fivemack: (Default)
Tom Womack ([personal profile] fivemack) wrote2008-12-29 11:51 am

Advice to modern-day Victorian naturalists

A narrow aperture, a long lens and a flash used in daytime permits a strikingly taxidermied look without all that tiresome messing about with intestines, cotton-wool, and specially-shaped metal hooks:



[identity profile] antinomy.livejournal.com 2008-12-29 02:36 pm (UTC)(link)
Of course, you're not going to manage to get it to stay in a glass box on your mantelpiece for very long...

[identity profile] huskyteer.livejournal.com 2008-12-29 05:28 pm (UTC)(link)
A stuffed squirrel wouldn't look that cute. It would have been posed reared up and snarling squirrely defiance at its brave slayer.

[identity profile] fivemack.livejournal.com 2008-12-29 05:50 pm (UTC)(link)
Had not the Walter Potter Museum of Anthropomorphic Taxidermy been sadly broken up and sold as individual lots in 2003, I could offer to take you to an exhibit of many large and beautiful examples of Victorian taxidermy posed at a level of cuteness sufficient to choke an ox.

But there is only a Web site, and the images on it are small and of poor quality:

http://www.acaseofcuriosities.com/pages/01_2_00potter.html

Who would not have paid £2800 for a case filled with 34 stuffed guinea-pigs, half of them playing cricket and the other half playing in a brass band? (http://www.acaseofcuriosities.com/assets/01grotesque/potter/Guinea_pigs_cricket.jpg)
Edited 2008-12-29 17:50 (UTC)

[identity profile] naath.livejournal.com 2008-12-29 10:36 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh, that is so CUTE!

But they are obnoxious blighters.