After my previous essay Animal rights on television? An analysis of Psych, I decided that I wanted to take yet another critical look at a tv show that I also enjoy watching, namely The Big Bang Theory. This show revolves around science, and animal experimentation is a topic that has been touched upon several times, and therefore I thought it would be interesting to see whether or not the characters on The Big Bang Theory are taking a critical look at the practise of animal experimentation or simply accepting it as 'scientific' and 'necessary'. I will also take a look at how live animals are being used on the show, which is the most important issue as it directly involves animals and not just discussions about them.
This essay consists of the following chapters:
First of all, no episodes feature information about where the animals come from, which is why I will not discuss that aspect for each particular animal. However, regardless of whether they come from animal rental companies, zoos or other places, the fact that animals don't belong on television sets remain. They have not chosen to be neither actors, nor props, and acting is not part of their normal behavior. Depending on the animal and its role, the parties involved in the production have a financial interest in the animal having been properly trained, which to me will always be a threat to the welfare of the animal.
The animals on The Big Bang Theory have been used as follows:
In "The Luminous Fish Effect," Sheldon has four gold fish, each in a separate glass bowl. I don't know what the animal protection laws in California say about keeping fish like this, but where I live (Sweden) keeping fish in simple, round glass bowls is illegal.
In "The Zazzy Substitution," Sheldon has become the owner of a large number of cats. He is first shown carrying one in the university cafeteria, and later we see him holding one in his living room, while five others are placed around him on the couch, and later yet we see approximately a dozen cats in his bedroom, placed on his bed and around the room. In the end of the episode the cats are in cages, being giving away to people, one at a time. There is also a cat in "The Barbarian Sublimation" which is licking up spilled groceries in the hallway.
In "The Jiminy Conjecture," the guys are keeping a cricket in a jar, which they bring to the entomology department of the university to determine what species it is. There, they are met with terrariums inhabiting scorpions, millipedes and tarantulas. There is also a shot of a box in which a dung beetle is on its back, unsuccesfully trying to right itself. There is also a tarantula in "The Alien Parasite Hypothesis"; in this episode it is crawling around on Howard's arm and back (and keeping me at the edge of my seat, fearing that it will fall to the floor and accidentally be stepped on).
Other animal episode examples are "The Hot Troll Deviation" in which Raj keeps a parakeet in a birdcage, and "The Pancake Batter Anomaly" in which a leashed dog barks at Leonard. "The Spaghetti Catalyst" also has a dog; this one is barking at and then running after Sheldon. In "The Skank Reflex Analysis," Penny has gotten an acting job in a commercial, in which we first see her standing by horses, and then riding.
The most notable episode though is "The Agreement Dissection" which features a trained monkey. The monkey is trained to hold a cigarette and cigarette lighter. In the episode the monkey is smoking, which is done with digital technology. That the smoke has been added digitally can be seen with the naked eye (and it is also pointed out in the episode's vanity card). What I find remarkable about this episode is that they have used a real monkey at all. The monkey in the episode is supposed to be a laboratory animal - an utterly tragic fate - and yet the producers choose not to portray this animal by digital technology, but by using a real, live monkey that has been trained for tv performances - a monkey that, like a lab monkey, is being oppressed by humans. Let me quote the director of Rise of the Planet of the Apes about their choice to use only digital technology - and no live monkies - for the movie: "I personally think it would have been a bit of an irony to be telling the story of our most exploited and closest cousins, and use live apes to tell that story. I think it would have been a cruel twist."
Though a chapter like this may include many things, like leather shoes and food that includes meat, I choose to limit it to dead animals in the form of stuffed animals, fur, and the like. In doing that, I'm glad to say that the episodes I find are few. Though, I have spotted fur collars on jackets at least three times, and once also on Halloween costumes; but I of course don't know whether or not the fur is real. If it is indeed real, it is sad that such an obsolete and unethically produced material still sees the light of day - especially in a high-profile place such as primetime tv.
In "The Jiminy Conjecture," a room at the university is sadly wallpapered with framings of dead butterflies, scorpions and spiders.
Using animals as models for human disease or as test subjects for medications for humans is unscientific. That is the clear and convincing message in the two books that opened my eyes to the dubious world of animal experimentation. I highly recommend Sacred Cows and Golden Geese: The Human Cost of Experiments on Animals and Specious Science: How Genetics and Evolution Reveal Why Medical Research on Animals Harm Humans, both by Jean Swingle Greek (DVM) and C. Ray Greek (MD). I promise that you will find these immensly interesting even if you have no previous interest in the issue. You can also check out the sites for The National Anti-Vivisection Society and Americans For Medical Advancement (the latter of which Dr. Greek is the president).
On The Big Bang Theory, the references to animal experimentation are numerous. For example, Sheldon himself experiments on gold fish to create fish nightlights, and another time grinds down insects and mixes them with food to see at what concentration food starts tasting "mothy". To focus on my main point though - animal experimentation made to predict results in humans -, Sheldon at one time points out that white mice are good animals to experiment on if the results are intended for human application.
Bernadette in one episode mentions an experiment where she watched flesh-eating bacteria skeletonize mice, and another time when she dropped flesh-eating bacteria among lab monkies. Amy is also a big animal experimenter on the show, and she also makes plenty of references to experiments involving monkies, e.g. that she stimulates a part of a Rhesus monkey's brain to make it cry. And in "The Agreement Dissection," she's brought home a monkey that's in her department's nicotine addiction study. To study nicotine addiction in monkies is of course a huge waste of time, money, and not to mention animal lives, as nicotine addiction is something that millions of humans suffer from, and the consequences of which are easily observed in humans, and in addition: already known. I'm wondering if this is supposed to be satirical critique of the unnecessary, sometimes flat out stupid animal experiments that are being undertaken in this world, or if it's just there because it allegedly is funny with a smoking monkey.
Either way, I have found no example whatsoever of Sheldon, Amy or anyone else questioning the validity or necessity of animal experimentation, which I find very odd, since both of them are supposed to be extremely intelligent, and both innovative in their respective field; and yet they blindly accept old practises as truth. I can't help but wonder if this is an aspect that has been omitted intentionally because the network doesn't want to risk provoking or pissing off pharmaceutical companies that advertise during the commercial breaks?
The Big Bang Theory has, like many other shows, employed the use of live animals, even though digital technology is available. Only when animal cruelty had been obvious (letting the monkey smoke) did one resort to digital technology. When the oppression is less obvious, i.e. a trained monkey - or indeed the use of any animal -, live animals have been used and digital technology been forgotten.
Regarding animal experimentation, the attitudes thereof have been largely one-way, presenting no scientific critique of the practise. When it comes to this essay's initial question - whether or not The Big Bang Theory is critiquing or cementing animal oppression, I'm inclined to say that it's not the former. Given the show's scientific premise, it has potential to offer new insights, but unfortunately it doesn't. Though "cementing" animal oppression might be too harsh a judgement, the use of live animals are examples of an obsolete view on animals' role in showbiz.
In conclusion, I'll say what I've said before: animals don't belong on television sets, and I hope that a complete non-use of animals policy by Warner Bros, CBS, and other productions companies and television networks isn't something that is too far off in the future.
| Episode | Live animals |
|---|---|
| 1.04 The Luminous Fish Effect | gold fish |
| 1.11 The Pancake Batter Anomaly | dog |
| 2.03 The Barbarian Sublimation | cat |
| 3.02 The Jiminy Conjecture | scorpions, milliedes, tarantulas, dung beetle |
| 3.20 The Spaghetti Catalyst | dog |
| 4.03 The Zazzy Substitution | cats |
| 4.04 The Hot Troll Deviation | bird |
| 4.10 The Alien Parasite Hypothesis | tarantula |
| 4.21 The Agreement Dissection | monkey |
| 5.01 The Skank Reflex Analysis | horses |
Note: Only episodes up until 5.02 are included in this essay. The reason being that I watch the show as it airs on Swedish television, and at the time of this essay's publication I hadn't seen any episodes subsequent to that one.
Text by: Helena
Published: 11/15/2011
Comments? Contact Helena
Photo © istockphoto.com/AntiMartina