[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: DINO Commercialization
> I don't remember seeing anything at any time during the Jurassic Park
> films that indicates they are out to " teach" anything....they are
> entertainment and I think most people know that.
I think my question was clear. How would you like it *if* the movies
were shown as dinosaur education?
> I assume that you are
> indicating that using props and items from fantasy dinosaur films is
> unacceptable in conjunction with a museum exhibit? I disagree,
> especially since the JP logo is plastered all over everything (once again
> indicating it's from the film and pure entertainment!)
No, the exact opposite is in fact happening -- by placing the JP
logo in a prominent natural history museum you sanction the
movie's pseudoscience. This is no coincidence.
> If a museum placed a model of Dilophosaurus on display as shown in JP
> (neck frill), but without the JP affiliation, would it be more or less
> acceptable to you?
No more or less so than a giganotosaur with wings.
> If I were and artist and chose to illustrate this
> species with the neck frill, would it be acceptable? (Paleo artists take
> creative liberties all the time- the nature of the trade given the
> limited info they have to work with...)
Their liberties usually have some foundation. What foundation is
there for a twenty foot-long dinosaur with a neck frill? What large
animal alive today has need of a neck frill?
> Or, is it just the JP logo on it that makes it distasteful?
Well there's always that too!
> > Believe it or not, people will go to see dinosaur displays
> > without the JP logo stamped all over them.
> Forgive me, but I don't agree that it is cynical to believe that the
> popularization of dinosaurs is a good thing.
The false opposition between rather sad, underexposed dinosaurs and
media-crazed, incorrectly-rendered dinosaurs rears its ugly head
Is it only possible to popularize dinosaurs by illustrating them
inaccurately? Is that all most people are capable of handling in
your opinion? If wildebeast became more popular when a movie
incorrectly portraying their lifestyle became popular, would this
justify a museum's exhibit portraying the six-legged wildebeast doing
laundry like it did in the movie?
> (The effort to keep dinosaurs locked inside the Ivory Tower is apparent.)
I myself was not aware of this dark conspiracy. Who is the
mastermind? I guess those Ivory Tower elitists are those who want
dinosaurs portrayed -- gasp -- correctly.
> Of course people
> will go see dino exhibits without a movie tie-in, but if a tie-in means a
> huge increase in attendance then why shouldn't the museums take advantage
> of it?
Do they have to take advantage of it by displaying dinosaurs
> BUT, you yourself pointed out that not EVERYTHING in the exhibit was part
> of the JP stuff! An earlier message (i deleted it since) listed some
> 5-10 (?)skeletal mounts of various species that were part of the display.
> This is far more than my local museum has to show at present, and I
> think I would put up with the JP "commercial" for the opportunity to see
> them. It would be worth it to me.
I fail to see the contradiction. Displaying the JP stuff alongside
the "real" mounts legitimizes the JP stuff.
> > Local museums will die without this?
> Of course they can continue to "exist", but why just do that when you can
The only way to prosper is to show incorrect renderings of dinosaurs?
> Dinosaur films don't come around very often, so taking advantage
> of it while it's there is to be expected. They'd be stupid not to do so.
> The surges in attendance at local museums coinciding with the release of
> the JP films was probably very welcome for budget-strapped facilities out
People interested in dinosaurs would come if the museums seize on the
interest and promote their holdings. There are other ways to profit
from the enthusiasm.
If we're just interested in museums making money, they should get out
of the museum business. Get them set up to trade AA rated debt
on the secondary market.
What reason do you have left for wanting museums to do well
financially if they can only do well by disseminating inaccurate
"Atheism: a non-prophet organization"