Conclusion - Nemo & His Relatives Part VIII

Conclusion to the Review of the Otter Exhibition at Wilhelm Fabry Museum 

Respectfully submitted and written by Béatrice Dumiche

The Wilhelm-Fabry-Museum, also responsible for the conservation of the industrial heritage of the town, has been caring for a former local grain alcohol distillery (“Kornbrennerei”) since its opening in 1989 and wondered how to express their explicit support to the exhibition using their own original advertising. It turned into an homage to Nemo with an additional pinch of humor. A beer mat was printed especially for the event using one of his photos taken by “Life on white” as though it had been issued by the historical distillery. It makes a very cute souvenir although one will not be able to find an otter schnapps at Hilden, sadly! The memorabilia most representative of the spirit of the exhibition was a lovely illustration drawn by one of the young visitors, published as a postcard after the exhibit was completed. The leadership’s true continued interest in the subject, shown by this publication is exceptional and cannot be lauded enough. It leads to the question which must occur to the mind of any enchanted visitor, how can this rare collection be preserved and enlarged while keeping the charm and the unique liveliness it owes to Gettmann’s personal involvement and to Nemo’s irreplaceable presence? For both, the Wilhelm-Fabry-Museum seems to have become their second home during the months they spent there together while bringing to life the exhibition, and they made it a great meeting point for all who love otters and otter stories.

They opened the path towards an interactive museum experience based on a personal encounter instead of simply on browsing around pedagogical items in support of a message, which too seldom captures the imagination and which can perhaps even be counterproductive. My opinion is that organizers may even distract from the concrete message of an exhibit by resorting to techniques from virtual media. They may give the impression that the presented items are not interesting enough on their own by adding artificial interest through methods we now know too well are pulling minds away from nature and its immediate experience. The special circumstances under which Gettmann’s Otter exhibition took place, due to the limited budget at his disposal, revealed paradoxically what is lacking at larger structures who pay tribute to delegation and lean management with a reduced presence of qualified educators with the scientific and pedagogic background to provide personally adapted information rather than an impersonal pre-shaped general discourse using fancy tools.

In short: a retired zoo director, member of the IUCN Otter Specialist Group guiding the visitors through the exhibition he conceived, accompanied by Nemo, who is more than just an animal ambassador available for a photograph, cannot be compared with the common museum guide (or worse, an audio-guide transforming the visit into a solipsistic experience under the pretext of an individualised service). It highlighted that nothing can replace personal exchanges and encounters to make natural history museums attractive as places participating in the evolution of science providing a space for self-reflection and playful invention as a response to the challenges of life. It proved that such institutions can be open to everybody if they are conceived twith the goal of inspiring questions and stimulating creativity as they appeal to the human senses and intelligence as power to encourage participation in socialization. Thus, beyond its apparent simplicity and accessibility, Gettmann’s conception revealed an extraordinary ambition, the goal of a fundamentally renovated humanism in which invention cannot be dissociated from first-hand popularization and it is up to specialists, many of whom cut  themselves off from real life to bear their own responsibility in the current rejection of progress. 

These specialists’ retirement from the public discussion as a result of the idea that there could be mass education required to be promoted by all cultural institutions, even those less critically acclaimed with low budgets, revalorizes this kind of unique experience as revolutionary in all meanings of the word. It reminds us that evolution is, contrary to our most reduced materialistic vision, an individual process based on learning from one another through listening and doing, reproducing and inventing. As is it requires personal appropriation, it is, in fact, the harshest criticism against what is currently considered to be culture. It does not recognize “consumption”, which is strictly unnatural and lessens our instincts as predators which has nothing to do with what economists have tried to create. From this point of view, Gettmann showed, through the example of the otter, how absurdly perverted and irrational our discourse has become again using new reasons and excuses sciences contributed to building up while losing contact with the public as well as with their objective. Abandoning their responsibilities in favor of the mainstream economy promising wealth as progress rather than socially useful knowledge benefitting the greater population.   

With the way Gettmann conceived his exhibition, he advocated fundamentally that, against the current climate of disinformation, it was necessary to reactivate the bond between humanities and natural sciences inherited from the Renaissance, the key element of the German “Bildung” in the 18th century. His presentation was an homage to this state of mind which promoted a culture based on intelligent self-fulfilment respecting the nature of the individual for a better socialization and encouraged experimental knowledge. He made it clear that to counterbalance the consumption of virtual information, which frequently people do not take personal responsibility for, it is indispensable to transform museums from institutions simply storing a historic heritage into meeting places where their collections are presented in a way that relates their knowledge to the future as a safeguard and a reference for constructive life projects. A place where people can get more than unconsidered and unsourced facts, and exercise their critical judgment in exchanges adapted to their level of cognition and interest rather than simply being witness to journalistic discussions which rarely contribute to clarify contradictions. They must reach everyone; personally teaching them again that the confrontation with nature means an encounter with the complexity of diversity that mass education and infotainment have not prepared them to live with. The density of his presentation, which was reinforced by the limited space at his disposal, offered the visitor exactly this kind of challenge. It invited him to be curious and inquisitive like an otter, playfully driven by the pleasure to learn more by himself and return to places he loves in order to become more familiar with them. A great merit of Gettmann’s exhibition was that it allowed one to gain knowledge about otters a lively place as it solicited impulsive reactions and reflections when faced with the exhibits and made one choose the most convenient approach for oneself, whether it be to go further into the subject or to just enjoy an informative afternoon which may or may not have an unexpected effect later. 

As he presented exhibits he related to while remaining within the frame of scientific structures, he succeeded in fighting indifference and avoiding the dangers of insignificant accumulation of information while still appealing to the intelligence in which he trusts as both a zoologist and a humanist. He remembered that natural history museums exist to spread awareness and be an independent forum for scientists and multidisciplinary exchanges with an interested audience. In fact, through his exhibit he cautiously modernized their encyclopedic design, not much evolved since the 19th century, according to us, by introducing the principle of pleasure as the most important natural motivation alongside survival instinct. While confronting an exhibit’s objective conservative function with the unpredictable spontaneity of life represented by individuals that only fine arts and literature can portray, he transformed the visit into an encounter and created a way to relate oneself emotionally with the exhibits and to be included in a learning process about the species. He gambled on the curiosity they would incite and the need for structured and safe information in order to provide understanding of the particular character as part of an evolving system with its own complex history where natural and cultural sciences cross without being able to elucidate the mystery of the individuality. This mystery is handled by the arts; they create the attraction of the otherness, often a strong motivation for a personal interest in wildlife and nature. This approach attempted to surmount the artificial opposition between sciences and humanities built up by the positivism and considered as a determining factor of progress. Through this he highlighted that, in the interest of evolution expressing the dynamism of life in dialogue overcoming its own oppositions, it is necessary to train the cooperation of all human faculties in the disciplines they stand for and to conceive educative projects from this larger perspective.

So, Gettmann’s originality, which was revealed more and more as one followed his own itinerary through the exhibition, is that he argues for an interactive structure between zoos and museums at a larger scale and on the basis of a more explicitly coordinated thematic conception than as occasionally happens with, for instance, art exhibitions at zoos. He takes the side for a biodiversity reflected by artifacts illustrating the faculties men and animals have in common as they feature life in different forms and appearances. While proving that every place and every natural manifestation can become an object of observation and provoke reactions, he insists that there must be proper events to raise awareness and locations, such as sanctuaries, dedicated to this purpose where human conscience, rising from solidly established scientific information, can be turned into the resolution to act reasonably in favour of wildlife conservation. This multidisciplinary interactivity, the idea and modalities of which must be built and improved upon as in a laboratory where life as a whole is viewed through different lenses, is a necessary guaranty against a backslide into a romanticism replacing the sensible understanding of nature with the feeling of an undefined communion with it, primarily based on the individual desire of any human person to fuse with an illusionary sense of wholeness to overcome his own existential solitude. At this level, the concept of the exhibition is remarkable again as it featured species who live in large family groups or alone and made it clear that knowing about nature is also learning about social organization and its variable forms. It showed that it is a fundamental step towards civilization because it consists of finding out about specific ways of life according to different existential conditions, which is the motor of evolution working with and for adaptation and invention, helping dreams to become creations.       

Creating a synergy between natural history museums and zoos 

The example of the otter allows Wolfgang Gettmann to transmit the philosophy of a zoo professional with a long personal experience with animals who wants to advocate their case more globally as they participate in the eco-system everyone is responsible for at their own level. Over the years he has become aware that the established role of natural sciences and in turn zoos, as their lively institutional relayers of information, have more and more been contested while the welfare they provided to animals did not stop increasing. He demonstrates that new ways of mediation are indispensable to convince a public often lacking a basis of scientific knowledge and reveals an inability to make up their mind in debates either at the superficial level of disinformation between highly specialized experts. So, although he settled in a museum, his goal was and is to be an advocate for zoos as necessary complements to museums and as a prolongation of school education because without them wildlife will be reduced to an abstraction, the existence of which will paradoxically only be publically noticed for a moment when the news turns to hunting and poaching in far countries where they are supposed to represent a sort of “normality” our civilization likes to feel helpless against. 

In defending the synergy between zoos and museums through the concept of his exhibition, he found a way to fight ignorance practically and without spectacle, showing that the fight for animal conservation cannot be improvised. He highlighted that it requires historical distance and a global scientific culture to allow for evaluation of reasonable and defendable actions according to the present state of knowledge. His success was that it never abandoned the perspective of science and limits to epistemology. He hinted at the necessity of extending the field of zoology, as has already partially happened with it now including the prevention of wildlife damages alongside fish and game management, requiring political support to provide the indispensable legal frame. His pragmatism, based on a large professional competence revealing his comprehension of multiple, sometimes invisible, aspects of the discipline, warned against any misplaced anthropocentrism which would annihilate the exhibit’s educative credibility. He showed that the lack of scientific knowledge and of its critical integration into a context including the evaluation of its own limits leads to irrational and contradictory discourses which do not serve animal welfare in any way, instead encouraging inane fantasy either in the contemporary form of idealization imagining them as better than humans or in the historic demonization as the wild beast. Both are symptomatic of the divorce between reason and emotion which has led to sterile conflicts since they oppose science and feelings and thus humanity with itself, seeming unable to accept our own rationality as part of our evolution and as the dialogue with the animals subsisting in each of us. Abstract concepts are set on one side and subjective emotions on the other which, if they are not mediated, set free an irrational power, unconsciously perpetuating the contradictions aroused by the coexistence of humans and major predators who share not only the same living and hunting grounds but the same playful intelligence. Fables have best featured this ambivalence through the ages, underlining that the characteristics in the animal cursed as evil cunningness is nothing other than the reverse of human cleverness. The otter is the perfect example of this and the meaning of the exhibition’s title was revealed in all its subtlety to those who were attentive throughout their visit and noticed the contradictions within themselves which they were invited to become aware of before taking sides in a complex debate in which arguments based solely on morality are inappropriate.

Gettmann demonstrated that to learn about an animal is to learn about oneself while experiencing the fascination and the irritation of otherness. Thus it is an important stage in psychological development to refine instincts in order to transform them into empathy and understanding while generating the confidence for personal evolution. As the otter, fortunately, inhabits most of the continents, the only exceptions being Oceania and the Antarctic, it is particularly able to illustrate this idea. The variety of places and environmental situations it is present and engaged in encourages awareness and reciprocal support through larger conservation programs, offering the opportunity for comparison. They offer the chance for cultural reflection and exchanges which opens minds to invention because conservation in situ needs local acceptance and a pedagogy respecting the experience and the beliefs of others as they are part of the history which forged their identity. Science will not be able to prevail if it does not adapt and recognize that it requires the mediation of individuals ready to explain its aims and take responsibility for the activities related to it while proposing pragmatic solutions to adults and offering concrete experiences to children. He stressed that meeting animals is fundamental to fighting prejudices, that it must happen early in a child’s life and be initiated by an adult making an educative moment of the encounter with its most prominent conclusion being a sense of self-awareness and the consciousness of personal limits as a sign of human intelligence acquired through evolution. So, he made it clear that the conservation of predators, which no longer challenge our survival instinct through direct confrontation, continues to challenge our existence because they question our natural capacity to evolve according to the survival instinct we share with them. The motto ‘Think globally, act locally’ perfectly matches otter conservation, that is the natural conclusion after visiting Gettmann’s exhibition, which literally invites you to become creative at your turn in favor of otters. 

Gettmann’s personal collection is focussed on the European continent, mostly Germany and the United Kingdom, though his collection from France and the Netherlands was under-represented as he could present only a small part of it. However, he was able to borrow items from other regions for several exhibits, for example, some from Japan, which hints at the ways in which his design could be extended to what could become the world’s first Otter Museum in collaboration with a zoo and animal ambassadors. There is no doubt that this initial exhibition will remain unique because it was an incredible personal realization and the duo of Wolfgang Gettmann and Nemo pushed the limits of any other kind of show as they are a duo in real life. Nevertheless, creating such a place, which does not currently exist even in planning stages anywhere else, through a foundation and/or participative financing while including already existing public structures would be, according to us, the next logical step. It would also be a way to continue to use Nemo’s well-deserved popularity to give otter awareness a lively home after his long association with Düsseldorf and the Aquazoo. It would keep a continuity to the effort, worth being preserved, of Wolfgang Gettmann’s personal involvement. The exhibition highlighted the visionary appropriateness of this by bringing attention to the important cultural heritage of the otters’ presence in North-Rhine-Westphalia which could help its return supported by a very dense network of zoos presenting Eurasian, giant and short-clawed otters in close proximity to each other. This would help give the species’ conservation efforts a dynamic based on original educative choices corresponding to the French initiative of the Plan Loutre, with which it could develop complementary strategies. This would set standards at the European level creating an excellence domain for French and German cooperation in associating natural sciences and humanities according to the tradition of Enlightenment. The institutions which played a decisive role in the rescue of the otter in Europe after the signature of the Bern Convention are all around 40 years old now and it may be an opportunity for the 50th anniversary to add centres documenting that the work is far from completed although it is entering a new phase with the otters’ slow and, in certain places, still threatened return. It is not mentioned often enough but, according to us, the actions in favor of otters, despite the many obstacles they have had to and continue to overcome, have generated the first timid success in reintroducing a predator at the brink of extinction in Europe. This needs to be celebrated with a future-oriented concept helping to normalize the coexistence between them and the other populations in their environments through the consolidation and amelioration of the standards already reached and through the refinement of the pedagogic strategies to make them more concrete. The implementation of such a centre in North-Rhine-Westphalia at the crossing of the borders of the countries initially involved in the process would make sense both historically and geographically while, at a larger scale, due to Germany’s location in Central Europe, it could represent an outreach to the East-European countries where the otter is present thanks to initiatives like the Vydra park in Hungary. Moreover, its realization could be a driving force toward conceiving the comeback of other European predators, for example, wolves, bears or the lynx, as part of a global project, which would succeed with the invention of proper strategies and realistic targets.  

The success of the multidisciplinary conferences, which took place throughout the otter exhibition’s run, showed that there was a real public interest in quality popularization able to relate information to local contexts and to open their minds while telling the stories of remarkable personalities who have contributed to a better knowledge about otters. Two of the conferences directly expanded upon themes evoked through items in the show. The first was the representation of otters in the arts ‘as predators and preys’ by Dr. Sandra Abend, an art historian attached to the Fabry-Museum, who focussed on the predominance of hunting motifs people still have in mind rather than the works concentrating on the animal itself. The depiction of the latter appear to be more significant of the artists’ formal style than in allowing the emergence of new general codes, which is the trend of modern and contemporary wildlife pictures, of which those of the otter are not an exception. The second was dedicated to one of Gettmann’s “heroes”, Gavin Maxwell, whose path he followed to Scotland in an adventurous journey which could not help but remind him of his own experience with Nemo despite the time gap. He brought with him some first-hand information thanks to his personal encounters and the documents he got access to at the Bright Water Visitor Centre on the Isle of Skye. More than one hundred people attended this conference, underlining the particular attraction of subjects associating personal adventures with animal stories. It was up to Dr. Jan Ole Kriegs from the Westphalian Natural History Museum in Münster to raise the awareness that the otter adventure is just at their doorstep now, he gave clues that it has begun to return to some spots in North-Rhine Westphalia, which gives hope it could make it definitively a home again soon.

Pleading the case for an international otter museum and awareness center 

The idea for an “otter awareness center” occurred to me alone and was not suggested by anybody for whom I may be considered a spokesman. It became clear the more familiar I became with the exhibit and observed Wolfgang Gettmann at work during his guided tours. I have no professional background in natural sciences or in zoology, which enables me only to propose such a project officially from this point of view. However, as a renowned specialist of Johann Wolfgang Goethe, working on his very modern concept of nature based on the reinterpretation of antique philosophy through experimental sciences and uncovering its still mostly ignored repercussion on his literature, I esteem myself qualified, being a French professor of German studies of the 18th century, to highlight the importance of such an institution for the re-popularization of humanities which has been a goal of the German Federal Ministers for Culture for years and which, so far as I am aware, has not led to the expected success. This is likely because there have never been targeted test-projects in domains where the cooperation with natural sciences would make a concrete tangible sense. As this article may have already shown, before I fell in love with otters and learned of them as an autodidact and coming into educative contact with zoo keepers, I was already interested in the influences between literature and fine arts in general. Through this, had developed a conscience for the role ‘nature’ had begun to play in the development of a local regional identity around 1930 before the Nazis abused it and the ongoing difficulty of integrating it in a modern ecological approach taking into account this former tradition. So, I want to stress that even away from the humanities, the literature and arts, there is a proper reason for Germany to place the imagery of the otter into a larger cultural context, especially since it was the same publisher who was in charge of both ‘Patschel’ books, so different from one another. My self-promotion, which may seem misplaced at the first glance, has no other goal than to give my proposal the necessary credibility in the context of a scientific evaluation: it is not born out of the blue, it is founded on cultural history and we contend it would participate in its evolution.      

It is my opinion that, with this exhibition, Gettmann perfectly put into practice the initial concept of the Aquazoo, to ally the goals of a museum and a zoo, and expand its perspective with the addition of the dimension of cultural history, which is the domain of the Wilhelm-Fabry Museum. The meeting with the living tame animal played a determining role in this process as it invited the visitor to become involved and take a position. He will be able to relate the knowledge gained through the exhibits to a practical sensorial and affective experience which may both echo and confirm each other, and lead to new questions. This way of thinking will help transform scientific discussions into a more widespread dialogue uncovering that animals are not only a part of a natural organization but also of human culture and that there are interferences between both which are necessary to consciously explore because we have come to a point where we know that sciences and technologies are included in a system of values for which we have responsibility. The way we define ourselves towards nature is the expression of our personal freedom and intelligence as a test for our capacity to evolve. 

These conclusions developed throughout the visit without any moral injunction, they came up spontaneously while spending a moment with otters through the works of those who love and protect them and contribute to readjust their image without negating that they are predators. Sadly, it also awakened the understanding that, although these animals have been hunted for centuries, they are in a privileged situation in Europe where the means for their conservation (scientifically and financially) exist, even if politicians sometimes need to be reminded of their duty to bring the Bern Convention to life by supporting concrete actions.   

It would be a pity ‒ I would even say, a shame ‒ if Gettmann’s initiative, which until now has existed only due to his private dedication (and his faculty to motivate Nemo) did not lead to further institutionalization as it was a real innovation and proven success. His collection needs a place where it can be conserved and inventoried and where it could be developed under good conditions to form the fundament of an educative exhibition through which it would be possible to tackle a wider variety of otter species and launch targeted awareness through multidisciplinary events. This may sound utopic in a period of economic crisis where cultural projects are often treated with despise while the devastating effects of deculturation and desocialization have been routinely deplored by the same people who built up the hurdles for their realization. With his exhibition Gettmann bet on what many would have considered “mission impossible” and proved that where there was a will, there was a way. Although creating a lasting structure is more complex than a single exhibit, it would be a sign that a more advanced stage of otter conservation could be reached and not judged as less important than the management of the animal’s comeback alone. Gettmann’s personal international reputation as a zoologist and otter specialist, and Nemo’s popularity should be able to unite otter lovers and conservationists from all over the world on a unique project proposing an educative program exploiting the possibilities of using present pedagogy to overcome the gap created by positivism and the industrial revolution between sciences and humanities, the origin of many of our psychological and environmental issues. Its strong scientific zoological foundation would be a guarantee for its sustainability and avoid the spiral of a quest for innovation, too often motivated by sensational entertainment to permanently increase visitor statistics. It would be an encitement to experience our relation to nature and the questions it brings, and would be a way to give an insight to the professional applications it offers while perhaps hinting at the modification of our conception of knowledge, which had become very monolithic.

All thirteen otter species are key, playing an essential role in the preservation of their respective eco-systems. There cannot be a more efficient method of promoting environmental education than placing them at the center of a multidisciplinary project which applies new strategies using the benefits of our encyclopedic culture, associated knowledge, and tolerance through the discovery of otherness as an indication of evolutionary intelligence. Such an ambitious realization requires a great deal of preparative work and the question of its feasibility will probably be the hardest hurdle to overcome but it would be an impetus if the first signs of movement towards this project could be given during the Year of Otter. A relatively easy – but work intensive ‒ step would be to create, at least on internet, a catalog of the exhibition with an inventory of a small part of Wolfgang Gettmann’s private collection and to add to this publication the transcriptions of the three major conferences. This would serve as a general introduction to help a larger number of the public consider the ways in which a cooperative centre could work institutionally and who might contribute to its further development financially, with loaned items, or even with suggestions of topics for publication that might be a useful way to begin conceiving a possible future. 

Otter News would like to sincerely thank Clare Laughran for her editing of the review.

Advocating Otters - Nemo & His Relatives Part VII

Advocating otters:
An attempt to awake Social Responsibility for Nature as a whole

Respectfully submitted and written by Béatrice Dumiche

Nemo’s example paradoxically reveals that his behavior is not simply due to his exceptional living conditions. On the contrary, he raises awareness for how deeply the depreciation of public opinion of zoos for their perceived inhumanity is related to a conception of animals which on one hand idealizes the wildness associated with an anthropomorphic feeling of “natural” happiness while on the other, views pet animals of all kinds as somehow better and treats them as if they were beloved humans. This is an exhortation to people to come to an understanding of what an animal truly is, which reminds us what love means biologically as the simple development of life for its own conservation. So, what Gettmann tries to transmit through his own behavior is that what is important is a return to what is truly natural behavior rather than what we imagine as such led by the nostalgia of our own very complex psychology. Nemo’s humorous behavior, through which he underlines how basic the needs of an otter and therefore his communication are, allows us to laugh about our own feelings we project onto our relation to him while simultaneously letting us realize how deeply bonded we are through our instincts and evolutional intelligence. Gettmann built his Nemo presentations on the otter’s special affinity with children thanks to playfulness. However, he showed that this quality is also the condition for his independence and mischief which, while letting him appear almost human and appealingly cute, also imposes those who love him to be generous enough to respect his nature and allow for him find his own way to live in contact with humans through a process of interactive socialization giving them the opportunity to get to know more about his antics through direct experience. This has nothing to do with traditional experimentation in which the animal is viewed as an object: it is an encounter which affects both parties and is based on instinctive stimuli like curiosity and pleasure which prompt truly natural reactions.

The Asian Short-Clawed otter has a socially structured mind due to its life in clans, and Gettmann used this natural disposition to integrate Nemo first into his own family, as they had to replace his parents. When he opened his eyes, he first saw him instead of a fellow otter, Gettmann generally reminisces to his audience. This meant that when he introduced visitors to Nemo it simply enlarged the circle of his human relatives while he was trusting in his innate curiosity. There, borders were crossed consciously, based on his zoological knowledge, in order to experience what kind of inter-species communication would be possible and what could be learned about Nemo’s adaptation aptitudes, his reactivity, and to what extent this knowledge might be significant for his species and all otters in general. In doing this he demonstrated that there was no better way to prove that research and education should not be disjointed in zoology because it makes sense only when a unilateral relationship does not exist between humans and animals, opposing a belief established through millenniums of domestication. He highlights that his discipline is at the base of a change which had not yet been realized because habitual thinking is the toughest resistance against evolution. It gives the wild animal a place back in human society, spreading the revolutionary conviction that mankind must adapt their behavior and living conditions to meet the needs of wildlife too, not only for abstract ecological arguments for saving the planet. Of course, that matters, but what has a chance create a lasting impression and spur motivation for this change is our own instinctive affinity with the animal otters are at their best, and this is fun.

What makes meeting Nemo a unique experience is that one immediately feels that they are a member of his family. This even extends to dogs! First, ‘Laika’, a German Shepherd, then five years later the huge and playful Hovawart ‘Balou’, whose relationship with this strange squeaky little animal who still fascinates him is worth observing. One cannot resist this enticing being which concentrates his interest on every newcomer. He is so obviously considering each one from the perspective of what he could do with them that they cannot remain indifferent and in response seem to transform a bit into an otter, learning to think like him and trying to guess what he would enjoy. One can realize how he pulls one over in his world and cannot help but admit how much fun it is to rediscover this kind of primitive and deeply sensorial intelligence for which one gives up some fantasies of human superiority, though that does not mean to abandon the realism of the survival instinct! This instinct is indispensable in order to challenge the charm and the cleverness of an otter, which would have no difficulty to trick out a human believing in his selfless cuteness. Thus, Gettmann’s choice to let those interested in otters spend some quality time with Nemo and allow them to document it through their different means created its own dynamism. It generated a mosaic of impressions, expressed in many personal testimonies of all kinds, whether from a high school biology class or simply from people who had been drawn to him when they saw him on television and wanted to meet him 'for real’.
This spontaneity, in order to not allow the otter’s stardom to bother either the otter’s or the family’s privacy, needed a great clairvoyance and some character especially as his popularity increased. Gettmann has always been wise enough to canalize the media and the public’s requests to avoid his otter becoming part of a marketing concept and what makes this attitude more sympathetic is that it seems as if he mostly trusted his own intuition of what Nemo would love to do. He is so familiar with him that he is able to instantly guess his reactions and it is a pleasure for any witness to see their reciprocal anticipations which highlight the instincts men and predators share, both originally being hunters and conquerors. Thus, he made sure not to show any complacency that might encourage a creation of the image of an otter as a pet, as it would falsify the reasons for his own interest in Nemo, to learn more about the evolutionary links between playfulness, intelligence, and predation. This has been easier for him as he has always been able to preserve independence through belonging to a public service which holds all of the rights on the little otter. Through this system, all profits from Nemo’s appearances on television programs have been donated to charities caring for otters, even after Gettmann’s retirement from the Aquazoo, after which he alone has been responsible for the animal’s expensive food and insurance.

This authenticity appeared in the exhibited pictures taken by private visitors showing lovely scenes of individual encounters, while a Morris column gave a survey of the events Nemo has attended over the years, and their write-ups in the newspapers. These pictures revealed the spontaneity most of the visitors experienced and the curiosity Nemo has never ceased to display, even toward Gettmann himself. Both the pictures and the articles showed how fond he is of sharing his love and his enthusiasm with those who care and that he still enjoys discovering how  Nemo reacts to new situations. They gave a good overview of how personal and specific any meeting with the otter is is as he remarkably adapts to his public. They are therefore a subtle invitation to change our own minds and our relations to animals as the little otter and his ability to stand for himself in the midst of a group of humans reveals that he strives to play an active role defined by communication and socialization just as with humans. He is, although it may not appear at the first glance, a form of advocacy in favor of zoos no longer being considered just as animal exhibits, but as places where through our understanding of wildlife and their independent organization, we can learn more about ourselves, which at the degree we have actually lost the contact with it requires ambassadors who are able to remind us that they exist and who they are!

From the beginning, charity events were not a social obligation or a tribute to Nemo’s cuteness as one could believe, they were part of his diversified experiences with humans, stimulating his curiosity and knowledge about them. Gettmann did not focus on charity because it was not Nemo’s mission and he avoided anything that might have given him the status of a mascot endowed with human feelings. However, his interest in Nemo’s reactions to new challenges when coming into contact with other humans allowed him to bet on their bond that he would overcome his predatory instinct for a while to live these experiences in curiosity and playfulness as he was accustomed to socialization by nature and by education. Publicity was never made of it as Gettmann feels that such ideas as an ‘otter-therapy’ are undermined by the anthropomorphism he fights because they are an obstacle to the naturally equilibrated coexistence between men and animals. Nevertheless, he did have a good feeling for the psychological support Nemo’s carefree and playful being could provide since it was part of his species’ natural behavior to strengthen their bonds by close physical contact. So, many times he was ‘just’ a love ambassador, but through being an animal getting in sensorial touch with a fellow animal he was leading humans back to primitive feelings of contentment which some of them may have been able to express or even reflect upon. The testimony the animal lover Helga Sophia Kranz wrote in one of her locally edited books about her occasional meetings with the little otter while walking in the Nordpark is a good example of the comfort he spreads because of Gettmann’s generosity in always letting Nemo choose his friends, as though he were a person.

Again, Gettmann has never focused upon the exceptionality of these activities, but they hint at an amazing change that has been initiated as the logical consequence of the way in which he conceives the way men and animals could live together in a highly complex and individualized society with the mediation of professionals. He consciously canalizes the unspoken nostalgia of contact with primitive nature, which has led to unqualified behaviors towards exotic animals and even domestic pets, revealing that fantasies have replaced the elementary knowledge of wildlife and its otherness, hindering our socialization. As this knowledge is fundamental to modern education, it is not an activity that should be put in the hands of dilettantes. For this reason, while his actions seem simple, he is refocusing attention to the core mission of zoos, which has become to mediate between animals and humans who believe they already know their behaviors through a mixture of wishful thinking and unconscious anthropocentric superiority built on an absence of contact and of egomaniac ignorance.
For Gettmann it is natural that Nemo plays a social role as long as it aligns with his own mental and evolutional structures and he has only to follow his instincts. It is, however, a reminder of the responsibility of humanity to overcome the indifference to otherness in order for our own survival. The predators’ instinctive behavior in communities – so far not idealized as morally better, but as the fittest ‒ gives an example of organization, serving as a reminder of how essential these qualities were and are for our own evolution. Of course, Nemo meeting regularly with refugee children over many years, long before they were in the headlines, was a charitable action with the goal of bringing some joy and distraction, but it was also a concrete sign of the threat of their de-socialization loss of their identity as his visit could remind them that despite all they went through, they are capable of rediscovering their inner child. The advantage of the little otter is that he is naturally playful and creates spontaneous connections beyond language barriers. He stimulates existing, often forgotten instincts for the sake of life and he spreads hope simply by being himself. That is why his actions and the events he is involved in have a large effect which, from my viewpoint, is in part supported by the subconscious mind. It is less a political statement than the expression of practical humanism. They participate in a natural way of living, noticed subconsciously by any evolved individual who is anxious for the care and the preservation of his community and the development of his species. The efficiency may be amplified as Gettmann relies instinctively more on small gestures, which may create change individually by becoming symbols, than on spectacular discourses which cannot provoke the necessary deeper reconnection of personal intelligence to the sensorial experience without losing the message when in a group who generate imaginary fantasies of belonging only temporarily in a moment of collective exaltation. His trust in animals and in their autonomous effect needing no words may be the wisdom and the cautious reaction of a zoologist who grew up in the immediate post-national socialistic German society and who had to separate himself from the irrational abuses of this ideology which travestied experimental reality in a dimension which had never existed before. Whatever the case, it is his merit – and probably one which comes with maturity – that he crossed paths with Nemo at the right moment. He delivers his own humanistic credo with deep modesty and practical experience as the representative of a discipline which has had to redefine itself and its ethical standards after the breakdown of those who perverted culture and socialization to the service of radical destruction and self-destruction under the pretext of the fulfillment of natural rights.

Gettmann’s actions may not have been as deliberate and reflected as it appears in retrospect, as they were connected in real time to the experience he was gaining from his work with Nemo when he answered different invitations or requests. The view the exhibition presented gave the impression that he likely acted by intuition according to what was suitable and pedagogically appropriate for the otter while he noting his own feelings and responses. It is my opinion that it was very instructive because it tracked the way in which Gettmann gradually became conscious of what made Nemo so appealing and any adjustments he thought were necessary when faced with the public’s expectations in order to preserve his original educative goal. His open mind and ability for self-criticism led him more and more to raise awareness for the contradictions the cuteness of his otter awakens in everyone who loves him. He has continuously tried to bring everyone to acknowledge their feelings in relation to Nemo in order to highlight the unnatural state humanity has reached with animals often being considered companions and endowed with qualities related to childhood, for example, innocence and harmlessness, in the collective subconscious of our highly evolved society. While he did use Nemo’s childlike qualities to provoke an initial connection for people with him, helping to advocate the cause of his fellows, more and more focus was brought on Nemo’s independence and the necessity of understanding his behavior in order to communicate with him, stressing the role of the zoologist as a specialist indispensable for both the animal’s well-being and the security of those who want to be in contact with him. He never allowed for any doubt that one cannot improvise being an otter keeper and that taking care of wild animals is a profession with important responsibilities and long term choices requiring consultation with the partner. That is why he never stopped focussing on the distinction that while Nemo did belong to his family, that he was not a pet and reminded visitors and friends who were tempted to, not to kiss him. So, although he did clearly recognize the deep sentimental bonds he had tied with the otter, he highlighted his educative mission as an animal ambassador, which could not be conceived without the frame of a zoo.

As a director of a zoo, he underlined that hand-tamed animal representatives have become necessary in changing the mentalities of a society that does not create the best conditions for the coexistence between men and wildlife. These animal representatives re-initiate a dialogue in which sensorial experience stimulates the curiosity to learn more about unknown animals and in turn about ourselves in the way we relate to them. He did not hide either the pleasure or the work it meant for him to live with Nemo so that it was clear that their situation is an exception bordering between a zoological and a communication experience where love and fun play an undeniable role. He revealed how determining such unique personal examples are in mobilizing people in favor of conserving endangered species like otters while appealing to their affective identification. This is indispensable in making future generations aware that their own survival is at stake while showing that the conditions of wildlife’s existence have been sacrificed to the greed of mankind using intelligence against ourselves. The exhibition revealed that this is man’s permanent temptation, sadly with increased means since global industrialization. Its presentation and the discussion of Nemo’s role caused one to question more philosophically, beyond the concrete work of animal conservation, humanity’s contradiction that from the moment they tried to define their relation to wildlife they were fascinated by as well as scared. He highlighted at the same time that, included in the perspective of this contradictory history, zoos represent huge progress and help to save many species but that they cannot change economic interests who may try to use them as alibis. He left no doubt that without the conservational work of the zoos his otter represents, many of the species would be even more threatened.

While Gettmann did not dwell on it, the documentation of his success made it clear that he has very little space in which to present meaningful and efficient action respecting his little otter’s animal dignity while the present society is searching for a phantasm of exotic wild pets based on the exaltation of their cuteness, and accusing zoos of animal cruelty depriving these animals of their natural freedom. With his example, Gettmann strives to find a way to make the public aware of this ambiguity which depreciates the work of zoos by projecting a subconscious feeling of guilt caused by man’s objective predation on nature they do not want to take responsibility for and to cause an impulse to make necessary changes for their own survival. Nemo is a reminder of the chance humanity still has to protect the biodiversity, thanks to the zoos. If humans will, at last, recognize our own impact on the wildlife’s living conditions, which has led to necessary ex situ conservation efforts to palliate the environmental threats and which may now be used as an excuse to continue business as usual. That is why Gettmann never forgets to mention that loving his little otter is just a first step back to recognizing the sense for nature’s beauty; the protection of it also expresses the respect mankind, who owes part of it to themselves. Nemo is a little messenger set into this world to paradoxically make it a bit more human while inviting everyone to not just let themselves be submerged by his cuteness into a nostalgic feeling and to realise that the affection he generates is a call for action as is suitable for a superior animal whose power results in his capacity to evolve. Together with the exhibition, he invites one to combine intelligence and sensibility in an appropriate balance for our present times through a consequent behavior rather than cultivating nostalgia for ancient times and their pretended natural existence. The cultural history of the otter, as it was shown there, proves how unconsidered it was and that resorting to repeating history in an effort for its protection would be useless and counterproductive as it would be a return to nothing but mythical beliefs and the reintroduction of obsolete prejudices which are a serious obstacle to even the desire to know the truth.

So, at its end, the presentation encouraged the evolution of a self-reflection, shedding light on the difficulty of defending the case of a predator who cannot help but be in concurrence with man. It seemed as though it was a short conclusion relating Gettmann’s lifelong interest in this category of animals which are the nearest to us and for the reintroduction of which he has advocated steadily not only since he has been Nemo’s owner. He is also an official wolf ambassador of the German Association for Nature Conservation (NABU). This clearly reveals his conviction that natural sciences should be included in the personal development of an evolved society at the same level as humanities, the aim of which is to both cooperate with and counterbalance the economic lobbies when they threaten the fragile equity on earth, for which the well-being of wildlife is an important indicator for. The team he has formed with his otter is the way he has found to demonstrate this necessity for himself and to send a sign as a scientist who is conscious that otters’ conservation cannot succeed without a change in the mentalities, requiring striking examples to encourage personal reflection on what matters in life both at an individual and a global level. He owes his success to the conscience of his limits he voluntarily acknowledges, as he believes in examples and the role they played in evolution.

Thus, he considers a key-experience to be the freedom given for people to react spontaneously when confronted with Nemo as he is confident in the unique impression the encounter will leave in everyone, even if they may have spent only a short moment together. He gambles on the unconscious impulses of love Nemo incites and their multiplicative effect to open not only hearts but also minds. He places much trust in children, whom he hopes will become advocates for otters to their parents. Moreover, he expects that otter lovers speaking of their encounter with Nemo will not just act in favor of his publicity but feel involved, thanks to him, in a critical awareness of the threats upon the Earth which are due to our general carelessness and lack of civil concern.

The summary of Gettmann’s activities with Nemo presented in the exhibition revealed how far a modern zoological approach can reach through a truly lived example that is not dogmatic or vindictive as it relies on human sensibility and intelligence. He trusts in the proven evolution of mankind which represents our innate quality for survival enabling us to answer the challenges we set for ourselves. He is wise enough not to believe in it blindly but he showed, with documents in favor of otter education and the personal achievement of his work with Nemo, that zoology, especially when dealing with predators, must react to ethical and etiological questions because the conflicts they raise are founded upon deep unconscious existential and even metaphysical interrogations. To answer these questions scientists who are prepared to endorse a global social responsibility and advocate their case with credible and understandable arguments are necessary. At no time did the exhibition turn either to self-celebration or claims for unconditional adhesion and this marked its superiority in the present situation where debates about environmental questions and our relation to animals have become more and more undermined by ideological considerations dissociated from serious critical examination and rational evaluation. The reason it was so successful in this message is that it featured an experience with outreach, suggesting that anybody can act at his own level to awaken sympathy for a cause as long as it is concrete and adapts to what it is possible to transmit according to each specific circumstance. This allowed the exhibit to appear lush as it spread a sort of joyous atmosphere in which the visitor felt as though they were participating in an exceptional otter life, and for some, reviving some of the memories he himself had been shared with him.

That Nemo is the only otter to be awarded as an honorary citizen (and probably the first animal in the world to be awarded in this way) is plainly justified, although he should share it with Gettmann who keeps him fit and happy for all of his activities while providing him a home where he can live an equilibrated life under professional care! It was particularly thoughtful and hopefully more than just respect of his cheeky cuteness that the exhibition ended with his inscription in the golden book of the city, a stamp of his footprint made in the presence of the town mayor, Birgit Alkenings, who was kind enough to bring one of Nemo's favorite treats to the occasion, a boiled egg. The little otter demonstrated once again during the many guided visits of which he was the permanently solicited star, that he is good-minded, kind, and understanding, actually able to adapt to his diversified public. The distinction was well deserved and hopefully meant seriously as an effort of involvement by the city of Hilden in favor of the Eurasian otters’ return and the educational challenge it represents, although it is evident that they cannot do much more than morally and institutionally support their little ambassador. That he had been honored surrounded by so many friends taking interest in him, which he obviously enjoyed, reveals again how precious he is as a great animal personality, giving his mission its incomparable savor and credibility. He accomplishes it with so much fun and joy because he loves it as his curiosity and interest in humans seems to be endless as long as he is accompanied by someone he loves and to whom he is accustomed, upon whose shoulder he can retire when he needs a break. Recognizing the work of Nemo and Gettmann officially in a public ceremony signifies a real breakthrough by the representatives of Hilden who may not have even been conscious of it to that extent. They stated the difference between prominent zoo animals, for example, Knut, who attract phantasms and sometimes, sadly, become commercial products when the situation runs out of control and animal ambassadors such as Nemo who participate in the social life of a town, community, or a region under the responsibility of professionals who take care of their rights and protect their health.

Contrary to encounters with many star animals, one can really meet Nemo and have the opportunity for contact with him matching his instinctive aptitudes. This allows one to feel in touch in a small way with an otter’s behavior. Moreover, while a visitor appreciates these traits, he can truly get an idea of nature’s power and its self-healing evolutional qualities, not as in the fashion trend of the moment through mostly pre-planned experiences. Visiting Nemo is a rare inter-species encounter hinting at an original global unity of life and allowing one to become addicted to the incredible feeling of self-enjoyment and love he spreads because maintains his freedom to just be an otter. Gettmann’s elegance is that he always took a backseat to the animal he socialized in order not to interrupt this affection he gives so innocently and naturally because he did not experience anything but the caring inclusion he received from his human family. So, this exhibition can be seen as an extension of that as Gettmann’s thoughtful way of thanking Nemo for the experience he has allowed him to live and which has transformed him so deeply that he did not at any moment conceive its presentation as though it should be an assessment. Instead, one gets the impression that he is still so enthusiastically involved in their common adventure that he cannot imagine there will not be new developments to come and that this curiosity of life they share spreads confidence and happiness. Relating Nemo to children, as he did from the start, is revealed definitively to have been the smartest choice, as though following that natural logic has helped them both stay young.

It is significant that the exhibition ended as it began: as a large family meeting during which the visitors could enjoy Gettmann’s wife’s homemade otter cookies and watch the German copy of the movie The Ring of Bright Water’. It would not have been the enormous success that it was without the couple’s familial teamwork. Edeltraud “Traudl” Gettmann, who had just retired from teaching biology and chemistry at a secondary school, contributed with her caring assistance and talent for practical organization. The directors of the Wilhelm-Fabry-Museum also supported their common effort by offering more than the usual service such an institution typically provides. The visitors were welcomed heartily as all of the staff knew what they were coming for, to be enchanted by an otter’s world and they could not help but think that this had actually happened to them before! Despite the modest budget, which sadly forced them to restrict the opening hours, the communication efforts were great, leading to approximately 2,000 visitors.

The several very positive reports in the local press played a role in the success too, but the organizers’ great merit was that they did not wait until people found their way to the museum. They gave a huge offer to schools, especially primary schools and to art classes and courses, which attracted quite a young audience, often with their parents, who discovered otters alongside them. The cooperation with art teachers appeared to be particularly successful because they were able to easily raise concrete awareness of the way in which the image of the animal evolved according to human feelings in relation to it and inspired the children to draw and paint their own images after having met Nemo. What was particularly interesting, although not very surprising, was that the adults seemed more prejudiced and cautious than the children because they knew that as a wild animal, he could be dangerous. While most of the children enjoyed touching Nemo and would even have liked to bear him on their shoulders, the parents often needed to be convinced by their children’s enthusiasm to overcome their inhibitions. It was a great pleasure to witness these precious moments which will no doubt generate lasting memories and make it easier for the adults to allow their children to become familiar with wildlife while remaining aware that this must take place under the responsibility of professionals.

Although these encounters happened under monitored conditions outside of a zoo, they are a reasoned argument in favor of structures providing opportunities to learn about living nature as it is unjustified to imagine that in our times – or probably ever – that it could or should be left alone. From the moment men came to live on Earth our society became a cultural concept evolving by interactive experiences, our relationship with animals has always been a part of this structure and this should not be reinvented as though there have never been existential conflicts between our species as well as love and respect. With Nemo, Gettmann proposes an example, which, while not directly transferable, underlines that living with predators is a challenge. That it stimulates our own creativity while urging us to take into account the world’s reality. It exhorts us to learn about them concretely and use this knowledge to form our own opinions while creating a culture where sciences and humanities including fine arts and crafts pursue the same goal: to perpetuate life through evolution grounded in imagination and self-reflection, not in the illusory idealization of a paradisiac nature in which one is in denial of humanity’s biological dispositions and what has been born from them. What is so exceptional is that this small but extremely dense exhibit, which had to surmount what could be considered many logistical problems, was able to captivate its visitors while providing food for thought without being pedantic or even didactic. It was presented as an offering of which one could feel free to enjoy only the parts he loved or found interesting as parts of a whole, which may not escape his attention.

In fact, upon entering the exhibit, one realized that it was based on inspiration. Its philosophy spread intuitively and became inspirational at each turn, because Gettmann as a zoologist has not forgotten the animal surviving inside all of us and knows that children and humans, in general, learn better when they are encouraged with treats. Those who were open to it could stumble upon lovely humoristic details, an appeal to create distance from our own controversies instead of dwelling on them. The stuffed otters trapped in horrible iron traps or lying on a frying pan alongside fake vegetables struck the visitors’ sensibility, especially that of the children, but the grotesqueness of this improbable composition also encouraged irresistible laughter as it showed that, at least in Europe, the protection of the species has worked in changing mentalities, giving some hope for other parts of the world where the animals remain less fortunate. It did not deny the barbaric process but showed its inappropriateness and its anachronism without introducing moral judgment which might imply an irrational feeling of superiority rather than consciousness of the actual evolution of our understanding of nature and our love for animals through experience and auto-criticism. It suggested that being able to laugh about our ability to overcome our own cruelty as a reflection of our subconscious fears is part of evolution which helps us pardon ourselves and restore in us the innocence we need to preserve in our culture the ability to enjoy life instantaneously, as animals do by instinct.

Otter News would like to sincerely thank Clare Laughran for her editing of the review.

Nemo, the Otter Ambassador - Nemo & His Relatives Part VI

Nemo, the Inspirational Little Otter Ambassador

Respectfully written & submitted by Béatrice Dumiche

I am tempted to say that this exhibition would not have existed if Gettmann had not taken the chance ten years ago to give his lifelong passion for otters an official focus through a unique educational venture. He likely did not foresee its extraordinary success when in November 2005 he rescued an Asian-Short-Clawed pup born in the Aquazoo Düsseldorf, of which he had been the director for almost twenty years. The otter’s mother could not take care of the seven cubs in her first litter at once. After two of them had died during the first night, Gettmann chose the weakest among the survivors and bottle-fed him at his home where he then grew up alongside the family’s German shepherd, Laïka, who provided a sort of maternal presence to him. He quickly became a family member with a strong personality and was named Nemo by one of Gettmann’s sons due to the white spot on his chin, which was reminiscent of the white beard of the legendary captain Nemo in Jules Verne’s Twenty Leagues under the Sea.                                    

One could say a star was born but it was not as easy as that in retrospect: much smartness and wisdom were needed to foster the cuddly little animal that won the hearts of the German public almost immediately from his first television appearance as an ambassador for his species. First, his keeper had to peak the journalists’ interest to get invited to shows that would provide the little otter enough time and space to demonstrate his abilities in order to really display his antics to the audience. Then his increasing popularity had to be managed because, as Gettmann states, Nemo’s childlike expressions and behavior created an unexpected wave of sympathy which needed to be canalized and oriented in favor of the cause he was defending.

The last room of the exhibition, mostly dedicated to Nemo, was a miniature hall of fame but remained far from focused on Nemo as a ‘star’. It gave an idea of Gettmann’s goal when he chose to make Nemo an otter ambassador: the concept is based on publicity, which he needs the support of celebrities for, but what matters the most to him is to spread a foundation of knowledge about otters and to generate understanding and sympathy for them. That is why he made Nemo accessible to everybody who showed an interest, and sometimes it was incredible how much even of his private time he gave to visitors who came from all parts of Germany and Europe just to see his cuddly companion. He is very conscious of the importance of personal contact in creating new otter advocates as they shared a precious experience with Nemo, the intensity of which could not be measured in comparison with the effect of just seeing him on television. It may seem exaggerated but in meeting Nemo a partnership is formed and any spectator becomes a witness of who Nemo is and what one can learn from him about the behavior of his fellows. It is a sign of great commitment and generosity that even now he has retired from his official position at the zoo, Gettmann remains ready to support any action in favor of otters if it is compatible with his multiple other activities and some well-deserved leisure time. He also continuously finds ways to let old and new friends from all over the world meet Nemo.

A photo gallery from the last ten years presented a range of celebrities, mostly hosts of scientific programs, posing with Nemo on their shoulders. There were also some actors, among them several of international fame, for example, Sky Dumont, zoo directors from all across Europe, and others who are dedicated to the investigation of the underwater world, for example, the pioneer diver Hans Haas who donated all of his equipment to the Aquazoo. Beyond Nemo’s role as an ambassador his advertising value for the zoo was tremendous and the opportunity to meet him there at regular free feedings as well as during guided otter tours that could be booked for a fee, which paid the volunteer in charge of the otters, made him so popular that many people stopped by at Düsseldorf just to see him and to take a picture with him. He became a local and touristic symbol of the city, appearing every night in the trailer for the regional news program among other famous local sights and personalities.

A wisely managed stardom to raise love and understanding for otters

Wolfgang Gettmann was wise enough to never let the idea of Nemo’s stardom take over the defense of the original cause as had happened with some other famous zoo animals in Germany at the same time. The memorable birthday parties, where the little otter was doted upon by his fans, sometimes visiting from as far as France or Great Britain to celebrate with him, were always an opportunity to remind them through conferences and information panels that he was representing a globally endangered species and that the love he was receiving should be extended to his wild fellows. The exhibition took into account both aspects as it presented a few gifts expressing the deep bonds formed between Nemo and his human friends, especially through his Facebook page created by a volunteer and which presently counts around 4,500 followers from all five continents. As all of these followers know what he likes most, the Aquazoo and his director received large quantities of mail containing pacifiers he loves to chew on, some even with his name printed on them, ballpoint pens he enjoys breaking into pieces especially when there is rubber round them, and pumpkin seeds he is fond of eating. Gettmann has also received many gifts featuring the little otter’s effigy, such as mugs or mouse pads and, of course, t-shirts. Although half of a showcase was filled with these items, the clear focus was on the educational work accomplished with Nemo as Gettmann has always prioritised this aspect while remaining aware that the public sympathy for his otter was a way to open the hearts for the needs of otters in general and moreover to transmit a philosophy of how to coexist with wild animals.

One could see in the exhibit evidence of the actions conducted in coordination with the Aquazoo, among them a lovely illustrated children’s guide to the zoo narrating a workday in Nemo’s life at the side of his human, some Nemo badges, a key ring, a postcard, and a sticker supporting the IOSF campaign to raise awareness for all of the thirteen otter species worldwide. These items as well as a beautiful CD compilation of footage compiled by a journalist of the public regional television of North-Rhine Westphalia, Jens Oliver Hoffmann, who contributed a lot to Nemo’s popularity thanks to the empathy he showed for him from the beginning, allowed him to become more than a simple mascot. His natural cuteness and the fact that he is absolutely hand-tame made him easily accessible to children whose love he responded to with much delicacy. Thus with his presence at the Aquazoo and at various events in the Düsseldorf area, he helped to lay the ground-stone for a new relationship between men and otters through the complicity he established with the children who he interacted with and who did not need to be taught to respect him.

While looking at Nemo’s teeth, children understood immediately that he was not just cuddly and could not be a pet for them to take home. They learned what a predator looks like and that he hunts to live, which is probably the most important understanding they gained as it allowed them to overcome any anthropomorphic interpretation of his behavior despite, or even better, because of the bonds they formed. From this moment, they began to learn that he was acting according to his specific aptitudes and that he needed the conditions enabling him to do so. He therefore did an amazing educative job with great simplicity, teaching generations of children love and respect for his fellows in the wild as they learned that humans and animals do not feel in the same ways and that it is the former’s role to resist their affective appropriation in order to keep their relationship a pleasant and naturally equilibrated one.  It could be assumed that almost any pupil in and around Düsseldorf has met Nemo at least once during their curriculum thanks to an intensive cooperation with schools and sport clubs. Countless numbers of children and adults recognized him while he was on his daily walks in the Nordpark where the Aquazoo is situated and proudly reported they had already seen him swim or catch a fish.

It was no surprise that the feedings, already a popular attraction at the Aquazoo as they display otters’ lively disposition, were the highlight of Gettmann’s guided tours of the exhibition too. These tours concluded with the feeding as a concrete illustration of the nutritional facts delivered by the panels at the entrance of the museum. Sometimes it was hard to say who was squeaking louder, the children or Nemo, as it was the fun moment both had been waiting for, him to get his food and them overwhelmed by his playfulness, but also his speed! They also became excited because they experienced his unpredictability and realized that they would not be able to cope with him if Gettmann was not there to play the role of a calming mediator explaining his reactions to them and helping them to get their cuddly moment. Discreetly and without words, he showed them through his own behavior that getting along with animals of all species, even pets, requires knowledge, practical training, and above all patience and attention - a useful lesson in human psychology, too! He proved his ability to not only be an excellent otter interpreter, his own sense of humor and mischief allowed him to have an easy connection with the young public Nemo attracted. It was often heart-warming to see how much some primary school children already knew about otters when they reacted to the exhibits presented.

The success of these encounters are the definitive clue that Gettmann was right to use the Anglo-Saxon educative methods in natural sciences as inspiration for his pedagogy and to reserve a special place for the abundant collection of English children’s literature about otters. The exhibition contained a large number of children’s books covering a wide range of styles and perspectives, from those based on encounters with tame otters? Daphne Neville’s Bee a particular otter illustrated by Jaquie Govier – to more imaginary stories relying on the emotional bonds with the species the British writers have established through decennials, for example, the very unique I am Otter by Sam Garton. The lovely Warum Fischotter schmatzen (“Why otters make noises when they eat”) published by the Office for Ecology of the Land (Region) Brandenburg and the Biosphere Reserve Spreewald (Landesumweltamt Brandenburg – Biosphärenreservat Spreewald) appealing to young readers with bad table manners, explaining their antics with a pinch of humor, showed that there are also some good, informative, books in German. It was the result of an ambitious project in which 1,500 pupils participated from the Paul-Gerhardt-Gymnasium and the primary school Spreewaldschule Lübben, monitoring the life of an otter mother and her cubs for a year. They created 1,300 drawings and texts, a selection of which constitutes the book, offering a good survey of this unique educative field project adapted especially for the public. There is even a booklet with practical exercises for the primary schools accompanying the textbook.

With Nemo, Gettmann consciously took a step further than popularization and otter awareness aimed at children, since they were excited about him from the beginning. He realized that part of the zoological experience in sharing his life would be the exceptional opportunity to observe an otter’s behavior under human care and collect first-hand information in order to adapt and improve the living conditions of his fellows. It is my opinion that Nemo already incarnates a zoological prowess, as he always gives the impression that he is behaving completely naturally. For those who have witnessed his kindness in any situation, his adaptability to the requests of journalists and filmmakers, and the fun he has with random people he meets, all while remaining himself and doing only what comes naturally, it is evident that his carefree behavior results from having never been forced to do anything contrary to his instinctive nature. He is integrated into the community of his family, where he found his own place, and this has obviously socialized him with humans in general with whom he has found a level of communication. The mischief he introduces into the everyday-life of his family members and especially, into Wolfgang Gettmann's life, leaves no doubt of his intelligence and corroborates the link between playfulness and evolution which connects his species with humanity. It also shows that the adaption is far from being unilateral and that the ‘otter’ normality they share as their very own is the secret of his naturally well-balanced and good minded character, which does not mean he will not stand for his rights with some loud protests when he does not agree! He is far more than an otter ambassador to whom people come simply to say hello and see what a cute and beautiful animal he is, he bonds with and touches them, and participates within the conditions of each encounter as he reacts individually to everyone he meets according to a range of instinctive behaviors he is perfectly able to modulate. He remembers visitors too and, as ridiculous as it may sound, it is a pleasure and an honor to be recognized by such a busy celebrity and personally welcomed, even – or perhaps especially - when that celebrity is not human.

Nemo has inspired many artists, including the renowned painter of animals, Monica Schwarz, and the internationally recognized photographer team, ‘Life on white’. Although this fame was highly appreciated as it helped in the fight against the prejudice that otters were ugly and not a worthy subject of art for their own sake, Gettmann never gave up on his original science-based goal of contributing to research by documenting life with Nemo. This was also a way to make a clear break from the traditionally limited role ‘star’ animals previously played in zoos and to clarify that he was not keeping an otter just for his own fun. That is why he authorized the North Rhine Westphalian television channel, WDR, to take footage of Nemo having an appointment at a local veterinarian dentist’s office to inform the little otter’s friends that he needed to be cured of a broken tooth. In this way, he attracted attention to one of the frequent health issues of the species which makes it vulnerable in the wild, and used the opportunity to give the television viewers an insight into developments of surgeries possible for wild animals. This was not the definitive aim, however. It also led to a joint publication with the veterinarian dentist, Dr. Jochen Krüger, from Krefeld, for a scientific journal used for zookeepers’ education.

Surprisingly, many followers of Nemo’s and Wolfgang Gettmann’s Facebook pages asked if they could get a copy of the article, and were willing to visit the Aquazoo for this purpose. It does not matter how far they actually went into their reading, what was most important, in my view, was that their interest in Nemo and what happened to him was strong enough to lead them to occasionally want to push past the limits of what they imagined they would read and that they were not embarrassed to ask for an article aimed towards a zookeeper readership. This shows that the little otter helps to remove barriers as he incites the courage in people to contact professionals and to try to reach a new level of knowledge, even if it may be just once. It is remarkable that these people responded so readily to an offer to expand their knowledge, making scientific information more accessible in a personal way and could even be the beginnings of a vocational interest in some cases. It proves that research is not incompatible with educating a wider public audience in a better understanding of the ways in which zoology cares for wild animals and contributes to improving their well being and bettering the conditions of their conservation ex-situ.

Thus, Nemo provides a chance to present the good zoos can do as he offers the opportunity to document how much knowledge and professional education is required to properly care for just one – predominantly tame animal. Despite his exceptional way of life, he can undeniably be considered, from my perspective, living proof of the ways in which zoology and ethology work together to ameliorate the cohabitation between men and wildlife. Zoos play a determining role in research and education as the close observation of otters both in the wild and under human care helps by constantly providing information on how to adapt and protect their natural environment and ways to prolong their life or rehabilitate them thanks to the progress of veterinarian science. Representing a zoo of which he was director, Gettmann could not help but be forced to face the reality that nature as it was before man began to transform the planet according to his own interests no longer exists, and that it will not be possible to find a way back to that original state as hypothetically suggested by Rousseau. He appealed to actually inform people how zoos work while at the same time abandoning the fantasies that they are adventure parks where rare animals are supplementary attractions needing to be improved upon every year in the search for sensational entertainment. The strength of Gettmann’s position is that he has never pretended to present anything other than an otter behaving as itself in the contact of men, not because it had been educated and kept like a pet, but because humans and animals share structurally some of the same natural forms of life, allowing them to coexist and communicate at certain levels of understanding.

Otter News would like to sincerely thank Clare Laughran for her editing of the review.

Otters in Literature & Fine Arts - Nemo & His Relatives Part V

Otter individuals in Germany:
Otters in literature and Fine Arts

Respectfully submitted and written by Béatrice Dumiche

Gettmann’s presentation definitively proved through experience that natural sciences have a genuine interest in relying on aesthetics not only to ameliorate the conditions of their popularization. He provided a reminder that they have inspired fine arts over centuries and have participated in their development because the arts and sciences are complementary modes of bringing attention to nature, through which humans have learned more about themselves and evolved. He successfully brought visitors back to these original affinities, which made no difference between the quest for knowledge and the quest for beauty and used them to generate sympathy for otters while underlining that they are both at the service of understanding and practical intelligence. Thus, he uncovered that the imagery of predators in our culture says more about us than about the animals themselves and that accurate observation can modify the way we see them and the status we attribute to them.

The German exhibits gave the impression that otter hunting played a less important role there than in Great Britain and that although otter motifs existed in the arts there too, probably under the British influence, there has long been a naturalistic interest in their representation as part of ceramic or bone china collections featuring the local fauna, which developed in the 19th century. This part of the exhibition was particularly remarkable as it displayed an impressive number of artifacts never presented together before which reveal that Germany has its own tradition with otters. This had only been forgotten, probably – and this is my personal hypothesis – because it was related to the literary and artistic movement dedicated to the celebration of local natural beauty that emerged in the 1920’s and was deformed and tainted by the later national-socialistic propaganda, although it most of the time had no affinities with it.

There were some popular otter stories in the late 1930’s, so even before Gavin Maxwell: their notoriety was interrupted by World War II and never returned to its original level, probably because during that time period the animal had almost disappeared and German literature was focussed on coping with the moral responsibility connected to the horrors of Nazism. The most famous story – and according to me the most touching – is that of the journalist and writer Walter von Sanden, who adopted a Eurasian male otter from the Balkans he named “Ingo”, which was also the title of the book he wrote about him. Published in 1938 (English edition: 1956), it created little event, but when it was re-edited in the 1950’s and was reviewed in the Grüne Post, a newspaper published in Berlin in 1942 in the middle of World War II, Ingo was almost as popular as Gettmann’s otter, Nemo. The heartfelt description of his arrival at the author’s home and the bonds they tied from the very beginning were written to awaken sympathy, especially as it was illustrated with lovely and funny photos describing what could be the life of a tame otter in an Eastern-Prussian farmhouse during this period.

This book, which is emblematic for the very particular relationship only otters and men seem to be able to have ‒ a mix of scientific interest, fascination, and unconditional love ‒ was, in my opinion, one of the most significant items exhibited, at least in the German domain. It perfectly links observation and sensitivity. It holds additional importance as it subsequently led to an extraordinary piece of art created by von Sanden’s wife, Edith: a magnificent sculpture of Ingo (one of its copies can be seen in the park of Badenweiler/Black Forest) which highlights the smoothness and the grace of the otter’s body, allying slickness and strength. This conjunction has something magic and incites interest in knowing more about Ingo’s destiny and the couple’s work, which has been entirely dedicated to the defense of wetlands and their fauna. It suggests that while the English literature, largely translated, like Gavin Maxwell’s Ring of Bright Water or Philip Wayre’s River People, was very popular in Germany too, there was a special relation to the fine arts which seems to have played a more determining role than in Britain.

Although this impression may have been made due to the way in which the collection was presented, the exhibits showed that the otter has been a real source of inspiration for plastic artists and painters who seem to have been particularly attracted by its anatomy since the 19th century. In any case, it was a rare pleasure to see together the beautiful otter sculpture by Max Esser (1926) made using original brown stoneware created by Böttger, the founder of the first German china manufactory “Meissen” in the 17th century, which became famous thanks to the Eastern-German stamp celebrating its 250th anniversary in 1960, and the Western-German Goebel china figurine. These artifacts in one place underlined that there was almost the same interest for the otter in both parts of the divided country, although the larger population subsisted in the East and contributed noticeably to increase the statistics at the country’s Reunification. These pieces of art showed that the exploration of local fauna had become a popular activity, probably under the influence of Romanticism which exalted the pleasure of staying in direct contact with nature, and found their expression in series of collectibles promoting a better knowledge of its beauties, benefitting the otter.

While the china statues referred to more traditional aesthetics inherited from representations of hunting and mostly display the otters with their prey or perched on some rockery, the more artistic sculptures revealed an interest for the creatures’ surrounding wilderness which has become a symbol for the natural freedom animals seem to have been born for. These artists have changed their viewpoint of predators and thus were fascinated by the physical strength and the dynamic of the otters’ movements when diving or swimming. They were inspired in that by the expressive style of the French sculptor Auguste Rodin who set the standards for gorgeous massive sculptures magnifying the power of life. These ideas and imagery found an important echo in the German art scene thanks to the poet Rainer Maria Rilke.

Many sculptors of the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries who specialized in depicting animals, for example, August Gaul and Josef Pallenberg, chose otters as their subject. While the former was represented at the exhibition with a drawing of a lost sculpture, a stunning piece by the latter, showing the muscles of the animal on the brink of movement, highlighted his fascination for the beauty of untamed wildlife. This interest led him into some extravagant behavior as he was temporarily keeping a lion at his home in Cologne before he moved to Düsseldorf, where his heritage is now conserved. This association reveals how different the perception of otters still was at that time when compared with present opinions, as they seem to have been considered comparable to wild beasts even then, as exotic as lions. Josef Pallenberg’s sculpture is a good example of the mythology they were included within through the pathos of German expressionism. Pallenberg was among the most famous animal sculptors of his time and that he chose an otter as the subject of one of his works suggests that it played a role in his conception of the wilderness, which may have increased local interest and awareness.

Although the exhibition did not dwell on this because it may simply be coincidence, there seems to be a concentration of artists from North-Rhine-Westphalia who displayed interest in otters at different periods in time. For now this is no more than an observation, but it prompts some questions about the possible existence of a specific tradition in the area. It could be useful to refer to it to advocate for the return of the otter to this region which it currently only populates in small numbers. It is interesting to note that there has already been a famous otter connected with the Lower Rhine and that it has alimented sympathy for this animal over generations, even while it was completely absent.  Heinrich Malzkorn was an author who lived near Duesseldorf and was a pioneer in the defense of the local nature he described in his books. Patschel vom Schwalmtal (Patschel from the Schwalm Valley), which narrated the daily adventures of an otter mother who had to feed and educate her numerous children and was confronted with many dangers, became his most successful book, published first in 1949 and re-edited several times before it seemed to fall into oblivion.

Decennials later, Nik Ebert, the political caricaturist of the leading regional newspaper, Rheinische Post, gave the name Patschel to his creation of a chubby and lazy otter male who, although being good minded most of the time, has lunatic moments when he comments in the local dialect on the little contrarieties he and his readers are facing. His cartoons, published weekly in the Saturday/Sunday edition, expose his criticism of summer (energy saving) time but, according to his creator, they are an appeal for tolerance and respect for the particularities of everyone through the encounters the character has with other animals on the lakeside. Contrary to Ebert’s sometimes very sharp political caricatures, his otter drawings display a lovely kind of weirdness in surrealistic scenes, for example, when he speaks to a snowman but then denies it after being mocked by the other main character of his cartoons, a pretentious sea gull. Patschel became a local celebrity creating some affection for his real counterparts even before their resurgence.

The name Patschel has, due to the original books and later cartoons, evolved as a symbol in the region, incarnating a corporate identity, with even a bakery naming a bread after him. The most important aspect is that a local tradition was renewed and remembered through him. In 2007, Nik Ebert became the godfather of the new otter male at the Zoo Krefeld. The otter cub was baptized in a small ceremony and the sculptor Uwe Meints, who has his atelier in the little town where the novel author Heinrich Malzkorn was born, was commissioned to create a bronze sculpture for a Patschel-fountain at Malkzorn’s birthplace. The artist loaned Gettmann’s exhibition a stunning ceramic replica of the statue, showing the otter proudly bearing a fish in his mouth. There are still some models available and it is emblematic for the way in which the conjunction of all arts in public space and media is able to bring about a positive image of a predator playing through human identification and the appeal of aesthetic beauty.

That these two factors are not enough to make the impact necessary for true change is clear. Nevertheless, they may explain to a certain extent the interest of major local nature artists in the otter exhibition as a way to express their support for its cause since the animal is undeniably a motive in the regional arts. Moreover, the water quality of the Rhine, so close to the exhibition’s location, has remained an ecological concern for years. The interest in the otter, a water quality indicator species, also reveals a more contemporary preoccupation to defend wildlife through reference to traditional genres rooted in natural sciences. That is why it appears so decisively important that Gettmann's presentation constantly moved back and forth between fine arts and scientific imagery as it helped bring awareness instantly, by association, that continuities and interferences underlining their reciprocal fertilisation have always existed and that this conscience must be renewed, especially to raise understanding for predators like otters. The picture the renowned local wildlife painter, Harro Mars, dedicated was a stunning masterpiece in this domain. Belonging to the artistic genre of the ‘biology’, it showed in one image the anatomy of the otter, its procreation, and its natural environment in a realistic way. He avoided all idyllic connotations while the strong vivid colors suggested a beautiful liveliness of a creature with its own rules, allowing the spectator a glance so long as it is with respect. With this painting, he invokes an immense admiration for the power of nature incarnate with a postmodern sensibility appearing to be at the service of nothing other than the animal’s welfare and for the pleasure of admiring it while it is enjoying life, the cycle of which it figures at its place.

That is the point where Gettmann’s exhibition again reached to the universal interest in otters shown from the moment their hunting ceased to be a major if not the only preoccupation. It uncovered that their facetious being, their playfulness and their extraordinary flexibility have become the privileged object for studies trying, through a better knowledge of them, to get nearer to the mysteries of evolution. Anew, he insisted upon a conclusive homage to Gavin Maxwell’s heritage with his sketches of Mijbil’s movements in The Ring of Bright Water, the lifelikeness of which resulted from close observation and a search for exactness in the representation of the animal’s behavior. These sketches created a genre inspiring zoologists particularly, whose drawings can be seen among others more similar to popular arts including the otter in a more or less legendary and atmospheric nature. In comparison with the style of the German exhibits, it appears that this style, which features the otter fitting harmoniously into a peaceful riverscape and enhances its cuteness without romanticizing its physical traits, remains typically British. There is a unique affective bond with this animal in Great Britain which the contemporary culture keeps alive. It may be the only place where it is easy to have a zoological, scientific interest while at the same time expressing a simple, carefree love for it. Lesley Wright, a member of the IUCN Otter Specialist Group, was represented in the exhibition with a lovely painted card. This is typical for a conscience, which, in my opinion, should also be extended to other species as it would help us return to some familiarity with nature and wildlife. However, that this cannot happen through its unconsidered generalization became evident too, as fine arts are revelatory for the specificity of cultural traditions and the strong feelings which are anchored in them. It is important to reactivate forgotten memories and use them as opportunities to renew existing symbolic bonds matching the local mentalities.

A merit of Wolfgang Gettmann’s exhibition was that its large collection highlighted, especially with the comparison between Britain and Germany, the ways in which national particularities have influenced the otter’s imagery and reflected it unconsciously. Surprisingly, North-Rhine Westphalia provided the most representative examples of this, though there seems to be no plausible explanation for it other than perhaps that it is the most industrialized region in Germany and has a great artisanal and industrial tradition. Located next to Hilden, the city of Solingen is a very famous center for cutlery where the legendary ‘otter’ pocket knives are made. These knives are known as a high-quality product beyond the German borders and the exhibition dedicated a special space to their history. The pocket knives’ production is deeply rooted in this region where there are still many anecdotes associated with them that keep their reputation as an example of the excellence of German crafts alive. So, although there is no direct imagery link with the characteristics of the animal, except perhaps the sharp teeth, the reference to the otter evokes a skill to be proud of when relating it to the region.

The affinity with the other regional product the exhibition presented was more superficial as the association with the otter is the result of a modern marketing campaign for a brand of safety shoes, the factory for which is situated in the same area, in Mülheim and der Ruhr. One can only speculate why the otter was chosen as their emblem: perhaps it is supposed to accentuate the waterproofness of the footwear and the anti-slippery protection. There were some examples of their advertising and their little otter mascot and ball pens with the logo were among the exhibits. It may be worth investigating what motivated the surprising and rather audacious choice of the otter for this product in a time when the animal itself had mostly disappeared from the conscience of people. It is interesting that there has apparently been the will to refer to otters as a symbol for the traditional quality of German craftsmanship which has proved to contain high levels of technical competence and reliability in key domains and has been the power of their industry for centuries.

It is difficult to relate the real animal to its symbolic attributes in both of the above German references; they indicate a rather abstract and intellectual perception when compared with the British familiarity, which often evokes much sympathy. Despite its different status in the two cultures, this opposition is a bit surprising, as literature existed that could have been referenced.  Unfortunately, this may have been considered obsolete because it was not thrilling enough or its simple descriptions not sufficiently in phase with the newer ecological perspectives. It is my opinion that they should be re-published with additional updated commentary and complementary information as they have a documental value for natural history and sociology, though they would not be a determining factor in the change of present mentalities. Creating the necessary acceptance for the comeback of the otter requires multiple concrete actions and especially the opportunity to learn about it through real observation creating lasting memories helping to build personal knowledge and understanding. This was already successful in the approach of zoos when they tried to find ways to bring children in contact with wildlife again and Gettmann used this experience for his own purpose, being conscious that pedagogy and communication must work together in favor of a lively popularization which motivates people at least to respect the animal even if it does not incite them to actively defend it.

Otter News would like to sincerely thank Clare Laughran for her editing of the review.