David Attenborough’s The Life of Mammals: Meat Eaters and Steve Irwin’s Africa’s Deadliest Snakes are wildlife documentaries that have similar but different purposes. Attenborough uses a script that is rehearsed and the natural environment is followed, Irwin does not have a script and the animals are disturbed. However, both hosts inform the audience of the animal and how they function. Attenborough achieves this through the use of language and Irwin achieves this by being the presenter. Purpose, audience, context, language and form will be compared between the two texts.
Attenborough’s and Irwin’s purpose is to educate the audience and to inspire respect for the animal kingdom. Attenborough achieves this by using factual information to
…show more content…
Attenborough prefers to use non-diegetic sound to enhance the animals speed or grace; this is generally done with the use of percussion instruments. Irwin tends to use non-diegetic sound when looking for the animal; through the use of African cultural music. Diegetic sound is common throughout Attenborough’s Meat Eaters this is done through the natural sounds of the animals, throughout Irwin’s Africa’s Deadliest Snakes the diegetic sound is the snakes hissing. Camera shots vary between both texts, Attenborough uses a majority of long shots and this is used to establish the area. Irwin uses a majority of medium shots which allows Irwin to always be in view, allowing the audience to know of his actions. Attenborough is rarely on screen which is exceedingly different from Irwin. Attenborough uses close-ups to show the animal, a significant scene is the cheetah hunting for its prey, whereas, Irwin uses close-ups to show emotion through facial expressions and significant details on the snakes. Although both texts use the same cinematic techniques, they are used in a variety of ways. The techniques used in Attenborough’s documentary are used to educate the viewer and to persuade a love for the animals. The techniques in Irwin’s documentary are used to entertain and persuade the
Have you ever wondered how animals interact and work together to get a job done? Many times, animals put their minds together to complete a task. But what many people do not realize is that animals interact with one another just as humans would. In many instances, people don’t realize the amount of intelligence and common sense that animals, such as the elephant, possess. The study of elephant’s thoughts and thinking were explained and backed up through three different mediums. This information was explained through articles, videos, and passages. Combined, these pieces of work clarified what the experiment was, what it was testing, the purpose behind it, and how the different pieces were
the idea of the wild and its importance and necessity of human interaction with the wild.
The most effective piece of this documentary, however, was neither the structure of the film nor the specific questions that one is forced to answer regarding the ethical treatment of these killer whales, but the overall questions of whether or not these corporations should be allowed to continue their cycle of abuse toward the animals and whether or not we, as patrons, should encourage their behavior by giving them a monetary profit every day, every month, and every year. Ignorance is forgivable, but with the knowledge given in this documentary: the final two questions raised should be able to answer themselves.
In the article “A change of heart about animals” author Jeremy Rifkin uses rhetorical appeals such as ethos, logos, and pathos to persuade humanity in a desperate attempt to at the very least have empathy for “our fellow creatures” on account of the numerous research done in pursuit of animal rights. Rifkin explains here that animals are more like us than we imagined, that we are not the only creatures that experience complex emotions, and that we are not the only ones who deserve empathy.
...inder of the cost of our lifestyle, for no one can live a totally cruelty free life. Cruelty will happen whether we wish it to or not—even people who abstain from animal sourced or tested foods and products will inevitably cause some cruelty by simply going about innocent daily life. For example, nearly any driver will eventually hit some animal no matter how hard they try to avoid it. The best one can do is make an honest effort to reduce his or her own impact on other creatures, whether that be by excluding animal products from their diet or seeking out foods from humane farms. Animal narratives are unique in their ability to allow the reader to experience these stories vicariously through the perspective of the animal, encouraging reflection and introspection on how humans treat others, and accordingly promoting empathy towards humankind’s fellow earthlings.
This book is appropriate for three-to-five years of age children as the story is very engaging and children are exposed to the Aboriginal culture. The book is illustrated in oil paint in impressionism and the whole story is in double-page illustration, which shows the landscape of Cape York and Aboriginal people. The pictures use vibrant colours including forest green and many shades of brown and the kangaroos and the snake people have red eyes. Educators can guide children to discuss the information in the image which can help children to understand how these details support meaning construction (Spence, 2004). For example, educators can tell children that the kangaroos and snake people who have red eyes reveal that they are evil, so that children can understand that adding more details in both writing and speaking can provide more information for audiences and the explicit language is very effective in constructing the meaning. Educators can use toy snakes and toy kangaroos and other materials to retell the story with children or make a small display that shows part of the
Michelle Carr uses the rhetorical mode of argumentation for the purpose of persuasion in her article, “The Reality of Zoos.” Carr focuses on the issue of the imprisonment and maltreatment of zoo animals in her article. She effectively presents her points by using the persuasive methods of pathos and logos. Carr establishes an emotional connection with the reader by recalling an occasion she noticed how unhappy zoo animals were during a childhood memory. Carr also uses logic and reasoning; she appeals to the reader by using facts and figures about the suffering zoo animals experience, for instance, the animals developing “zoochosis” and the animals being forcibly inseminated for money-making purposes. By establishing an emotional connection
This Safari, jungle experience is the main point of the predator versus prey and between the...
This can be answered in Frans. B.W. de Waal’s essay, “The Pitfalls of not Knowing the Whole Animal,” where Waal emphasizes on why humans should connect with animals emotionally in order to truly understand the animal. He compares the ridiculous claims that some scientists made about an animal based on what they know about other animals in general, but they never once tried to connect with the animal. Scientists that had worked with animals for a while understands that “care of their subjects is a round-the-clock business,” and not something that can be done half-heartedly (247). Waal acknowledges that, “only those scientists who try to learn everything there is to know about a particular animal have any chance of unlocking its secrets” (252).
Linzey, Andrew. Introduction. Animals on the Agenda. Ed. A. Linzey et al. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1998.
Jurassic Park and other films or articles like it, seem to raise an awareness to people about the possible hidden mistrust that occurs with science development. This mistrust may shock people in witnessing which direction science is heading towards and the power behind what science can do. With the motive of “profit” in Jurassic Park, I believe that it is the same motive companies use who support genetically modified organisms. An example of this was when in the film, Harvest of Fear, Greenpeace sent a letter to Gerber stating their concern that they located a genetically engineered ingredient in their products. Gerber never responded to them so they decided to announce it to the public and within a few weeks Gerber announced that they would stop using genetically engineered ingredients in their products. This change showed the consumers that big companies can easily stop production almost by overnight and not have to go through years of government regulations to get something done. What was needed to get the reaction was to give them the fear that they are going to lose a little bit of their market share. Although some companies claim to want to help the countries from starvation, it really is just a bandaid to cover the real motive. Why is it that we want to use the people from these countries as the guinea pigs for the GMO movement experiment? Do the scientists not trust their results? Do they not believe that what they are doing is to truly help?
Singer, Peter. “All Animals Are Equal” in Environmental Ethics edited by David Schmidtz and Elizabeth Willott. Oxford University Press, New York. 2002. p. 17-27.
Furthermore, while zoos should conserve and encourage educational experiences within their parks, Allen points out it’s also important to take a compassionate approach in caring for each individual animal. As zoos focus more on education and conservation, they sometimes forget that animals are not alive in terms of population and individual welfare is important. Thus, it appears that Allen is taking a middle ground approach to the ongoing debate about zoos, because she is open to zoos, when they are compassionate, yet fully recognizes the downside of animal cruelty.
As an advocate of animal rights, Tom Regan presents us with the idea that animals deserve to be treated with equal respect to humans. Commonly, we view our household pets and select exotic animals in different regard as oppose to the animals we perceive as merely a food source which, is a notion that animal rights activists
Mammals are vertebrates and, unlike other animals, have 3 middle ear bones (the malleus, incus and stapes), have body hair and provide their young with the milk that females produce in mammary glands, which are modified sweat glands. They are endothermic and produce their body heat internally. Most species of mammals give birth to their living young while some, like the platypus, lay leathery, shelled eggs.