What was once a formidable force has largely diminished into artwork and

museums. The early days of awe, fear, and respect are gone.

Once, humanity feared the lion. A creature few understood, the only explanation some

could offer was backed by religion. How could a creature such as the lion grow to be so powerful

without the intervention of a higher power? Now, in the modern day, if one wants to see a lion,

they can go to zoo; they can see one stuffed in a diorama; they can search for a picture online.

Humanity has succeeded in taming many aspects of nature. In doing so, however, we have thrust

ourselves into the seat of power. Humanity now makes the decisions as opposed to nature. The

inherently flawed aspects of humanity now influence both artwork, and the whole world.
5