The Vegetarian Cinophile
Note: With the widespread availability of videocassette players, video rental stores, and multiple cable TV channels, it is now possible to access an enormous variety of films, and the public is no longer dependent solely on the vicissitudes of what the local movie houses or network TV stations choose to program. This column considers selected general-release films, both past and present, which the author believes hold particular interest to viewers with a vegetarian perspective.
By Emanuel Goldman
THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU (1996) Marlon Brando, Val Kilmer, David Thewliss, Fairuza Balk, Ron Perlman. Directed by John Frankenheimer. Based on the book by H.G. Wells (95 min).
Chances are, neither ethical vegetarians nor committed carnivores will be comfortable with this latest version of H. G. Wells' classic book, The Island of Dr. Moreau (there was a 1977 version with Burt Lancaster and Michael York, and a 1932 version titled "The Island of Lost Souls," with Charles Laughton and Bela Lugosi). On the one hand, Moreau (Brando) is an ethical vegetarian, who has decreed a law on the island "not to kill anytime for any reason." At the outset, Moreau's assistant, Montgomery (Kilmer) informs Douglas (Thewliss), a ship-wrecked castaway who has been taken to the island, "We don't actually eat meat here, but I'm sure the doctor will make an exception for you — a special unexpected guest." But when rabbit is served at the dinner table, Moreau has a fit, yelling "Get this out of my sight. Leave, all of you. Go to the kitchen and wash your hands."
On the other hand, Moreau is also a brilliant scientist, a Nobel Laureate "obsessed with his animal research." According to Montgomery, "animal rights activists drove him out of the States. It got so bad, you couldn't cage a rat without reading him his rights." Moreau's research involves "animals that have been infused with human genes," his dream, to "create the perfect human race." According to Montgomery, "Moreau wanted to make animals into humans and humans into Gods."
On this remote island of unspecified location, the experimental creatures he has created, looking like bizarre mutants, roam about; hybrids with their species of origin, they have obtained the power of speech, but also retain many animal qualities. Moreau controls their "baser" instincts with implants that give them a painful electrical shock when triggered by his remote control. There is a designated "sayer of the law" (Perlman), one of Moreau's creations, whose role is to raise ethical consciousness and behavior among the creatures by reciting human (actually, Moreau's) values.
It all starts to unravel with the arrival of Douglas, and that fateful decision of Montgomery to serve him rabbit. Mont-gomery justifies killing the rabbit, saying "No one saw me kill it except Douglas." But Moreau's "daughter" (derived from a 'pussycat') Aisa (Balk) mentions that they had found a rabbit in the woods with its head torn off. Apparently, one of the creatures saw Montgomery's deed, and killed another rabbit itself. "We'll have a trial tomorrow," Moreau declares. At the trial, the killer is found out (a creature derived from one of the great jungle cats). Moreau is content to discipline (with the remote control shock) and forgive the creature, but one of Moreau's "sons" (derived from a dog) puts a gun to the creature's head and pulls the trigger. This provokes great unrest among the "populace." Hyena-man discovers the implant in the cremated remains of the executed creature, and putting two and two together, realizes that he has an implant, too; he proceeds to tear it out of himself, and instructs several other creatures to do the same. This band of rebels confront Moreau, and Hyena-man declares, "To eat flesh and fish — that is the law." Chaos and anarchy soon follow.
Amid the ruins of Moreau's compound, the Sayer of the Law laments, "We have to be what we are, not what the father tried to make us. To go on two legs is very hard." As Douglas drifts away from the destroyed island on a makeshift raft, he narrates that he has set this down as a warning to all who would follow in Moreau's footsteps. But a montage of images of human violence towards fellow humans fills the screen, and Douglas adds that we humans are "as unstable as anything Moreau created — and I go in fear." The point being, humans are fundamentally beasts as well, despite our ability to perceive and idealize superior modes of behavior.
There are several disturbing issues here for an ethical vegetarian. Hyena-man's assertion that eating flesh is the law raises a vegetarian's eternal quandary: how to regard animals who are genetically carnivorous? Moreau himself is the embodiment of the view that one need not consider animals of equal importance to humans to still feel compassion for them (and not kill them). It may surprise some readers, but the scientific basis for Moreau's research is actually not so far-fetched. Genetic engineers have already transplanted foreign, I believe even human, genes into mice, and the progeny of those "transgenic" mice in fact expressed the foreign trait. No doubt, some researchers, somewhere, are working on expressing human organs in animal models. What if they succeed? If a research animal harboring a human organ must be sacrificed for an organ transplant to save a human life, who among us would declare that the human life should not be saved? And what if it were our life that needed saving?
Regarding animal research per se, even if one accepts the argument that such research is not a valid paradigm for human disease, it is still a valid paradigm for animal disease. How are pet owners/lovers supposed to regard animal research that could ultimately save their pet?
Bioethicists have recently had to confront the issue of cloning an individual (following the successful cloning of a sheep in Great Britain), and have recommended that humans should not be cloned. Can and should such a recommendation be obtained for the mixing of human and animal genes? As Douglas exclaims when Moreau explains his research, "Has it ever occurred to you that you've lost your mind? This is satanic." These issues will no doubt continue to confront us as we progress into our brave new world. The ethics of what we choose to eat and not eat are much simpler.
© 1998 by Emanuel Goldman
Emanuel Goldman, a vegetarian since 1964, was a film critic from 1968 - 1980 for several publications, including The Boston Phoenix and The Boston Review of the Arts.
