2304Views48Replies

Author Options:

Steampunk Taxidermy - time-travelling rodents. Answered

Picture of

49 Replies

user
Kiteman (author)2008-04-08

I was sent this picture of a rat that was prepared and mounted by Seamonkeyboy.

I think it needs an Instructable, though I would personally skim over the photos :-/

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
xACIDITYx (author)Kiteman2008-06-06

That picture is awesome! Are those LEDs in the eyes? I know my next hobby... To quote dale from king of the hill...
No taxation without taxidermieation

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Kiteman (author)xACIDITYx2008-06-06

I think they are - ask Seamonkeyboy.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
xACIDITYx (author)Kiteman2008-06-06

Looks awesome. Maybe integrate a circuit to make them blink red?! I should find lots of mice, taxiderm them, then give them out on halloween!

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Kiteman (author)xACIDITYx2008-06-06

LOL - don't decorate your house, just pose loads of taxidermied mice and rats holding tiny weapons and peering out at passers-by.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
xACIDITYx (author)Kiteman2008-06-06

That'd be hilarious! I think I'll put a taxidermied rat on my mailbox holding up an American flag.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Kiteman (author)xACIDITYx2008-06-06

If that's going to be permanent, change it for a blackened, skeletal rat on Hallowe'en, holding a charred flag, and install a small smoke-generator onside the mail-box, venting gently through small holes around the rat's feet.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
xACIDITYx (author)Kiteman2008-06-06

That would be awesome! I know what my big thing will be this halloween. I'll also put some red LEDs in the eyes.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Culturedropout (author)2008-03-19

I object to the use of animals or animal parts in artwork, so I really don't care for it.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user

what if they died of natural causes?.. or maybe they were dying horribly painful deaths so he put them out of they're misery?... why do you object to the use of animals or animal parts in art? as long as they werent flat out killed just for this I say make use of their remains.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user

I didn't say I objected to euthanasia in cases where the animal was suffering, and there's not much to be done about dying of old age at the moment, so I can't very well object to that either. What I _do_ object to is the disrespect shown by making a "whimsical" novelty item from their remains. The respectful use of animal (or human) remains for educational purposes is one thing, but using them as toys or novelties strikes me as somewhat barbaric. YMMV.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user

ever watch a game of football?? ever throw the ol'pigskin around your backyard?? seems pretty 'whimsical' to me to be throwing around the inflated skin of a dead animal.. the definition of novelty item as opposed to art is debatable. i'd call duchamps urinal a novelty item.. but thousands or art lovers would correct me on that. live and let live i say, but if they dead its fair game.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user

I can't stand football, so no. I don't watch it, nor do I own one. "if they dead it's fair game"? So you won't mind if I make an end table out of your grandmother?

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user

pffft.. my Granny ain't dead yet. so the best i can do is ask her for you.
but if she was would you upload it as an instructable??

in the mean time heres a little something i have been working on over easter

[IMG]http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd195/seamonkeyboy/usbcable015small.jpg[/IMG]

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
xACIDITYx (author)seamonkeyboy2008-06-06

(IMG codes don't work, you actually have to upload them.) That pictures awesome!

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Culturedropout2008-03-20

I agree completely with your arguments. It's silly and disrespectful.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Kiteman (author)omnibot2008-03-20

So, I assume you are a vegan, don't wear leather, wool or silk, and can regularly be seen picketing outside petshops?

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)Kiteman2008-03-20

I don't want to start anything, but even Cotton, was "alive" at one time :-) And the dirt we walk on is made up of decomposed animals. Taking what will rot and decompose, and creating art, is not something I would do with a pet, but I don't have any objections to others doing so.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user

although I agree with everything else you say, cotton was never sentient.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user

Depending on the definition of "sentient" and there are arguably a few variant ways to define it; one may exclude most of the animal kingdom as well.

If sentient must include self-awareness, most dogs / cats / rodent / fowl / cattle, etc. have trouble recognizing themselves in a mirror. I have seen many a smart dog "run around the back" trying to attack the new intruder (smart enough to come up with "there is glass between me and thee, but not enough to understand it was thee all along).

Like I said, I don't really want to get into a semantical argument about the sentience of animals (or of plants as some would argue) but was merely pointing out that the entire animal kingdom "eats one another", from germs up to mankind. Most of them, would not be caught DEAD in the fur of a family member however ;-)

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Goodhart2008-03-31

I've seen a hamster lock her hamsterwheel with the foodbowl in order to escape her cage. That was pretty clever for a brain the size of a pea :)

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)omnibot2008-03-31

First, it is not the size of the brain, but the size in relation to the body that matters. Whereas an owl's brain is bigger, it's body is MUCH bigger and it really has little capacity to learn much. Whereas the North American Mockingbird has a smaller body relative to its small brain size and can learn hundreds of songs. But, there is a difference between intelligence and sentience: Sentience refers to the whole idea of consciousness. That is, being conscious of one's existence in the world. This is actually a difficult thing to determine, but very few animals show their ability to recognize themselves (for instance) in a mirror. This has nothing to do with intelligence though. Other then humans, no other animal "retains" stores of history, in other words, grows in knowledge because of the "last" generation. HOWEVER, with our somewhat unique position, also comes a unique responsibility towards animals; at least the living ones. To treat them with honor and respect for their position in the cycle of life; and to not torture, or mistreat them, while alive.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Goodhart2008-03-25

I eat meat, wear leather, wool and silk. I don't listen to reggae, smoke pot or organize flowerpowermarches or whatever. Preferring instead 50's rockNroll, cigarettes and frosty beer. I usually like your instructables, Kiteman, I just dislike using dead bodys as playthings for reasons already stated so this idea (and the mouse-mouse) I find appalling .

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)omnibot2008-03-25

I don't want to answer for Kiteman, but since you attached this as a reply to my last post......at what stage does a "body" become "ok" to use ? Eventually, decomposition will render it "nearly earth" and with the addition of a little powdered stone, becomes clay. We use that for eating / drinking out of, and for art. My only objection would be personal: I couldn't do this to my pet i.e. family member, no more than I could do this to my wife / mother / etc.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Goodhart2008-03-27

A good point. Truth is it's never a perfectly objective definition for me as I am a human and that function does not appear in the specifications ;) What I oppose to is the use of the creature as a person, keeping the form and making it a plaything. As you said, we wouldn't do this to our mothers or pets because they have personality to us. I find it degrading to the animal, an insult to it's personality as I suppose most people would if it was a little more "close to home". In return .. what is the argument for using animals this way? Is it just coz it's funny?

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)omnibot2008-03-27

Maybe, for some, it is their own way of "honoring" the animal. In which case, it reverts back to a case of subjectivity i.e. personal preference.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Goodhart2008-03-28

Honoring? Well .. I suppose if I consider such a person severely twisted, with a skewed sense of morals and the worldy views of some especially orthodox and medievel church then .. yeeeaas I agree it could be honoring .. but I still think it's wrong much like some people frown upon ritual cannibalism where we can say it honors the deceased. (ofcourse I don't feel a need to honor my burger) However, as the rodent is dead all the arguments can be is subjective and refer mostly to our personal expression of humanity such as it is. This is an interresting discussion. It reminds me of one I had with a vegetarian who ate fish. In the extention of her filosophy vegetarianism was restricted to shunning mammals.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)omnibot2008-03-28

Honoring? Well .. I suppose if I consider such a person severely twisted, with a skewed sense of morals and the worldy views of some especially orthodox and medievel church then ..

Hmm, I am trying to open a door here... You don't have to walk through it, just look into the room a bit. From their prospective, allowing the animal to rot and become maggot-filled and return to the dirt may dishonor the memory of their pet.

Just as you say with: However, as the rodent is dead all the arguments can be is subjective and refer mostly to our personal expression of humanity such as it is.

All points are coming from each person's own point of view. Again, I am not saying I would do this, but I can understand another person doing it.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Goodhart2008-03-29

Okey, I just want to make it clear here that i mean I consider a "person severely twisted, with a skewed sense of morals and the worldy views of some especially orthodox and medievel church" if they would honor a dead pet by turning it into makebelive timetraveler.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)omnibot2008-03-29

I understand that. I am just saying the person's point of view is different and so they do not think it so out of the ordinary to do so. I am not arguing for his point of view, just for his right to have a different point of view. :-)

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Goodhart2008-03-31

Well, obviously everyone has the right to their oppinion. I think that's called human rights and democratic principals, eg freedom (although shamelessly tattered nowadays). Ofcourse this means I can have my oppinion to and critisize accordingly, this I belive is the phenomenon know as open debate ;) wich is what we're doing. Ones again I find myself agreeing with you.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Culturedropout (author)Goodhart2008-03-28

Eventually, everything that ever lived becomes "nearly earth". Or more correctly, just "earth". Which we walk on, and which we grow our food in. By stretching the definition of "body" to include every molecule that was ever in the body, you are then faced with the thought that you've been eating your dead ancestors. To me, natural processes of decay aren't offensive in the way unnatural preservation of once living things is. That extends to our exceedingly strange funeral customs as well; I was really bothered by seeing my mother propped up in a casket, her cheeks stuffed with cotton, her eyes and mouth sewn/glued shut, and her face slathered with makeup so people could say, "She looks so _natural_!" as they passed by. To me, that whole thing is in exceedingly bad taste. The natural way of things is to break down into the elements from which they were born.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)Culturedropout2008-03-28

To me, natural processes of decay aren't offensive in the way unnatural preservation of once living things is.

Exactly, as long as you stress the to me part, that is, that this is a personal point of view. We each have a slightly different take on it, really.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
omnibot (author)Kiteman2008-03-27

(post originally incorrectly posted sry) I eat meat, wear leather, wool and silk. I don't listen to reggae, smoke pot or organize flowerpowermarches or whatever. Preferring instead 50's rockNroll, cigarettes and frosty beer. I usually like your instructables, Kiteman, I just dislike using dead bodys as playthings for reasons already stated so this idea (and the mouse-mouse) I find appalling . (I add that I don't actually drive a pickup though ;)

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Culturedropout (author)Kiteman2008-03-20

Except for the pet shop part, you are correct. For 30 years.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
ledzep567 (author)Culturedropout2008-03-27

well, im guessing your against all master peices painted with the "egg tempera" method?

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
xACIDITYx (author)2008-06-06

This combines my two favortie things! Steampunk and dead stuff!

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Goodhart (author)2008-03-27

using them as toys or novelties strikes me as somewhat barbaric

I agree, but what if, in the eyes of the creator of this, they see it as a way to honor their "pet" or animal ? That would not be classified as either using them as toys nor novelties.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Firebert010 (author)2008-03-25

that's way cool. I can't even begin to imagine the massive amount of time and effort put in to making that. I love the whole steampunk genre, but this really is something different!

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Vendigroth (author)2008-03-23

Reminds me of the re-animation thread over at brass Goggles...

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Dungeonbrownies (author)2008-03-20

i dont care for taxidermying dogs, cats, mice or rabbits, thats fine, but with guineapigs, I have one as a pet, so thats just sad.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Patrik (author)canida2008-03-18

You know, Christy, with all this steampunk taxidermy lately, we are expecting you to rise to the challenge... ;-)

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Kiteman (author)Patrik2008-03-19

Why do you think I posted it?

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
iectyx3c (author)2008-03-19

Now that's what I call TAXI-dermy.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
ifoverton (author)2008-03-18

Creepy... it's cool... but wicked #$@%ing creepy.

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer

user
Bran (author)2008-03-18

Wow! That's a tad creepy, but awesome!

Select as Best AnswerUndo Best Answer