Laura Mitchell - Big Game & Big Science

Main ideas / lessons

• Why history matters

  • History is presented as an inquiry-based, interpretive discipline—not memorizing “dead people.”
  • Historical analysis can reveal blind spots in fields like environmental studies, ecology, zoology, botany, and critical race/gender studies.
  • History helps show differences between local vs. global interpretations, which shape how stories get told.

• Museums are not neutral

  • The speaker argues that “modern” museum knowledge (especially in the global north—Europe and North America) is not culturally or socially neutral.
  • Scientific knowledge produced by museums reflects human concerns such as race, gender, economic power, and political prestige.

• Taxidermy specimens and “universal” science hide unequal histories

  • Museum collections (specimens, type specimens, cataloged knowledge) are treated as universal truth in Western education.
  • The speaker challenges this by arguing that other ways of knowing were historically excluded or devalued, even when they were empirical and valid.

• Extinction and extraction are tied to imperial history

  • Example animal: the blaubok (blaubuck/bluebuck) (antelope)
    • Described as extinct since 1800, linked to settler colonialism and intensified land/resource competition.
    • To see evidence of the animal, people must go to European museums (e.g., Leiden holds the type specimen).
  • The broader argument: museum display of African wildlife is intertwined with violent extraction and displacement of evidence and agency.

• American museum displays as subliminal messages

  • Example location: American Museum of Natural History (AMNH), Akeley Hall of African Mammals in New York City
  • The collection is framed as both educational and as a conveyor of messages about value, expertise, and imperial narratives.
  • Museum scale is emphasized (e.g., tens of millions of specimens owned; millions of visitors annually), suggesting widespread cultural influence.

• Global inequality and knowledge devaluation

  • When asked what drives global inequality, the audience might think of economics or “differences” (race/gender/genetics, etc.), but the speaker’s emphasis is different:
    • Imperial absorption/adaptation of valuable information
    • Then devaluing the sources of that information—particularly African knowledge and African contributors.
  • A key claim: Western audiences “know” African wildlife largely through mediated African interactions that are erased from the historical record.

Methodological / explanatory structure used (as a “how to read museums” approach)

• Step 1: Treat museums as historical artifacts

  • Instead of asking only “what species are displayed?”, ask:
    • How did these specimens get here?
    • Who collected/killed them?
    • Who is named vs. erased?
    • What stories are prioritized by exhibition design?

• Step 2: Apply historical inquiry to scientific authority

  • Investigate how scientific categories and practices (e.g., type specimens, naming/classification) became institutionalized as “universal truth.”
  • Question whose standards and methods were assumed to define validity.

• Step 3: Track power through extraction and representation

  • Link museum collections to:
    • imperial expansion
    • hunting/killing campaigns
    • logistics of shipping specimens
    • public entertainment systems (exhibitions/freak shows/cabinets)
  • Compare how “expertise” is distributed:
    • Named European/American actors vs. unnamed African helpers.

• Step 4: Use concrete case studies

  • Move from abstract critique to specific examples:
    • blaubok type specimen in Leiden
    • AMNH elephant/gorilla exhibitions
    • Carl Akeley’s expeditions and masculinity
    • Theodore Roosevelt’s “carcass arms race” expedition
    • Robert Jacob Gordon’s field notes and local informants
    • a giraffe specimen story tracing bullet holes and provenance

• Step 5: Bring in popular culture as analogy

  • The “Black Panther” museum scene is used to illustrate:
    • who is treated as the “resident expert”
    • how formal Western institutions claim authority
    • how living cultural knowledge can be marginalized

Detailed bullet points of major examples / narratives

1) The blaubok as a proxy for colonial erasure

• Blaubok characteristics

  • Mid-sized antelope; ~four feet at the shoulders
  • Noted for backward-curving horns (~two feet long)
  • Mentioned as thinner/less numerous than animals like springbok and impala

• Historical outcome

  • Extinct since 1800
  • Framed as the first large African mammal to succumb to intensified colonial competition for land/resources

• Where evidence survives

  • Museum viewing required—specimens in European cities (including Leiden where the type specimen is displayed)

• Educational concept introduced

  • Type specimen = exemplar defining a species for biological naming/comparison

2) AMNH / Akeley Hall as mass-cultural reinforcement

• Setting

  • New York City, American Museum of Natural History, Akeley Hall
  • Dioramas/vitrines provide “windows” into reconstructed African worlds

• Scale

  • Museum draws millions of visitors yearly (speaker cites 5 million annually).
  • The African room is described as a “gem.”
  • The museum’s total animal specimens are enormous (speaker cites 33 million).

• Argument

  • Visitors absorb messages even if they don’t actively analyze them.
  • The displayed animals become part of a global narrative about inequality and knowledge.

3) Museum knowledge production and “type specimens”

• Museum model described

  • Specimens are stored and used for ongoing scientific publication and study.

• Numbers used to show ongoing relevance

  • Example claims about publications and studies using museum specimens (speaker cites AMNH’s annual report figure).

• Core argument

  • Cataloging/collection logic helps perpetuate the need for more specimens, tying back to a long history of extraction.

4) Short history of museum collecting (timeline)

• 15th century: curiosity cabinets (mostly private collections of “learned men,” blending natural history and ethnography)
• 17th century: royal collections expand; explorers bring back objects/specimens
• 18th century: high point of imperialism; major voyages sponsored; European expansion drives collecting
• 19th century: transition toward public entertainment/display (museums, circuses, freak shows)

The speaker uses this to set up modern museum practice as historically contingent rather than “natural.”

5) Three U.S. African specimen expeditions (linked by Carl Akeley)

• 1898: Field Museum (Chicago) expedition to Somaliland
• 1909: Smithsonian expedition to East Africa

• 1921: AMNH expedition to Congo to collect gorillas

• Common figure

  • Carl Akeley
    • described as the “father of modern taxidermy”
    • depicted as a major driver across these events

• Additional claim

  • Akeley is interpreted as emphasizing masculine identity and seeking credit/control.

6) Akeley’s transformation and conservation story (mountain gorillas / national park)

• Early successes

  • Taxidermy innovation: muskrats placed in semi-natural context (water habitat positioning)

• Hunting career

  • Elephant hunting episodes; wife portrayed as a better shot
  • 1909 Roosevelt expedition involvement (discussed later)

• Shift in 1921 (Congo)

  • After confronting gorillas, he feels conflicted; begins moving toward conservation

• Conservation claim

  • Credited with creating the first national park in Africa, established 1925 for mountain gorillas

• Speaker’s skepticism

  • Challenges the “white savior” framing; argues museum storytelling may not match archival realities
  • Notes Belgian colonial violence in the Congo as context.

7) Who is pictured vs. who is erased (African helpers)

• The speaker revisits a photograph:

  • African men are visible, possibly gun bearers/helpers, but unnamed.

• Representation critique

  • African characters appear as caricatures (e.g., repeatedly referenced as “Bill”)
  • The speaker argues African contributors’ names and skills were reduced to stereotypes.

• Research goal stated

  • “Recover” African voices and show how African knowledge was co-opted into Western science.

8) Theodore Roosevelt’s 1909 expedition as “carcass arms race”

• Framing

  • High-profile expedition led by a recently former U.S. president

• Scale/logistics claimed

  • ~500 porters
  • ~four tons of salt
  • ~11,000 specimens (number given as ~11,400)
  • They didn’t ship all, but animals were still killed

• Aftermath

  • Years of cataloging required before meaningfully understanding the collection

• Endangered species context used

  • Discussion includes white rhino (near-threatened), southern white rhino (population decline from early 1900s to present but recent declines), and black rhino (critically endangered)

• Moral/political point

  • The speaker argues that violent extraction was justified as knowledge production in a colonial context.

• Contemporary vs. historical criticism

  • Cites a critic (Lord Cranworth) who condemned the slaughter as brutal, noting potential lack of conscience.

9) Pop culture analogy: Black Panther museum scene

• The speaker uses this scene to argue:
  • Museums claim expertise as institutional authority
  • The “real” knowledge is treated as belonging elsewhere (in the example, Killmonger claims expertise)
  • Fiction illustrates real epistemic injustice: formal Western systems often undervalue living cultural expertise.

10) Robert Jacob Gordon and the question “who counts” in the history of science

• Gordon described as:

  • A commander in the Dutch East India Company garrisons near the Cape
  • Published work on botany/zoology/astronomy, etc.
  • Correlated with learned European correspondence

• Key evidence described

  • Gordon’s field notes credited sources and local informants more than many contemporaries
  • Speaker uses him to argue that “local informant knowledge” shaped scientific outcomes

• Important theme

  • Determining who “counts” as a scientist often depends on who is credited, not who did the work.

11) Final giraffe specimen story (provenance and evidence)

• Why Europeans were curious

  • Giraffe’s size/blood circulation questions; belief it seemed too improbable

• Gordon’s pursuit

  • He aims to bring a giraffe specimen back to Europe
  • After spotting a living giraffe (using a pocket telescope), the entourage and local helpers enable capture/kill

• Speaker quotes field notes

  • The giraffe is recorded as coming toward them; one servant helper is mentioned; shooting and dogs used; he describes the dead animal as remarkable

• Museum provenance

  • The skeleton ends up in European collections; speaker says it is in the French Museum of Natural History after Napoleon-era looting (not the expected Dutch collection)

• Bullet-hole verification

  • Speaker claims a visible bullet hole supports Gordon’s account.

• Closing argument

  • The speaker knows much about Gordon and Akeley but far less about African helpers who made collection possible.
  • Calls for more recovery of marginalized voices and attention to knowledge sources.

Speakers / sources featured (as named in the subtitles)

Primary speaker

• Laura Mitchell (implied by the talk title; speaker throughout)

Named historical figures / referenced people

• Theodore Roosevelt
• Carl Akeley
• Robert Jacob Gordon
• Napoleon (referenced regarding looting)
• Kermit Roosevelt (mentioned in relation to the expedition)
• Bill (a helper name used in the storytelling being critiqued)
• Lord Cranworth (critic quoted)
• Marie “Conda” (appears to be mis-transcribed; unclear exact name—referenced as a “museum” figure; likely not reliably captured)
• Afrikander / Pianar (names appearing in quoted field notes)

Referenced scholarly / cultural sources

• Donna Haraway
  • “landmark 1984 paper” in Social Text (mentioned; title not provided in subtitles)
• Black Panther (film)
  • Character: Killmonger
• Roosevelt expedition / Smithsonian and Field Museum expeditions (institutional references)
• AMNH (American Museum of Natural History) (institutional reference)
• Smithsonian Institution (institutional reference)
• Field Museum (institutional reference)
• Milwaukee Public Museum (referenced for muskrat display)
• National park in the Belgian Congo (mountain gorilla context; speaker discusses Belgian colonialism)

Audience / general references

• “Professor McCarty” (mentioned by the speaker as someone the audience heard from)
• Unnamed classroom audience members (“any science students in the room,” “anybody,” etc.)