I was going to write about professional big game hunters in the 19th and early 20th century, but then I noticed that all the sources approached the subject with scathing condescension. In the end, I thought that the historians were more absurd and obnoxious than the hunters. Its true that hunting became an extension of European colonialism. Its also true that the hunters themselves were invariably over-the-top about how manly they were because they shot a bunch of animals and thus easy targets for ridicule. None of the sources really bothered to wonder why a bunch of intelligent guys with nearly unmatched resources decided the most worthy pursuit of all was hunting large animals far away from home. Modern condescension about the motives and beliefs of people who lived before us not only ruins all of the fun of telling good history but its also plainly embarassing. More seriously than just condemning the passtimes of the aristocracy, most history I've read can't seem to grasp why people thought what they did and evoke some sort of empathy for the times. By empathy I don't mean apologetics but rather an accurate understanding of why people did what they did. There are historians capable of doing this. I think Diarmaid MacCulloch's The Reformation: A History is one of most amazing histories I've read simply because it manages to make you understand why people were willing to kill each other because they "disagreed on whether, and how, bread and wine were transformed into God". If a modern, secular author can understand and foster an understanding of such strange and foreign thoughts, then that's really something. In the meantime, if I want to know why people used to go hunt lions I'll just have to do it myself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
*SPOILER* = Content mostly unrelated.
ReplyDeleteThis reminded me that some professors ate a 35,000 year old frozen bison they found. And there are some legends about other scientists eating some mammoth that can't be proved or disproved.
I can see where this would be a tough topic to get an unbiased source for. Most people who care enough about big game hunting to write about it are either 1)Big game hunters or 2)People who strongly oppose big game hunting.
ReplyDeleteThinking about your would be post, I would believe that most modern day aristocrats seem to have obtained their power through financial means so most people these days do not have the urge to "hunt the most powerful beasts on the planet." However, in the not too far removed past, power and riches were mostly obtained through a combination of an individual's savvy and conquering those above them to get to their status. I personally think they went to Africa because they had the thirst to prove to themselves that they were indeed the greatest beast of them all.
I have no defense for these thoughts, they are just thoughts. However, for what it's worth, I am a hunter who does not find it necessary to go big game hunting or any hunting for that matter unless you are hoping to stock your freezer with tasty goodness. Unfortunately, a lot of the people who share this label with me do not share these thoughts and thus have successfully branded the mostly negative image for hunters as a whole.