Does Not Illustrate: Somewhere A Mammalogist Is Crying

I don’t get this one at all. It just shows an anthropomorphic mouse, on a trope about artistic license for mammals. And why does the caption mention Non-Mammal Mammaries when she is a mammal?

If it helps, Chonky Lemur added it.

Edited by PurpleEyedGuma on Dec 19th 2022 at 1:38:23 PM

Yeah no, this one isn't clear at all. For one thing, it's too caption-reliant. For another, the animation style of 12 oz. Mouse makes it hard to distinguish what species the character in the image is, exactly (title of the work notwithstanding).

Pull.

Edited by ilovewildkratts1 on Dec 19th 2022 at 10:54:23 AM

Definite pull

Stick it in a glue trap (Pull)

Pull.

I've seen this image a couple of times before, and I never stopped to consider "wait a minute, mice are mammals".

Pull.

This is a bit off-topic, but as the page itself explains, Non-Mammal Mammaries has a very slightly misleading name as even most mammals don't have human-style breasts with their round lumps of fat bulging out from the chest, so you will find a number of technically mammalian examples.

Multiple replacements.

1: Sandy has a pink nose and protruding incisors, unlike a real tree squirrel.

2: This one's obvious.

3: This painting by Jacob van Maerlant, c. 1350, depicting an elephant he has never seen.

Do the first two need a text like "Animation vs. Real life" on them?

I like 9.3.

9.3 is baffling, I really like it.

I prefer 9.2, as 9.3 is more of a case of the painter (possibly) simply trying to replicate an animal he had never got the chance to see, rather than a deliberate choice from the work.

Edited by good-morning on Dec 20th 2022 at 1:23:35 PM

The issue I have with 9.2 is that Sid is supposed to be a giant ground sloth, not a modern sloth. It's comparing him to the wrong species.

Edited by badtothebaritone on Dec 20th 2022 at 10:39:56 AM

I like 9.3.

True, I only realised it after writing the comment

I was going to suggest Sandy Cheeks myself. 9.3 is interesting though.

I like 9.3.

(good-morning, depending on when and where the illumination was made it might have been a stylistic choice - elephants could occasionally be seen in Europe during the middle ages, usually as a diplomatic gift from nations with greater access to them.)

Tropers/badtothebaritone, I didn't know that Sid was a ground sloth! I'd change the image, but it seems like 9.3 is winning.

To clear up the confusion (?), while Jacob van Maerlant didn't see the animals he depicted, he drew them based on the oral/written description made by travelers, as did other artists during that time, according to the article I read.

to 9.3.

Edited by Coock-atoo on Dec 20th 2022 at 1:29:25 PM

9.3 looks good. Or well, not necessarily good but an accurate depiction of the trope.

Edited by CompletelyNormalGuy on Dec 20th 2022 at 5:32:01 AM

9.3

9.3

9.3

Definite agree on 9.3.