The Possible Impact of Comparative Ethology on the Analysis of Works of Art

Leonardo, Vol. 11. pp. 63-67. Pergamon Press 1978. Printed in Great Britain THE POSSIBLE IMPACT OF COMPARATIVE ETHOLOGY ON THE ANALYSIS OF WORKS OF ART* Gerhard Charles Rump** Speaking on the possibleimpact of comparative ethology on the analysis of works of art is speaking on a rather unusual subject, at least for art historians. But the subject is less exotic than it might seem at first glance. Almost from the very beginning of comparative ethology as a scientificdiscipline a number of leading ethologists have paid attention to the large hermeneutic potential embedded in ethological analysis. Konrad Lorenz, one of the founding fathers of ethology, analyzed works of art, both classicaland modern, as early as 1940, and ethology is little older than that [l, 21. Comparative ethology is an interdisciplinary science, combining biology and psychology. Ethology could be translated as behaviouralstudies, although that would be a little misleading, as ethology is quite the opposite of behaviourism.The subject of ethology is the behaviour of living organisms, excluding higher plants, but including homo sapiens. It is not only interested in the actual or present state of the behavioural complex but goes on to ask how the actual state has come about. It tries to trace the historical evolution of organismic behaviour and tries to discover the general principles that underlie the highly varied forms ofbehaviour, it is, so to say, concerned with universals. Ecologists have found out that humans, like every other living organisms, are in no way a tabula ram when born, but that they have quite a number of innate abilities at their command that they do not need to learn. Without innate abilities no baby could survive, for it would have to learn, for example, the rather complicated pattern of interplay between breathing and gulping when being nursed by its mother. It would probably starve beforesucceeding.Acceptingthe view that humans have a number of innate abilities does not correspond to a fatalistic concept of acceptance and toleration; it rather incorporates a moral duty towards individuals and leads, quite naturally, to a strong interest in the development of suitable pedagogic strategies. This is most important, becauseso-calledhuman instinctivebehaviour isdifferent from the instinctive, fixed behaviour patterns of other animals. Most human innate qualities can be influenced by experienceand learning, although it is not quite clear to what extent. Despite all this, there are a number of mechanismsthat, generallyspeaking, function quite well. I shall focus my attention on some of the more important ones of these later on [2, 31. If one agrees that ethology has some important things to say about humans, it is not yet quite clear why one *Basedon a lecturepresented to the 1976Annual Congressof The Association of Art Historians, Glasgow, Scotland, on 27 March 1976. **Aesthetician,32 Romerstrasse.D53 Bonn-Bad Godesberg, Fed. Rep. Ger. . . - -~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ should employ it in the analysis of works of art. This doubt can be answered quite easily. Let us take a look at Velazquez’s ‘Las Lanzas’ (Fig. 1). One can admire the skill of the artist as regards composition and the use of colour; one can admire especially his taste and tact in the rendering of the group of figures in the scene. One can then proceed to investigatehisway of painting, influences on his work, etc, but the only way to a thorough understanding of hispainting and to a fullappreciation of his art leads through an understanding of political history as different from art history. One must know that Velazquez’smasterpiece depicts a moment in history that really happened: The surrender of Breda (led by Justin of Nassau) to the forcesof Spain led by General Spinola on 5 June 1625.One must know that the defeated weregranted military honours, although Spinola’s troops objected. It is only by that historical knowledge that one can appreciate the painting as a rendering of true nobility in humans. Furthermore, one needs to know that the picture was painted in 1637, at a time when the main character, General Spinola. was less militarily lucky and to understand another objective of the painting, namely to assure a place in history for a truly noble character, to save him from an undeserved devaluation. So one can see...