Meticulous illustrations of birds are much more than works of art
In 1812, John James Audubon
filled a wooden box with about 200 of his paintings of American
birds and left it with a relative for safekeeping while he went off
on one of his many trips. When he returned to retrieve the
paintings, he discovered to his horror that they had been destroyed,
shredded by nesting rats.

The New York Times
An 1837 illustration of the scarlet ibis by
John James Audubon. Audubon was only one of a number of
naturalist artists who made their careers portraying
birds. |
As he described it later, his
first reaction was “a burning heat” in his brain, a headache so
intense it kept him awake for days.
Then, though, he reconsidered. “I felt pleased,” he wrote, “that
I might now make better drawings than before.”
We know the results – Audubon turned himself into the most famous
practitioner of what some call “bird art.” Copies of his “Birds of
America,” published section by section in the mid-19th century, are
among the most valuable illustrated books.
But Audubon was only one of a number of naturalist artists who
have made their careers portraying birds. And in his day, before
cameras or reliable preservation techniques, bird artists gathered
and recorded important scientific information about the
ornithological world.
For Audubon, his colleagues and rivals, the ability to observe
their surroundings and draw what they saw was not just a
prerequisite for making and selling art. Observation and
illustration were important tools of research.
Four new books illuminate the
confluence of science, art and ornithology, which flowered perhaps
most brilliantly in Audubon's day, although it had ancient roots.
The art of depicting birds emerged in the cave culture of
Paleolithic times. The first drawing of a bird (that we know about)
was of an owl, found on the wall of a cave in Vallon-Pont-d'Arc,
France, in 1994.
And though sketching may have given way to the high-technology
tools of zoology, the authors of three books agree that drawing and
painting continue to be superior tools for people seeking to learn
about birds. If you find that hard to believe, consider that many
contemporary birders prefer the field guide drawings of Roger Tory
Peterson and David Allen Sibley to guides relying on photography.
All three of these books are filled with glorious images of drawn
and painted birds, fascinating anecdotes about how the images were
made and odd facts. Edward Lear, for example, the master of the
limerick, was an accomplished bird artist who considered this work
his true calling.
But there is much more than beautiful images and bird-art trivia.
In “Humans, Nature and Birds: Science Art From Cave Walls to
Computer Screens” (Yale University Press), Darryl Wheye, a
California artist, and Donald Kennedy, an ecologist and emeritus
president of Stanford, take a close look at humanity's relationship
with birds.
Wheye and Kennedy, also the former editor of the journal
Science, have collected bird art ranging from the cave
painting of an owl to a portrait of the ivory-billed woodpecker,
which appeared on the cover of Science in 2005 to accompany a
report, much criticized since, that an ivory-bill had been observed
in an Arkansas swamp and that the species was not extinct after all.
They arrange this art not in chronological order or by species or
geography, but in a kind of virtual “gallery” that tells, room by
room, of birds as symbols, a natural resource, exemplars of
important biological principles or as species useful in encouraging
conservation. And they describe art that reveals bird behavior –
individual, intraspecies and interspecies, including relations
between birds and people.
Among other things, they note that birds as icons are a
contradictory lot. They embody wisdom (owls) and stupidity (dodos);
peace (doves) and war (eagles); freedom (in flight) and enforced
propriety (when caged).
“Birds: The Art of Ornithology” (Rizzoli), by Jonathan Elphick,
an eminent British ornithologist, is a more conventional, and
exhaustive, survey of bird art from the work of medieval weavers to
artists painting today. If your knowledge of bird art is limited to
Audubon, Sibley and Peterson, the parade of characters who walk
across this book's pages will be a revelation.
Lear, for example, was celebrated for his art, Elphick writes,
describing his lithograph of a gaudy scarlet macaw as illustrating
“the individual character he gave to his bird subjects without
sacrificing scientific objectivity.” But Lear's prosperous family
lost its money when he was a child, and he struggled as a bird
artist for patronage and other support. Worse, his vision faded,
immensely complicating his work.
Audubon prided himself on working “from life,” but, like his
contemporaries, he usually worked with birds he killed. When he
could not get a live golden eagle to hold still, Elphick recounts,
Audubon contemplated letting it go. Instead he stabbed it through
the heart and posed it to produce one of his most famous images: a
golden eagle carrying off a snowshoe hare.
Drawing and painting were almost the least of the troubles of
early bird artists. Field trips in those days were rugged. And once
they had made their art, the artists often faced formidable
difficulty reproducing it in high-quality (and marketable) form. In
the early 19th century, for example, reliable printing houses were
few and far between.
How Audubon's art developed is a theme of an introductory essay
by the historian Richard Rhodes in “Audubon: Early Drawings”
(Harvard University Press), which reproduces one of the few extant
collections of his early work, the Harris collection at Harvard.
These drawings are interesting not just because of their
seemingly naive charm, but also because of their great technical
distance from the work produced in “Birds of America.” In this
collection, the birds appear in more or less stilted poses, usually
in profile. They appear almost always on an otherwise empty page.
Audubon offers terse notes to describe their habits, a practice he
dropped in “Birds.”
Even today, scientists sometimes consult Audubon, Lear and other
early practitioners of bird art to learn about extinct species like
the Carolina parakeet, the subject of another famous Audubon image.
Or they look for hints of how the habitats or habits of surviving
species might have changed since the 18th or 19th centuries.
These books might seem to make the case that photography has
nothing to contribute to the science and art of ornithology. But a
fourth new book, “Egg and Nest” (Belknap Press of Harvard University
Press), by Rosamond Purcell, Linnea S. Hall and Rene Corado, is a
most effective rebuttal. It collects photographs that Rosamond
Purcell made at the Western Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology in
Camarillo, a natural history collection specializing in the eggs and
nests of birds from around the world.
In an essay, the naturalist Bernd Heinrich offers his explanation
for, as he calls it, “the allure of eggs and nests.” Hall, the
director of the foundation, and Corado, its collections manager,
offer detailed explanations of which bird laid each egg or built
each nest and descriptions of how collectors gather specimens and
preserve eggs by blowing out their contents. They even provide an
X-ray of a gravid kiwi, its body seemingly filled by an egg, and
explain that kiwis lay one egg at a time, “the largest eggs relative
to their body size of any living birds.”
If you are wondering why anyone would spend a life in a pursuit
as eccentric as collecting eggs and nests, Purcell's work will tell
you. She selected a range of specimens, eggs brightly colored and
plain, and nests made conventionally of twigs or of materials as
bizarre as nails. Then she photographed them in natural light.
Her luminous results explain without words why people have been
collecting eggs and nests for centuries.