Thanks for this very interesting text, Alan. I've been thinking along similar lines in relation to fish. I have three small freshwater aquaria in my apartment and have been reading up and observing (nothing expensive or exotic--can't afford/house it). I was most struck by studies of fish rivalry and fighting in particular. Display is so significant that it's clear that fish work in a realm of representation. Fights where fish have been exposed to each other visually beforehand, across a transparent divider, end much more quickly and in favor of the larger fish, than fights between fish who have never before seen each other. While it almost seems like a fatalistic 'attitude' to fights, it's also obivously a mechanism that reduces long-term wear-and-tear on the fish, since fights 'determined in advance' are always shorter.
As you suggest, the question is where this sort of representation, which always involves flaring of gills and fins and certain patterns of motion, shades into a visual 'culture' -- I am amazed by their sensory abilities, by the way. Catfish, like my pimelodus pictus, can detect electromagnetic impulses generated by muscle activity; they use it to find buried prey. Sharks have the same capability and will lunge 'blind', a membrane covering their eyes, relying on electromagnetic because it is more accurate than vision. The lateral line system is also incredibly sensitive, detecting minute currents; fish have been shown able to detect the motion of hair-width glass rods using this system. -- Ryan On Thu, 25 Aug 2005, Alan Sondheim wrote: > Instinctual-Cultural States
