Beauté Animale

I saw an exhibition on animal’s beauty at Grand Palais in Paris today. I like the exhibition. I really do.
The people behind the exhibition say, ‘there is still a close link between art and science, between our desire to know about animals and our fascination for their beauty’. It is true that paintings, drawings, sculptures, photographs, famous or not-famous.. the exhibition brings together about 130 masterpieces of Western art from the Renaissance to the Modern day, and takes a radical new approach by choosing works in which the animal is shown on its own and for itself, without any human presence.

I liked the monkey room. There I saw 100 school children, five or six years old, brought by their teachers, were learning about evolution. Children were listening attentively. I was so happy! That was one of the effective ways to learn about the truth.

They say about monkeys and men:

The publication of Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species in 1859 was a shock for Judeo-Christian civilization. The naturalist developed his theory of natural selection, based on the struggle for life, and suggested that men and monkeys were cousins. Artists were keenly interested in these theories. The image of the monkey, previously ridiculed and conventional, changed radically and gave rise to disquieting portraits, like Pompon’s extraordinary Orang-utan.

There were some arts on Noah’s ark. The story about Noah’s ark was called a ‘myth’ in the exhibition. Children were laughing at the handful of animals that were waiting for the ark in the paintings. They were saying, ‘even though we are small children we know that there are much more animals in the world, where is dinosaur by the way, not a single polar bear is here. We know better than the myth-creators and the painters. Don’t we?’

I left the exhibition with a good feeling. The future might not be so bleak.


  1. Stacy says

    Sounds wonderful. I would love to see this exhibit.

    Unfortunately, I’m stuck in the U.S.A., where discussion of Darwin and of Noah’s ark as obvious mythology is still controversial. *sigh*

  2. Gorbachev says

    What’s sad is that though evolution is not now easily debatable – it’s obviously an accurate interpretation of the data – people still instinctively dislike the idea that there is no “immanent presence” or “God”.

    However, ironically, this appears to be an evolved behavioral instinct in humans – the tendency to think magically and to attribute characters to fundamentally random functions.

    It may have helped us survive and adapt in a quixotic world, adapt to our own existence, or was just a weird accident.

    Logic, alas, is not the default mode for homo sapiens.

    • Grimbeck says

      Jwalant Natvarlal Soneji, said:
      “No, wait..
      Where’s that part in which now those students and presenters go, kill and eat those all animals?”

      I think that will be the version to tour the USA. But only if the main sponsor is the National Rifle Association.

  3. Taru Dutt says

    In the USA they would be unlikely to dare to call Noah’s Ark a “myth” so plainly. Here, they would be likely to say something like “According to the Christian faith,” or some such idiotic euphemism – the hold of the religious types here is pretty rock solid. Religionwise, I think the USA must be the most backward Western country, really. The number of people here who believe in the literal truth of these mythologies is staggering.

    Good for France.

  4. codelette says

    Someone here might be able to correct me if I’m wrong regarding this, but didn’t Darwin basically deemed the “female of the species” (as applied to human females) as less evolved that the males and therefore inferior?
    DiD Darwin really wrote about male superiority in “Origin of Species”?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *