Re: Is the Study of Dinosaurs Science?

[Darick Chamberlin <drogue@eskimo.com>]

On Sun, 6 Aug 1995, Kata McCarville wrote:

                            
 
> > Kekule ourobouros dream
> Oooh! What's this? 
> 
> 
> Kata McCarville



Dear Kata:

I had read that a dream-image of a snake biting it's own tail proved to 
be the roundabout trampoline (psychically speaking) Kekule 'needed' in 
order to 'discover' the Benzene molecule or somesuch; thus ushering in 
(among other things) the Synthetic Revolution; plastics, fuels, teflon, 
Flair pens, warm-up suits, Jeno's pizza rolls, etc.


Also, with regards to my posting, I apologize for whatever about it was 
grammatically funky.

In essence, though, my question is still raised. Betty C., I noticed, 
pointed out the 700 million bucks congealing around the JP phenomena, and 
at the risk of incurring EVERYONE'S wrath for talking about _that_ I 
nonetheless will, here for just a sec'.

The movie, and previous movies indeed (like Valley of Gwangi, 
f'rinstance), had some incompletely hard science, of course. But from 
another level of interrogation - beyond sheer factualism or even economics -
does not the astounding psychological impact of seeing even 
exploitational 'versions' of Dinosaurs (sorry, I like caps fer that), 
coming _that_ much to life not satisfy a hunger all of us presumably share?

In order for facts to be assemblable into something cultural, which must 
be the goal of sciences (the brittlest, most esoteric sciences included), 
do we not need these metadialogues? Requiring IMAGINING what we are knowing?

I recently watched a laserdisc all about Ray Harryhausen's 'ouevre' and 
it took me to my ancient, ancient place of fascination. The way he 
articulated an 'Allosaurus' as it snaps, even at some cowboy fer gosh 
sakes, was for me a genuinely selfless, pro-History articulation. In it 
as well were clips from his original, black and white Dinosaur science 
film project, made in the wake of his own religious experience seeing Kong.

Well, enough for now, but I am still listening for anybody's comments 
with regards to a Post-Jungian Paleontology (or reasons why such a thing 
is as invisible and silent as it apparently is...)


pale ontologies,

darick chamberlin