"I contend that we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do."
- Stephen F. Roberts
During my recent visit to the Tulsa Zoo, there were many animals and exhibits that I was keen to see. Perhaps unique among my zoo visits, however, what I was most interested to see was a particular piece of art. Not so much for its own artistic merits, or for the subject matter. Instead, I was excited to see it for its role in one of the most interesting zoo controversies of recent years.
Tulsa lies in what, in America, is generally called "the Bible Belt," and the inclusion of a religious icon drew outrage from some members of the community. Not local Hindus, as near as I can tell - if the objection came from people who felt that their religion was being disrespected by the inclusion of the statue, I might have felt differently. Instead, the charge was led by some local Christians who - and I really am having a hard time with this - thought that having a statue of a Hindu god (displayed in the context of teaching visitors about the importance of elephants in Asian culture) was somehow tantamount of encouraging visitors to... convert to Hinduism. That's right. The theory was that people who were raised Christian all of their lives would abandon their faith as soon as they saw a cool-looking stone elephant at the zoo. Likewise, a granite globe at the entrance of the zoo, inscribed "The Earth is our mother, the Sky is our Father," was deemed too pagan.
This was 2005, mind you, not some distant days of yore. The Marvel movie "Thor" would be released in a few short years - perhaps these folks would later be worried that their kids would rather make sacrifices to Odin rather than go to church.
The zoo was, at the same time, dealing with backlash against some of their signage, which discussed evolutionary theory. Local activist Dan Hicks decided that, if the zoo was going to teach evolution and have non-Christian imagery, the least that they could do was install an exhibit on Biblical Creation. "Here we have a three-dimensional representation of a Hindu deity. You don't get much more religious than that," Hicks told reporters. "Now I'm not calling for these things to be removed. I'm saying if we're going to have a open marketplace of ideas, why not allow the creationist viewpoint?"
On June 7, 2005, the Tulsa Park Board voted in favor of installing such an exhibit. I remember being irked when I heard about it, considering it shameful pandering. What I could not expect was that, a month later, the Board reversed the decision and cancelled the exhibit. The decision was made as a result of outcry from both the local community (which surprised me the most is that a considerable amount of the pushback came from other Christian leaders) in the form of drying up donations, as well as disapproval from AZA, which, in it's accrediting role, judges not only animal welfare and care practices but a variety of other aspects of the zoo - including educational materials.
I'd been told that much of the evolutionary imagery in the zoo was in the since-renovated North American museum. I didn't notice too much of it during my visit of the new exhibit. But Ganesha is still there, serenely greeting visitors on their way to the elephants. A plaque at the base of the statue informs visitors that Ganesha is a symbol of wisdom and good will. Those are two things that we could all use a little more of, inside and outside of the zoo. I'm glad the Tulsa Park Board, after a false start, was able to muster a little of both.
No comments:
Post a Comment