Initially,
what began as a lecture attended at the local Nevada Museum of Art immediately
started with me asking myself, “Adventures and Taxidermy should not be used
together in the same sentence.” Guided by a PowerPoint with Milgrom leading the
lecture she began to discuss taxidermy and addressed it as a “deceptively
complicated topic,” I imagined this to be due to the fact that people typically
think of these professionals as stuffing loved ones pets to keep around like
some Frankenstein relic of an old family friend. Or more commonly regarding
taxidermy as the profession of mounting deer heads to walls, which for many,
can come off a bit macabre, even from those who love the sport of hunting. I was
unaware, however, that in addition to these common misconceptions Milgrom was
also discussing the complicated nature of the art of taxidermy and the ‘artists’
involved.
Taxidermy,
as she frankly stated, is the art of juxtapositions not just for the
conceptions of the type of “barbaric” people it would take to create such
pieces made from dead animals, but also for the art itself. Milgrom declared
that “artists are not obliged to tell the truth” and indeed the very practice
of taxidermy is to recreate some organism that has died to make it appear
living again. Even before taxidermy became as widely used as it once was in
natural history museums, it was a prominent feature of cabinets of curiosities.
These private collections of exotic things almost exclusively belonged to upper
class members intent on showing their worldliness through bizarre items brought
back from the corners of the globe. They also consisted of strange combinations
of animal parts displayed in odd ways making new fictional creatures. With the
advent of better technology and rising curiosity about animals not typically
seen, taxidermy became more advanced and even scientific. In fact taxidermy in
the late 1700s to early 1800s was almost exclusively scientific with these new
interests in the inner workings of organisms and an overall fascination of the
complexity of nature. Milgrom discussed taxidermy’s current struggle as not
only a dying industry, but also as attempting to distinguish itself apart from
science. The difficulty in this lies in the nature of taxidermy itself, a
properly done piece is overtly scientific down to the sculpting of muscles and
every little detail whereas anything less appears “off” and can even be
grotesque. Milgrom states that a balance between these two, much like a single
mark left by an artist on an otherwise flawless porcelain vase, is the key to
taxidermy as an art.
As
previously stated, another juxtaposition of taxidermy lies with the ‘artists’
who practice it. Milgrom was very careful to address preconceptions about
taxidermists as twisted individuals with no regards for natural organisms other
than their value as trophies. Although I myself did conform to such views of
taxidermists she made a case that all taxidermists deeply care for animals,
insisting that “the best taxidermists love animals the most.” She stated that
because the nature of their work relies on the input of animals and the
recreation of them takes such calculated scientific procedures and attention to
detail, there is no better reason for them to love animals and fight to
preserve them to thus preserve their own way of life. This deep love of animals
and natural appreciation was evident in multiple stories of taxidermists such
as Carl Akeley as well as Milgrom’s own experiences. A current crisis in the
industry among taxidermists is the driving out of passionate amateurs as
practitioners specialize. Milgrom argues this crisis is not unlike other crises
experienced in other forms of art such as painting where a culture is created
around the famous artists and masterpieces pushing the practice further away
from the general populace.
An
interesting dichotomy exists in the world of taxidermy fueled by misconceptions
according to Milgrom. These misconceptions range from beliefs in the nature of
taxidermists themselves and also in the artwork of taxidermy. However, despite
her passionate defense of a dying art reliant upon true artists I remain
unconvinced of the legitimacy of taxidermy as an ‘artform.’ This may be a
result of my preconceived notions of taxidermy as trophy-making from nature or
the gruesomeness of the practice itself. However, I find taxidermy to be more
along the lines of a craft requiring an impressive skillset given the nature of
taxidermy to convey one message – this is an animal recreated. However, artists
such as Damien Hirst utilize taxidermy to make more provocative statements
critiquing aspects of nature and society itself which I believe lends his
pieces more toward an artistic conversation.
