Fantastic Mr Fox Analysis

So far, Morgan’s “Fantastic Mr. Fox” is considered a diorama through its narrative, its manipulation of the taxidermied animals, and its ability to manipulate the audience. However, these characteristics have contradicted traditional taxidermy dioramas such as Potter’s “The Kitten Wedding” and Akeley’s “The Muskrats,” which makes it debatable whether Morgan’s work can stand as a diorama or only as a sculpture. In confirming that it is considered a diorama, there is something that all three of these works share. While observing Potter’s, Akeley’s, and Morgan’s work, the observer experiences familiar expressions and arouse memories and feelings of déjà vu for the observer, according to Parcell. They reflect various states of life such as social
This state plays another role in taxidermy dioramas and becomes more relevant as years go by. Natural history dioramas are a documentation of specimens and their habitats. Although they are the lowest form of didacticism in Natural History Museum , they give a visual into the world that many humans present and the future will never know, understand, or experience. They are not always necessarily a captured moment in time, but a description of an animal’s habitat and way of surviving. This is contradictory towards some ideas put forth onto timelessness and taxidermy dioramas, but it depends on what taxidermy dioramas are being displayed, especially if they are natural history dioramas. “The Muskrats” barrier has a sheet of glass at the front, which acts like a window, while the sides and back are made out of wood. The diorama is also referred to as a cabinet because it does not protrude into a wall, but because it stands on its own. Because of this design, the work of defined as an observation. There is only one angle the observer can see into, suggesting that the world inside is much larger, and the sheet of glass separates the human world and the animal world. Natural history dioramas make it possible for humans to grasp a glimpse of what true nature looks like. But as humans must be given access to glimpse at false nature, it also defines the lack of integrity humans have to explore
She reconstructs the fox’s body to give an illusion of life, but contradicts it with the deconstruction of another animal to the point of no recognition (in reference to the hanging deconstructed rabbit meat). In addition, she ignores the rules of preservation and allows the deconstructed rabbit meat to rot, and places the reconstructed fox to enter this zone of what that fox once was. Even though this is a dangerous move in traditional taxidermy dioramas, Morgan makes the fox livelier by contrasting it with symbols of death. Potter’s “The Kitten Wedding,” Akeley’s “The Muskrats,” and Morgan’s “Fantastic Mr. Fox” are all dioramas that evoke life through their narratives and presentation and hover between fact and fiction through the human’s altered and romantic interpretation of certain situations (Perez-Gomez, 1996). Through the situations that each taxidermist attempts to create, the viewer is reminded of similar human situations that perhaps have nothing to do with the animals in the dioramas, such as different vital states, social situation, or temporal conditions (Perez-Gomez, 1996). It is questionable whether Morgan’s work “Fantastic Mr. Fox” can be described as a taxidermy diorama such as Potter and Akeley’s dioramas, or if it is just a sculpture. However, because she creates an