The Importance of Being Irwin

I'm only planning on writing about this topic once, as it's already beginning to wear thin, and this is only day two.

I was introduced to The Crocodile Hunter several years ago by my Bad Movie Night group of friends.  Generally it was what we watched when we failed to find a movie bad enough to live up to our freakishly bad expectations. 

I realized this week that I just presume anything that those particular people are fans of is relatively unknown to the rest of creation, from the science-fiction series Lexx to the live-action superhero British movie musical The Return of Captain Invincible (which, contrary to its name, is not a sequel).  That Steve Irwin's death was the top story on cnn.com astounded me.  That television has been fascinated by this story like a royal car wreck for the last day is just shy of incomprehensible.  He's in danger of becoming another media Princess Di, only with spiders instead of landmine victims, and with far less fashion sense.

Ok, the guy has 200,000,000 viewers.  (Or, to put it another way, ten times the population of Australia.)  So did Baywatch, but no one's going to throw a state funeral if David Hasselhoff dies.  For that matter, we wouldn't make this big a deal about things if it was Tom Cruise who had died.

So what is it about Steve Irwin that has so fascinated us?  Is it the Jackass-like quality of some of his stunts?  That may make him entertaining to some, but it doesn't make him worthy of this commemoration.  Is it his fervent conservationism?  This country has never seemed particularly interested in the topic, other than in saving the occasional owl.  (To paraphrase one associate of Irwin's: anyone can convince people to save koala bears.  Steve took up saving spiders and crocodiles and other nasties that people generally think aren't worth saving.)

Is it his everyman language?  Maybe getting closer, but I think that ultimately stemmed from his refreshing lack of phoniness.  As crazy as he was on camera, he was just as crazy off camera.  The persona we all saw was really him.  He wasn't putting on a show: he really was that passionate, and that crazy, about wildlife.  And while he made pleas impassioned to the point of corniness, he didn't lecture and he didn't often point fingers.  Certain species are dying because their habitats are being destroyed, he would say, not that mean, capitalist developers were callously destroying their homes.  He talked a lot about respect for animals, while avoiding specifically addressing  "animal rights."  I think in that way he made conservation palatable for a lot of people nervous about being associated with radical, tree-hugging members of PETA.

Did I approve of his methods?  Not always.  He took risks that were not necessary.  You have, by now, no doubt seen a couple dozen clips on CNN of him getting bit in the face by snakes.  That doesn't have to happen.  My high school had a program where elementary kids came as field trips to learn about a variety of animals which high schoolers handled.  As a child I attended those field trips.  As a teen I was one of those animal handlers, and the main attraction was a couple boas and pythons that we would bring out draped around our necks that the children could pet.  Never got bit.  No one I knew got bit.  Why?  Because we didn't wave them around like yo-yos.

On the other hand, Steve never EVER blamed the animals.  When he got bit, it was his fault.  (Damn right.)  Nor did he ever tell his audience that these animals were just harmless, misunderstood creatures wanting a cuddle.  These are dangerous animals, neither pets nor toys.  While many of these animals are not aggressive or wishing to cause harm (like, ironically, stingrays), they still require respect or people and animals both can get hurt.  And, of course, there's the crocs, who clearly always want a piece of that crazy zookeeper dancing around their pens.

Comments

[Ben]

First: nice headline.

I also contemplated whether Irwin's death should be a major story, and I ultimately decided it should be - for the simple reason that people care about it. And CNN beats EVERY story they cover into the ground. It's what you do when you have to fill every moment with something.

I watched Irwin's show maybe twice, though I did dress up like him for Halloween once (all khaki, rubber snake, drunk and yelling "crikey!"). Still, I think you're right - it was his unscripted enthusiasm and exuberant love of wildlife that made us care.

[Heather]

My two year old was standing beside me when I first read the news. He was so excited because he recognized "Steve" and he proceeded to tell me about how he was going to "get that crocodile!" The Crocodile Hunter is one of the very few things we let our son watch. At least I don't have to explain it to him right now.

I do think that Steve took unnecessary risks for dramatic purposes. My husband had an 11 foot Burmese Python. We found a new home for him before our oldest was born. Although he had a well constructed cage, it was never worth that small shadow of doubt. (The rabbits he ate were larger than a newborn.)

Herpetology was my favorite course in college and Steve Irwin always made me smile. He'll be missed in our household.

[Daniel]

You compared his show to Jackass, and I think you're bang on about that. You can really see that theme in the show that, I think, intentionally combined Crocodile Hunter and Jackass: Wild Boys. A couple of idiot post-adolescents with a camera crew running around in thongs harrassing wildlife.

I didn't like Irwin's schtick because I thought it was an absurdly mixed message. I understand showmanship, but you can't talk about respecting animals and then, as you say, wave them around like yo-yos. That's thrill-seeking behavior cast as mature concern, and it doesn't wash.

I'm sorry the guy had to die, but isn't this the least surprising death you've heard about in a long time? Taking unnecessary risks around dangerous creatures made this guy rich and famous. It also killed him. Duh.

[Pam]

I wasn't a fan - and to be honest, I think his conservation message was lost in all of the sensationalism. I always thought he treated animals horribly. When I heard that he had died the way he did - I felt the same way that Dan did - I wasn't that surprised. The Great Barrier Reef isn't exactly a safe place - folks die all of the time there, it just isn't publicized.

[JanetLee]

I just feel sorry for his kids. Especially the older girl as it has been reported that he was filming scenes for a children's show that she was involved with. Kids think everything is their fault.

[Heather]

For the record I do not consider The Crocodile Hunter to be of the same caliber as Jacques Cousteau or National Geographic, but at this stage in my son's life, they just don't hold the same appeal.

The show was what it was and I never really credited it to be more than entertainment with a little bit of information thrown in.

[Pam]

I feel sorry for his kids too. It would be hard to lose a father, but I wonder how strange it would be to lose a father that there were so many images of around. Maybe it's good (comforting at some stage) - I don't know. I just think it would be strange.

[Ben]

Of course Irwin didn't use common sense. As Dan says, this was not a terribly surprising death.

Still, I don't find Irwin contradictory. Almost every risk taken with nature or wildlife is unnecessary. No one has to climb the Himalayas, get in a whitewater kayak, or backpack through Alaskan bear country. But almost everyone who does so has an immense respect for and love of nature and wildlife. To put it in Dan's terms, I think thrill seeking behavior quite often meshes with mature concern.

From what little I watched, Irwin was way over the top. That said, linking risk/adventure to nature is pretty normal. For most of us, interacting with "nature" is a now a purely leisure activity. And for many, that experience can't be distengled from the idea of "adventure." I think that's human nature, I think Irwin tapped that (albeit sensationally), and I think it is an effective avenue to get people interested in conservation and wildlife. Certainly more effective then dousing people in fur coats with paint, a la PETA.

I didn't watch enough to assess how he treated animals. I mainly saw him pick them up and handle them, which didn't strike me as particularly egregious (though often stupid). My impression is they were probably worse off in a zoo (his or anyone else's) than being handled by Irwin in the wild.

[Nightwind]

--I'm sorry the guy had to die, but isn't this the least surprising death you've heard about in a long time? Taking unnecessary risks around dangerous creatures made this guy rich and famous. It also killed him. Duh.--

I keep wanting to say this. Really. When I told my husband that irwin had died, his response was a long pause followed by "I'm guessing it happened how I'm thinking it happened?"
(ok, the sentence doesn't actually make sense, but you get the picture.)

But after all his crazy stunts, and as much as I would like to say "See! That's what you get for being a goof!" that isn't what happened. By all accounts, he wasn't doing anything outlandish. People scubadive with stingrays all the time. I encountered one on one of my dives. It was buried in the sand, and no one knew it was there until we were practically on top of it and it swam off. They didn't even warn us to avoid any stingrays we encountered.

Steve was a thrill-seeker, but I just can't bring myself to blame his death on that trait.