Banner Sponsors
For artists and collectors sponsored by Intercal...your mohair supplier and Johnna's Mohair Store
The first time I heard these two terms used together was in an article about R. John Wright. He was talking about his cute café bears, or maybe about all of his work, and said he often asked himself what distinguished his pieces from taxidermy. Obviously the techniques are different, but with realistic pieces, is the result all that different? (He said, "yes," but wait—there's more.) :dance:
The current issue of TB&F, with its round-up of this year's TOBY winners, has me thinking about the topic again. Four of the nine artist pieces are what I would call very realistic, and two more are so stylized that I would never call them teddy bears. Now, please don't think that I'm criticizing the pieces or the artists. Their work is stunning, and was well-loved by me and the other TOBY voters. :clap: :clap: :clap:
Here are my discussion questions for you: 1.) What distinguishes an artist's realistic bear/dog/cat from a taxidermist's? I think both admire the beauty of animals, but if the taxidermist is trying to capture nature in every detail, what is the artist doing? 2.) What's the relationship between a toy bear that a child takes to bed every night, a traditional mohair teddy bear (artist-made or manufactured), and the most detailed, realistic artist-made animal? Are all of these on a spectrum, or are the characteristics and purposes so different that it's like comparing apples and oranges? 
I look forward to reading your thoughts on the topic.
Becky
Benson BearsTaxidermy uses a real animal's body! The artists who create realistic bears are interpreting the animal, making a pattern, and adding any amount of features to get to their goal. Looking at a taxidermists work, what I see is death and I feel a great saddness. When I look at the bears these artists are creating, I am awestruck at their artistry and I see life. Even though they are fabric, the artists have breathed life into their creations.....you can probably guess I'm not a fan of taxidermy (especially on bears!)
desertmountainbearTo me a piece of taxidermy is a trophy celebrating the hunters skill. I know the taxidermist is trying to show the beauty but at least for me there is no comfort looking at the face of such a prize.
A teddy bear whether it be realistic, traditional or a store bought child's bear has sweetness and life behind his eyes, not death. Every bear I have ever made or owned whether it be Paddington, Pooh, antique or one of mine with claws has been picked up cuddled and loved exactly the way it was meant to be.
Could you ever imagine doing that with a dead animal?
Joanne
Excellent points, and that was Wright's idea (as I remember it), too. That no matter how realistic, teddy bear artists always add charm, and usually some anthropomorphic appeal to their creations. Karen Lyons' polar bear holding his mousie friend (Thomas' Big Present) is a perfect example of this, I think. The sweet, very human look on that bear's face is one that no real polar bear ever had.
Any takers for question #2?
Becky
desertmountainbearThe relationship is that they are all made to be loved. Like I said I cuddle all of mine. Who do you think made those antique traditional teddies look the way they do now? They children who loved them.
I work at a school. I bring my bears to school. The kids get to see them first. And what do you think they do? They take them and they cuddle them. Even the boys. You should see the very cool 6th grade boys melt when they hold a bear, even one with claws. Maybe for some they are meant to be shown and not touched. But even if I was ever fortunate enough to get a hold of one of Karen's polar bears I would do just like the kids. I would cuddle it.
Am I answering question #2 I am trying.
Joanne
You should see the very cool 6th grade boys melt when they hold a bear
Aww. That I would love to see. 
Becky
Milan, ItalyHi Becky, hall
This topic looks very interesting.
I think that the mainly difference is that taxidermy is done by scientists, biologists... taxidermy's aim is to describe nature in the most realistic way by stuffing dead animals. This is a shame I can't understand it; it has always been in the human being the willingness to show its supremacy on nature, taxidermy is an example. I hope none will ever stuff one of us with straws to show how we looked like 
On the other hand, when we speak about an art work, we usually speak about a personal interpretation of something; it could be a sensation, a issue, an animal...
If we speak about teddy bear artists, perhaps we have to define different categories: traditional classic teddy bears, vintage bears, anime bears, and realistic bears or other animals.
I think that realistic teddy bear have nothing to do with taxidermy, because first the process of creation is different and they are created for two completely different aims. One process is scientific (= "barbaric") the other one is artistic.
Then from a collector point of view, the rest is a matter of taste.
I prefer traditional teddy bears (in mohair or viscose, no fur) because I have to take them to bed every night 
I apology if I hurt someone, this is just my personal opinion.
Best
V.
On the other hand, when we speak about an art work, we usually speak about a personal interpretation of something; it could be a sensation, a issue, an animal...
This is very interesting, and very well-said, Valentina. It goes beyond teddy bears, but if you look at the bears that we make, all are so different from each other. We all interpret them in our own way.
I hope none will ever stuff one of us with straws to show how we looked like
I hope not! I'm sure that taxidermy is just as creepy to animals as this would be to people.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. 
Becky
Busser BearsTaxidermy uses the hide, not the body...there usually is somekind of form made of fiberglass or hard foam. My ex-husband had 2 fish done...they were dehydrated and then the skin/flesh was put over the form. And since it's a form, it may never actually be the same size as the original live animal/fish etc.
Leeann
This is a fascinating topic, Becky. I think the answers you've gotten say it all. 
I'm not fond of taxidermy by any means, but I know that taxidermy has its place as a learning tool and to show people what an animal really looks like. I realize many species of animals can be seen in the zoo, but for artists and scientists, sometimes being able to study an animal in a static, unmoving pose can be helpful.
I think that the draw of teddy bears, whether soft and floppy, traditional jointed, or realistic, is just like the draw of animals themselves. We all would love to be able to be close to animals and interact with them. If there were no way you could get hurt by, say, a tiger or a bear, wouldn't it be neat to pet one, to hold its paw? With stuffed fabric animals, we have that opportunity. How else can one take a bear to bed with them at night? 
~Debora
How else can one take a bear to bed with them at night?
You've got a good point there, Debora!
The animals made by Hansa Toys are probably a good example of our wanting to admire animals safely and up-close. I haven't bought any of their products, but they make quite an array of fairly realistic wild animals.
Becky
PennsylvaniaA tough subject...
Let me start off by describing what I do in photography.
I am a TRADITIONAL photographer. I use traditional film cameras to develop and print photos in my darkroom in my basement. I don't care about the digital vs. traditional debate. That's not what I'm really talking about. My photos are images that I have made by my own hand using traditional techniques. Each photo, by itself, is a work of art. Each photo is a personal creation.
If I made a photograph of your Teddy Bear, the image would bear the LIKENESS of your Bear but it would not truly be the Bear. As I said, that image is the work of my own hand. I didn't make the Bear. I made the photo interpretation of the Bear.
You, as a Bearmaker, do not make real bears. You make interpretations of bears in the form of Teddies. Even if you are making realistic-looking Bears, they aren't real but they are still the work of your own hand.
The taxidermist is not MAKING the Bear (assuming he is mounting a bear) but he is preserving an already existing bear. There is much skill and artistry involved but he does not create the Bear by his own hand. He only preserves and reinterprets the work of God's hand.
Frankly, I don't see how any Man could recreate God's work but that's a discussion for another day. ;)
If a Bearmaker took a bear pelt and make it into something different, even if it was a realistic interpretation of nature it would still be a Bear and not a bear.
(Capitalization is significant... Signifies the difference between a Teddy Bear and a live bear or "bruin.")
I like real fur Bears and we have several of them in our Den. However, they aren't for children to play with. Yes, we love to stroke them and hug them just as much as any other Bear but they aren't for playing. They are collectibles.
We are adults and we collect Bears for our own reasons but, still, the symbolism of the Teddy Bear is an important part of their charm. A taxidermy bear doesn't have that same charm. It may be just as collectible and desirable as a Teddy Bear but, without the symbolism it's not the same.
I don't have a problem with hunting as long as it is done legally and the hunter does not waste what he takes. If you are not going to eat what you take, I don't think you have any business hunting. Trophy hunting isn't Kosher, as far as I am concerned.
I don't have a problem with taxidermy, provided the hunt was legal AND the rest of the animal is used. Also, don't forget, taxidermy is valid as a scientific endeavor. Taxidermists preserve records of what animals looked like in real life after their death.
Australians know that the only record of the existence of the thylacene might reside as taxidermy specimens in museums. As much as there are still reports of them being alive in the wild, we don't know if the reports are true. So... WHAT IF somebody were to catch a live thylacene? How would we know if it is really a thylacene? We would have to compare the live animal to the specimens in the museum.
The taxidermist preserves and interprets specimens from nature but he does not create.
The Bearmaker creates work which might mimic nature but it is still the work of her own hand.
Benson BearsWe do have film of the Thylacine and there are plenty of photographic records. In this day and age I don't see any reason for the so called "scientific" purposes of taxidermy, we can learn so much more from the non-lethal and minimally invasive means of investigation available. As for going out and hunting an animal and then hanging it's remains on your wall, I can't think of anything more pointless or repugnant!
C.W. Huggley BearsWe do have film of the Thylacine and there are plenty of photographic records. In this day and age I don't see any reason for the so called "scientific" purposes of taxidermy, we can learn so much more from the non-lethal and minimally invasive means of investigation available. As for going out and hunting an animal and then hanging it's remains on your wall, I can't think of anything more pointless or repugnant!
^ Yeah that.
PennsylvaniaIt's a bit difficult to measure a specimen and compare it to a reference that is only recorded on film unless very, very detailed photos were made with measurement scales included. Neither is microscopic or DNA evidence preserved either. (There is thylacine DNA still in existence.)
Never said I LIKED taxidermy. I'm just not against it because, as I said, there are valid reasons for it. (e.g. Preservation of scientific specimins, etc.) It's still not on my list of favorite things.
Hmm, what about realistic human dolls and sculptures? Becky, could they be considered taxidermy? ;)
P.S. My favorite thing to take to bed at night was, you can guess, a toy cat. THe more real looking, the better! Problem was there weren't many realistic stuffed cats. I ended up with a Gund cat with a rubber face. I had it until college when the rubber rotted away. Broke my heart. I never tied it together, but that's probably one of the reasons I spent so many years trying to create a realistic looking teddy bear type cat
Karen
To be honest, I'm not much interested in taxidermy, and I've seen more than my share of it living in a place where hunting and fishing are a very big part of many people's lives.
My question was, "What distinguishes an artist's realistic bear/dog/cat from a taxidermist's?" I guess we have to define taxidermy first...maybe...but do we have to defend it or condemn it in order to discuss artist bears?
Anyway, I do appreciate all the thoughtful and interesting replies to the topic. Thank you.
Becky
Hmm, what about realistic human dolls and sculptures? Becky, could they be considered taxidermy?
Um, no? (Not sure why you asked this.)
Becky
PennsylvaniaTo create a "sculpture" of some item in nature by preserving it or by taxidermy, even though it requires art and skill, is still just "copying" somebody else's work.
To create a "sculpture" of some item from scratch, even if it is a faithful copy of an original, is the maker's original creation.
To me, the important part of Teddy Bear symbolism is that somebody CREATED it. It is the care that went into creating it which brings a Bear to "life," so to speak.
A taxidermy bear, as far as I am concerned, is a lifeless thing.
Realistic cats... Realistic child dolls...
Again, somebody created it and brought it to "life." That is the difference.
Karen wrote:Hmm, what about realistic human dolls and sculptures? Becky, could they be considered taxidermy?
Um, no? (Not sure why you asked this.)
Becky
Becky,
Not picking on you. I've heard this before from some traditional bear artists. I just find it a little ironic that these same artists have no problem with realistic human art pieces yet complain that realistic animal designs are not art, but taxidermy.
To me, the important part of Teddy Bear symbolism is that somebody CREATED it. It is the care that went into creating it which brings a Bear to "life," so to speak.
Well-said, I think. And as you mentioned, it's quite different from an imitation of life that God created.
Not picking on you. I've heard this before from some traditional bear artists.
I'm glad you clarified, and I didn't mean to imply that there was much of a connection at all with taxidermy, but it was a term that surprised me when I first heard it.
So for you, Karen, or for anyone who makes and/or admires realistic stuffed animals (I was among those who voted for Karen's incredible pieces, by the way, and not just because she's a TT-er), let me put it another way:
What inspires you to make something that's so true-to-life? I'm reminded of the still-life painters who re-created a bowl of fruit, for example, down to details as small as a fly nearby and a bruise on an apple. Those paintings lead me to contemplate the beauty of the everyday in a way that probably wouldn't happen with a real bowl of fruit sitting on a counter-top in the kitchen.
Becky
Hello. :)
: 1.) What distinguishes an artist's realistic bear/dog/cat from a taxidermist's? I think both admire the beauty of animals, but if the taxidermist is trying to capture nature in every detail, what is the artist doing?
Well, I've seen quite a few taxidermy bears actually -- they're big, but there's no mistaking a real bear which has been preserved after death, and a much cuter, softer, cuddly teddy bear. I think it's important to remember that the distinction is just that -- you can't *hide* a real bear which has been stuffed. But an artist's bear is different. The artist might aspire to make a bear look as life-like as possible, or they might not -- they might do something else. I see a lot of that in the wide-range of teddy bears on here -- the interpretation is what sets it apart, both from different teddy bears, and real bears.
2.) What's the relationship between a toy bear that a child takes to bed every night, a traditional mohair teddy bear (artist-made or manufactured), and the most detailed, realistic artist-made animal? Are all of these on a spectrum, or are the characteristics and purposes so different that it's like comparing apples and oranges? :wacko:
It depends. I would resist cuddling a real bear -- one I knew had been prepared taxidermy. But I cuddle every teddy bear I get my hands on, when I am allowed. :) It's children who are going to perhaps wonder the most here. WIth the rise of shops like "build-a-bear", and other plushies (I mean plushies here as opposed to specifically teddy bears) one can buy from card shops, the emphasis isn't so much on the bear as it is something "soft and cuddly" -- and I would suppose children would expect that aspect moreover they would a traditionally-made mohair teddy bear which is somewhat harder, and perhaps not as cuddly.
Not that this denies the traditional artist-made teddy bear any love, but a colleague of mine at work has pointed out the she doesn't like some of the artist bears on my desk because they're not as squidgy as the other ones (bah! I say). I wonder if that's how children will see it?
In my eyes though, I admire all teddies for the personality they have in their look, the material they're made of, and if know, the person(s) who made it. That way, I am able to bestow a lot more personality into the teddy bear than I am something which is mass-produced; where the appeal and function of the teddy bear has already been pre-determined to a large extent.
-- Thomas Adam
Past Time BearsThomas has touched on one of the aspects of artist bears that differentiate them from taxidermy. We who make bears usually agree that the pieces we create retain the artistic 'soul' and personality of the one who makes them . . . one of the reasons bears looks so different from one another. The spirit of the artist is sewn into each work that is created. All I see when I look at taxidermy is a sentient being who's life has been deliberately taken, only to be reconstructed as an inanimate trophy. What a waste of life.
What inspires you to make something that's so true-to-life? I'm reminded of the still-life painters who re-created a bowl of fruit, for example, down to details as small as a fly nearby and a bruise on an apple. Those paintings lead me to contemplate the beauty of the everyday in a way that probably wouldn't happen with a real bowl of fruit sitting on a counter-top in the kitchen.
Becky
Well said, Becky! :clap: And I think you are right.
