The Horns of Amun and Alexander the Great

The Horns of Amun/Ammon, also known as Ammonis cornua, is an important feature of one of Ancient Egypt’s most important deities. It later became associated with Alexander the Great, solidifying his place as Egypt’s rightful ruler.

 

Sheep imagery is often associated with the sacred.

            Priests, for example, were the only people permitted to wear wool. Considering Egypt is (quite obviously) a desert, I doubt many people objected to this delineation.

Most ramheaded deities had horns that loosely spiralled towards the side. These are the horns of the barbary sheep (Ovis longipes paleo-aegyptiacus). The imagery persisted long after the barbary sheep went extinct.

However, the Horns of Amun curled down and forward like those of Ovis platyura aegyptiaca. This matches the Kushite imagery of ramheaded deities. Fossilised snails and ammonites (named after Ammon) were associated with the Horns of Amun.

So it’s quite clear in Egypt when horns are merely sacred (Ovis longipes paleo-aegyptiacus) or associated uniquely with Amun (Ovis platyura aegyptiaca).

 

So what’s Alexander the Great got to do with the Horns of Amun>

Well, he stopped his veracious conquering in order to go on pilgrimage to the Siwa Oasis. Here was the Sanctuary of Zeus-Amun, and here he was pronounced as the son of Zeus-Amun. This allowed him to use the Horns of Amun. Indeed, he was depicted as a ramhorned man on coins. The horns were even meant to be made of iron. Due to this declaration and Alexander freeing them from the Persians, the Egyptians accepted Alexander as their ruler.

Even centuries on, this imagery persists. In the Qu’ran, Alexander is called Dhu al-Qarnayn, meaning ‘the Two Horned One’ (also written as ‘Zul-Qarnain’). Alexander is said to have performed various acts, such as travelling through the air, or using a glass bubble to reach the bottom of the sea.

 

Alexander the Great using the imagery of an Egyptian god has great influence centuries after it was initiated. Something sacred used for political gain remembered in creative ways. Just another way to add to his legacy.

 

Critique: A Monster Calls (Film) 2/2

*****SPOILERS*****

 

Clever Details

 

There were so many clever details!

The Tree Monster is a yew, a tree that symbolises death. Considering Connor’s mum is dying, picking the yew as the tree was a good choice.

Connor tells the Tree Monster, “I need you to heal.” The Tree Monster responds, “So I shall.” As his tone is so sad, and he’s spending time with Connor makes me wonder if the Tree Monster is meant to heal Connor, not his mum.

Every night, we see 12:06 become 12:07. It’s at this time the Tree Monster appears. It’s also the time Connor’s mum dies.

Connor watches an old version of King Kong with his mother. The gunners try to kill Kong, his mum explains, because people don’t like what’s different. Just like Connor’s bullied for being different, i.e. his head is off in his own world and his mum has cancer. (The spire-Kong scale is inconsistent because Kong is larger at the top of the tower compared to when he falls.)

When Connor reveals his nightmare to the Tree Monster, Connor can’t hold on to his mum who drops in the hole. There’s havoc of wind and debris. When she drops, there’s complete silence. The noise stops, just like Connor’s heart must have done.

Connor reveals his truth, his nightmare: he wants it to be over. He believes he deserves punishment for this. All through the film, he isn’t punished, not for destroying Grandma’s house, not for sending his bully to the hospital. If he doesn’t ‘deserve’ punishment for doing bad things, he definitely doesn’t deserve punishment for wanting his and his mother’s pain to be over.

 

Humour

 

Considering the film is so serious, little moments of gentle levity are well-placed and well-used.

When Connor finds cookies in Grandma’s house, he says, “Get in!” This made me chuckle.

Connor’s dad is a fun character. When he finds out Grandma’s opinion of him, he says, “She’s entitled to her opinion.” After Connor destroys Grandma’s house, his dad says, “I’ve got to say, champ, you’re amazingly thorough.” His dad also says something rather wise: “Most people get messily ever after” (not happily ever after).

 

Tree Monster’s Perspective

 

The Tree Monster’s perspective on things get odder as the film goes on.

The queen is made out to be the bad guy during the first story but then the tree rescues her because she was falsely accused. So the audience knows from the first story that the point the Tree Monster makes won’t be the one the audience thinks it will be.

During the second story, the apothecary refuses to heal the parson’s daughters because the parson ruined the apothecary’s business. The parson was willing to go against his own beliefs in order to save his kids. Yet the Tree Monster makes out like this is a bad thing. But how can principles be more important than people? The Tree Monster says giving up belief is bad from a healing perspective because treatments are a belief in the cure, a belief in the future that awaits. I can understand why this is important, but why punish the pastor when the apothecary willingly let children suffer and die for their father’s actions? It seems like such an odd view. Not wrong, just odd.

During the third story (it happens whilst Connor’s at school), the Tree Monster encourages and joins Connor in the attack against his bully. Even though the bully just said he’d leave Connor alone: Connor’s attack wasn’t in self-defence.

So the Tree Monster’s strange perspective in the second story was part of a pattern of escalation of letting Connor ignore morals to do what he wants.

 

Progression

 

As seen with the Tree Monster’s opinions, everything in this film progresses into a more chaotic and realistic state to reflect Connor’s emotions and situation.

The first story is beautiful watercolour dream. The second story is a dream in 3D animation. The third story happens whilst Connor awakes. There’s a clear progression into realism: 2D fake, 3D fake, 3D real. Just like his mum’s impending death is getting more ‘real’ because the treatments aren’t working.

The Tree Monster emerges from the yew tree. The fist time, he unfolded. The last time the audience sees it, his branches fall off or get ripped off. Whilst it would be easy to claim inconsistency, but as with everything in this film, it’s a progression of things getting worse.

 

Heartbroken

 

The whole premise of the film is gut-wrenching. Yet two particular moments broke my heart.

            As Connor experiences his nightmare whilst awake, he can’t hold on to his mum anymore. She drops into the whole and Connor, conveying both disbelief and pleading, murmurs, “This is where I always wake up.”

When in the hospital at the end, Connor hugs his dying mother. The Tree Monster narrates, “How does the story end? A boy holding on, so that he can let her go.” Using the same action twice to mean their opposites was clever and beautiful.

 

The film was well thought-out, planned meticulously and delivered to a high standard. Emotions were conveyed in the plot, the dialogue, tone of voice and body language. In short, ‘A Monster Calls’ was artfully done.

 

Critique: A Monster Calls (Film) 1/2

Connor’s mum has cancer. The twelve-year-old is visited by a tree monster at night. The Tree Monster promises Connor three stories and, in return, Connor has to share his nightmare, his truth.

 

*****SPOILERS*****

 

 

Good Shots

 

There are many good camera choices that deserve ti be recognised.

When Connor puts his school shirt on, we don’t see any of his skin. There was good angle work going on to manage this, especially considering the camera angle moved as this happened.

In the first story, the Tree Monster stretches his arm. It zooms in then zooms out, revealing a bridge that people ride across; behind the bridge, the Tree Monster walks with two arms dangling at his side. A good transition.

Connor doesn’t swipe his pencil shavings off his paper. This is realistic behaviour for artists. I’m glad they chose this realistic shot over making the ‘perfect’ shot.

When Connor goes to sleep in the Tree Monster’s hands, the camera zooms in. When it zooms back out, Connor is sleeping under the tree. Like the zoom in-out with the bridge in the first story.

 

Fantasy or Hallucination?

 

I’ve never doubted if the fantasy elements are real (in-film) before.

Connor is clearly a stressed kid. His head is in the clouds. Combined, Connor’s statistically more likely to hallucinate than others.

When in the hospital at the end, Connor’s mum sees the Tree Monster. It’s very unlikely that two people could share the same hallucination. As Connor goes through his mother’s artbook, he sees the Tree Monster and all the characters/scenes from the stories the Tree Monster told him.

Throughout the film, we’re kept guessing if it was real or hallucinations, both seeming like plausible options without contradicting each other.

 

Problems

 

Most of the problems are related to Grandma’s character, but I’ll start with the one problem that isn’t hers.

In the second story, there is a parson. This is a very unusual choice of words for something set in England, especially considering that this story was based during the Industrial Revolution. Words like priest or vicar would’ve been more appropriate.

Grandma tells Connor how they all want his tea. We watch his make tea easily: if he already knows how to make tea, surely he knows his family’s preferences by now? So Grandma telling him is not realistic. One could argue she does this because she’s controlling, but everything she does screams ‘controlling’, so adding an unrealistic control is completely unnecessary.

Grandma buys replacement furniture. I wonder how she has the headspace for it: her daughter’s dying; she’s looking after a child; and she has to share her private space, her home, with someone for the first time in a while. Also, Connor’s situation hasn’t changed so what’s to stop Connor repeating the destruction? It just seems like a risk.

Sigorne Weaver does a good, convincing English accent. There was only one hiccough. When in the car, she says, “It doesn’t matter” twice, but they were both in different accents!

 

Story-Real Correlation

 

Each story is relatable to Connor’s current circumstances.

For the second story, Connor is told the story of a man who only thinks of himself. Up until this point, Connor had been wallowing in his own anger, his denial, his anger. That is, everything he’s thinking about is his emotions. So both him and the story character think of themselves (even if Connor’s is justified coping).

There are also more obvious ones. In the first story, the prince is frustrated with his grandma, just like Connor is feuding with his grandma. In the second story, the Tree Monster destroys the parson’s house, just like Connor wakes up to find he’s destroyed Grandma’s house. In the third story, both the character and Connor attack those who ignore him.

 

Almost Problems

 

There are two things that look problematic on the outset. So these are reasons why these shouldn’t be classed as criticism.

The audience views a door from inside its room. We can hear Connor on the other side first unlocking the door and then twisting the handle. Yet from the inside, the doorhandle didn’t move. If I hadn’t seen a moving-static handle before in real life, I would have said this was so unrealistic!

Throughout the story, the Tree Monster says that Connor called it. Connor denies this. If Connor’s right (and surely he is, because surely he’d know?) then the title ‘A Monster Calls’ would be baffling. But even if you invite someone over, it would be legitimate to say the someone ‘called in’ on you. That would make the title legitimate.

Longleat Safari Park

We went on the 19^th April 2024 and had a blast.

Seeing painted dogs in real life was such a privilege. Over the past decade, people have become aware that painted dogs exist, which have meant more documentaries, which have meant more love. It’s always great to see a great animal gain the recognition they deserve.

One of the giraffe keepers said that the bull has been retired. From mating. This concept is by itself funny, but the pride in the keeper’s voice made it almost too much. Their bull’s fathered over thirty offspring so he’s definitely done his part for the species.

I saw in the distance what I thought was a gemsbok due to its colouration and horn shape. Later we came to another oryx species, the scimitar: the white with the rusty-red neck and head was stunning.

 

There were Somali sheep in the lemur exhibit. Because Somalia is well-known for its lemurs? (If they get along, there’s no reason not to house them together.) Very striking looks.

On the way out of the lemur exhibit, we saw pygmy goats. They were definitely small enough to be immediately recognisable as such (from the size of their horns, they were clearly adults).

Whilst in lemur exhibit, we saw ostrich on other side and they had white dots on their feathers. I’d never seen this on an ostrich before. When we got around to entering the actual safari, the closer look revealed that it was dust, not pigmentation, making their feathers appear a different colour.

 

The netted enclosure of the flamingos and pelicans not only had a small square footage but it was rather short. Whilst it was sad to see this (especially when the other animals had much larger enclosures), I understand the reasons why.

            If it were any wider, there would be a lot of sagging and hence a higher entanglement risk. The only way to free these birds would inherently risk the others fleeing the enclosure. Also, if it were any taller, it would be more likely to fall down. Not only would this lead to more money and time spent repairing the structure, the birds would panic when it falls and fly into the net, entangling themselves.

            Plus, the birds get to fly around, an obvious bonus and enrichment for creatures evolved to fly. Without this kind of enclosure, this wouldn’t be possible. But does the benefit of flying outweigh the negatives of a smaller living space? Considering how crowded the enclosure was, these negatives would’ve been amplified.

 

Driving through the carnivores was interesting. The fact they had vans parked right next to the creatures was a bit alarming. I know they’re there for the safety of visitors and animals alike but being there and so close made it seem like there was an immediate danger.

The first tiger was curled up in its dark den under the dark sky and the second was lying in the open under the bright sunlight. The first’s colours blended in with its surrounding whilst the second seemed to glow.

The male lion of the first pride had a long face whilst the male of the second pride had a shorter face. I wasn’t expecting such level of individual differences in muzzle length. (It was really rather drastic.)

Also, all of the second pride’s members were huddled together bar one. We did worry it was being shunned. However, as we came into this enclosure, we saw two lionesses walking to the rest of the pride, so maybe they woke up then saw most of their family had drifted off? The lone lioness did look like it had just woken up. Hopefully it wondered over and we greeted nicely.

We could barely see the hyenas. It was dark and gloomy and they camouflage well against the ground, so being hidden was to be expected. The hyena enclosures angle and slope maximised our ability to see the hyenas, so the park had clearly thought how to counter hyena’s hiddenness.

 

In with the meerkats were a bunch of nearby enclosures.

It was unfortunate that we couldn’t smell the binturong’s unique popcorn scent. It was rainy, something known for dampening scents, so that’s not a surprise. They were fun to watch.

Below them were small clawed otters. Every time we looked, the otters had moved somewhere knew, but each time they were cuddled in the exact same configuration. That was beyond adorable.

the crested porcupine was snuggled up and asleep. I love them and think they’re underappreciate. So even if this one did nothing exiting, I want to big it up because I really appreciated seeing it.

The tortoise in the hyrax enclosure had its legs splayed out yet its head was retracted under its shell. Between that and my height/angle, it looked like it didn’t have a head!

Unfortunately, I didn’t get to see the aardvark. It wasn’t in its outside enclosure and the wall between the public and the inside enclose was too high for me to see over from my wheelchair. No other barrier was this high so I wonder why this one was like this?

 

The train ride was nice.

At the entrance was an enchanting cherry blossom in full bloom. It was next to cascades and waterfalls, a relaxing sound that calmed down the inevitable clunking of the wheels. We could see the gorillas across the lake, great for those that lacked the sea legs or time to take the boat over (or both, as was the case with me).

There were also sculptures or leafcutter ants marching along, the final one with its head missing and thorax angled down, looking like it was entering its nest. Such a clever detail.

 

Some final thoughts.

            The sloth house had ropes all along the ceiling and the walls, meaning the sloth could move all around us. That would be fun. But all we could see was its hand: it was hiding in the only spot it could. I hope it wanted peace for sleep, not escape from people.

Seeing secretary birds and the red panda were a privilege. Yet we didn’t get to see either the prehensile tailed porcupine or the giant otters. That was a shame.

Considering we got there early and left practically at closing time, it was surprising that there was still quite a lot to do. The fact that the tickets counted for two consecutive days helps get rid of this issue, as long as people had two consecutive days available. Still, even if people only had one day available, the tickets were very reasonably priced.

 

So yes, a great day. Everywhere was fully accessible to the wheelchair (apart from the aardvark area). The animals looked healthy and happy. The park does work towards conservation. There was a great variety of creatures. What more could you want?