Imaginary Animals

Our word "animal" comes from the Latin anima, which can mean either 'breath', 'soul' or 'butterfly'. All three of these meanings, which themselves are subtly interconnected, contribute to our understanding of what an animal is. Definitions that are biologically oriented will emphasize physiological process such as drawing breath; those that are more religious or philosophical may emphasize either possession of a soul or its secularized equivalent, consciousness; pictorial representations of the soul will often show it as a butterfly or a tiny person with wings. ... it rests on the assumptions that are very difficult to articulate, elucidate or explain, and impossible to prove. pg 41

Consciousness is seen essentially as a possession which may be obtained, gained or lost. But this model, now intensely questioned even by many pominent Western scientists and philosophers, has never been accepted in most human cultures.

The anthropologist Philippe Descola distinguishes four essential paradigms used in organizing experience- totemism, animism, analogism and naturalism. Totemism is found in Austrialian Aborigines. Animism, generally combined with totemism, predominates in Americas and Africa. Analogism predominated in Western cultures during the Renaissance as well as, at least until historically very recent times, those of China and most of East Asia. Naturalism based on the division of experience into the realms of 'civilization' and 'nature', has been preferred paradigm in western culture from early modern period up to present.

From the perspective of analogism, the differentiation between real and imaginary animals is not necessarily important, since both the mental and physical worlds are understood through complicated allegorical or metaphoric patterns. Only in the perspective of naturalism, essentially that of modern science, are imaginary animals likely to seem clearly distinguishable from real ones. An animist might ask his cat for advice, while a naturalist would study the characteristics of its breed; a totemist would declare himself a 'cat person', and an analogist would watch the eyes of the cat in hope of gaining wisdom. Many cat owners, of course, will do all four. pg 42-43

Roberto Marchesini and his theory of zootropia, which holds that human identity does not lie in a special feature such as possession of a large brain or use of fire but, rahter, is constructed through identification with other creatures. [Roberto Marchesini and Karin Anderson, Animal appeal: Uno studio sul teriomorfismo(Bologna, 2001), pp.23-55]pg 44

Food is intimately tied, though almost entirely on an unconscious level, to conceptions of individual and collective identity. On the one hand, since we very literally become the things we eat, just as they become us, people fear that eating meat could bestialize them. They believe if they eat beef, or too much beef, perhaps they could come to resemble cattle. pg45

The late Elizabeth Lawrence, a veterinarian and pioneer in anthrozoology, writes: "Through... symbolizing, there is a kind of merging-animals take on human qualities, and humans take on animal qualities."18

Animals are the major templates used in the construction of human identity, whether universal, tribal or individual. Imaginery ones in particular are a record of the changes in humankind, as we absorb, lay claim to or try to disown features that we discover in toher creatures. pg46