Arts & Literature

The Dinosaur and the Messiah

Art in the service of certainty.

Comments (2)
Thursday, August 23, 2007

Dinosaurs, Mammoths & Forests Primeval: Celebrating the Great Zallinger Murals at Yale
At the Yale Peabody Museum of Natural History, 170 Whitney Ave., New Haven, (203) 432-5050, yale.edu/peabody.

Icons are illustrated lies which meet our expectations. This is particularly the case for those fraught topics where a desperation for certainty confronts evidence which is either fragmentary or lacking entirely. Where amazement or fear predominates, the icon consoles us with recognition. The knight in Bergman’s film The Seventh Seal knows that Death plays chess because he has “seen it in paintings.”
There are, of course, baser motives for such imagined falsehoods. The exhibition of Shakespeare portraits at the Yale Center for British Art a year ago was a telling example of nostalgic paranoia. The one verifiable image of the poet was uncompelling; only the sham but more splendid versions would serve as suitable to the poet’s myth.

A more melodramatic instance of presumption trumping reality is Warner Sallman’s Head of Christ. A commonplace of illustrated piety, reproduced in millions of copies, with its unsurprising xenophobia, it had an audience in waiting. The mass acceptance of the image precluded future variants. But it is the pretense of realism in the portrayal that certifies its authority. The gilt nimbus given to medieval renderings of the Christ is now turned to a radiance of air. Presented with an anticipated stereotype, the predisposed faithful recognized the Anglo-Saxon features because they were what their prejudices required, even though they had never seen the rendering before.

It is a reminder that the iconoclasts of the 8th and 9th centuries—condemned as heretics for their destruction of Christian images—would seem more sympathetic if theirs was not so much a frenzy against idolatry as it was a passion for mystery.

Curiously enough, this is an entry into the workings of The Age of Reptiles mural by Rudolf Zallinger. Completed 60 years ago, a small anniversary exhibition of preparatory sketches and other archival materials related to it (and to a later mural, The Age of Mammals) has been on view since May.

Based on reasonable speculations of experts who oversaw the work, Zallinger’s mural was not initially meant as a fantasy. It also did not have a core audience with preconceived pictures, at least none they were unwilling to relinquish. But the mural established a typology of imagination that would not readily admit to later alteration. A version of the mural printed in LIFE magazine completed the transformation from a popularized natural history to iconic image, with the mistakes, which would be later discovered, already become the realism of dinosaurs.

In the 1960s, when undertaking some needed restoration of the mural, Zallinger offered to make corrections which would update several elements to reflect the newest state of knowledge about the plant and animal life portrayed in it. This was refused on the grounds that the piece was now considered “a work of art,” outside the framework of scientific accuracy. Unlike a textbook in paleontology which would have revisions required of its succeeding editions as a consequence of ongoing research, the mural was granted immunity from fact. It had become believable, even if not accurate.

The landscape, which borrows something from Thomas Cole’s Course of Empire and more from Maxfield Parrish’s heightened color fields, is of an orderly universe, ponderous, intact, with an arrangement of static tableaux that suggests little of the fleet, sleek raptors animated in the film of Jurassic Park. There are accurately rendered geological forms in which fossils were found, although they would obviously not have been visible when those same animals were still living. And the Tyrannosaur is potbellied and foppish, like some murderous bureaucrat, or one of those fez-wearing Blue Meanie cadres from Yellow Submarine, their bulging torsos opening as toothy jaws.

But for all its invocations of order, violence is literally central to the painting: A carnivorous dinosaur, blood-flecked, tears at another animal’s corpse. While the mural on mammals has the pursuit of prey, there is no such ravening visible anywhere.

A wartime work (as was Sallman’s image of Christ) begun in 1943 and completed in 1947, The Age of Reptiles deploys an art that makes wonder bearable, the overwhelming reduced in scale. Read as time, the pictured sequence which stretches over 350 million years is (in a refinement of the philosopher Walter Benjamin’s argument of what art does to space) rendered as a miniature that we can read in a moment’s glance.

Zallinger has constructed an essay on hope stretching from the initiate stages of land animal evolution to the small mammal which will survive the catastrophe of species extinction. Even if the entire pictured world vanishes—as it had—the future is still promised, where we will paint our fantasies of the past.
But the constantly mutating current science of prehistory has rendered the mural quaint, and we no longer require icons of forbearance in the face of present wars. Our new realism is a polished indifference.

skobasa@snet.net

Comments (2)
Post a Comment
It's not always recognised that works of "palaeoart" are hypotheses that (hopefully) incorporate the scientific assumptions and speculations of the time they were made. Sometimes, as with Zallinger's work, they are created in close collaboration with the scientists working on the fossil material.

A more subtle point (well made in this article) is that such art incorporates elements of the zeitgeist, whether taken from among the scientific community or from the more general population, or even the artist's own reaction to more general popular sentiment. Realism in the painting or sculpture helps to divert attention from the hypothetical nature of the reconstruction, while incorporating popular sentiment in some form helps to make an image into an icon.

All of that said, it is undoubtedly true that the artwork of artists like Rudolf Zallinger have helped to communicate the excitement of thinking about the past, and now stand as icons in an additional sense - icons of the unfolding dynamic of the scientific understanding of the history of our planet.
Posted by Simon Crowhurst on 8.24.07 at 0.45
I work for a company that builds exhibits for Natural History Museums. Mostly, we deal with genuine fossil material, but occasionally we venture into reconstructions of extinct animals and their environments. I can tell you from personal experience that everybody who has ever attempted to create a ?realistic? representation of something that is ultimately unknowable, be it a dinosaur, a model of a molecule, or a diorama of an ancient city, becomes acutely aware of their own hubris the moment they contemplate the possibility of accepting the job. Plato had mixed feelings about the advent of writing in ancient Greece, because he worried that committing the spoken word to writing would give those written words an air of truth that was independent of the facts. (It?s hard to pull off a propaganda campaign by word of mouth, but it?s a piece of cake if you?ve got a blog or a book deal, or a news syndicate for a pulpit ? just ask Rupert Murdoch).

Ideas that are in flux need to remain fluid in order to keep the spirit of inquiry going. An idea that is expressed in such a concrete way as a painting or a sculpture can radically change the course of intelligent discussion, and I can?t say for sure if it is always for the best. Sometimes it shuts down inquiry, but sometimes it can energize the debate.

There is a tension between the sense of wonder and the need for certainty. When I look at a representation of a primordial landscape, such as the Zallinger murals, there are always two separate conversations running through my head. The imaginative side of me is trying to will myself deeper into the overall effect of the work. I want to marvel at the size of the Apatosaurus, I want to tremble at the menacing power of the Allosaurus, I want to feel sweat drip down my back, hear the hum of the insects, smell the scent of blood and magnolias. The rational part of me, however, is picking out all the things that don?t jive with current scientific thinking, or could never be known given the available evidence. ?The T. rex is much too fat.? ?All of the bipedal dinosaurs should have a horizontal posture.? ?There?s no way to know if any dinosaur was brown, or red or fuchsia for that matter.? ?I?m not sure if an Apatosaurus could hold it?s head so high.?

That last bit is a good example of how perilous it can be to commit to an idea in the paleontology business. For the past two years, I would have told you that one of the dominant figures in Zallinger?s mural, the Apatosaurus wading in the river, is all wrong. There?s a lot of anatomical and statistical evidence to support the theory that Apatosaurus couldn?t have held its head so high up. Rather than keeping it?s neck straight up like a giraffe, the Apatosaurus would have kept it slung low between its shoulder blades, more like an ox or a buffalo ? more like the second Apatosaurus in the background of the painting. But then I came into work today, and a paleontologist friend had sent me an article that makes a strong argument for the idea that an Apatosaurus probably could have held it?s head low while feeding, but up high while scanning the horizon for food or danger. The thing is, it can take months or years to execute a painting or a model, or a mount of a dinosaur skeleton, but it only takes a moment for an article in a scholarly journal to completely invalidate all your hard work. So, if Zallinger had still been alive in the last two years, and Yale had given him the green light to update his masterpiece, he might have finished revising the neck of the Apatosaurus just in time for the ?current? theory on neck posture to be invalidated, and then the painting would be newly updated and outdated at pretty much the exact same moment.

The flip side to all this is that great works of art, like the Zallinger mural, like the novel or the movie ?Jurassic Park,? can really inspire wonder and inquiry, despite their many flaws. Sometimes a really ridiculous representation can kick start the scientific debate. Take Richard Owen?s model of Iguanodon at the Crystal Palace in England. Turns out that sticking the thumb spike on the end of its nose was the least egregious of his errors. The fleshy, languid pose looks more like Jabba the Hut then any modern conception of a dinosaur, yet Owen?s sloppy concrete model was, in a way ground zero for the discussion. Give the man a little credit for going out on a limb.

I?ll end with this warning. Dr. Ray Wilhite, a good friend of mine who teaches animal anatomy at LSU, is fond of pointing out that, when it comes to dinosaurs, ?It?s easy to see what you want to see.?
Posted by John Scott Lucas on 8.27.07 at 14.18
Leave this field empty Name*:

Email*:

URL:

Comment:

All comments must adhere to our Terms & Conditions of Use.

Find it Here:
keyword:
search type:
search in:

« Previous   |   Next »
Print Email RSS feed

T.C. Boyle, Literary Showman
Still goading the opinionated after all these years
What's the Big Idea?
A new batch of exhibits are a breath of fresh air at Artspace
The God of Depression
In a new photo exhibition, the poor of 1935 have much to say to the poor of 2010
Sweet Nothings
True Confections needs more Zip's
Vegas, Baby, Vegas
Looking back at how we used to look at architecture
Disembodied Spirit
An exhibition as rich and diverse as the country it pays tribute to
Oddball Universe
Discomfort on display at Southern Connecticut State
World Within World
Storrs native Tim Page recounts childhood with Asperger's