The theme of my works is to explore the relationship between humans and animals. In my research on how to strongly encourage human beings to re-examine the relationship between humans and animals through painting, I noticed that the factor of modern technology has an important impact on the relationship between humans and animals. I’m going to start investigating this factor. The interaction between humans and animals has been established to be complex as a result of the introduction of technology, changes in climatic conditions, increased urbanization, and, in addition to this, the invasion of media. Every one of these modern advancements has brought about new ethical concerns and moral duties that have shifted society’s responsibilities towards animals. The issues of autonomy, privacy, and ethical concerns when it comes to using technology for domestic pets and wildlife are brought by this notion. Likewise, natural factors such as climate change and urban developments have altered living spaces and exposed animals to human beings, thus creating debates on survival and preservation. This paper discusses these diverse impacts and considers how they inform, challenge, and reframe the relationships between people and animals, the ethics of animal use, and social roles and responsibilities toward animals and the environment. Through research, we can better realize the expression of the relationship between human and animal in art practice.
1. Technological Advancements and Ethical Implications
Technology has impacted social relationships with animals in use at home and in the campaigns to protect endangered species. Technologies like health monitoring devices for pets, GPS collars for wild animals, and genetic manipulation of animals alter the relationship between man and animals.
1.1 Pet Technology and Surveillance
Pet technology has been expanding quickly and has brought devices meant to enhance animals’ quality of life and health. These devices can monitor various health-related parameters, including heart rate, activity, and stress levels, meaning their owners have information about their pets’ health at their fingertips (Benis et al., 2023). It improves the knowledge about the animals and allows the pet owners to enhance an early diagnosis of diseases or even contribute to the emotional state of their pets. For instance, some wearable devices called pet trackers learn behaviors and emotions through algorithmic analysis to assist owners in catering for their pet’s needs.
However, using such a technology is also accompanied by many moral issues that may concern the privacy and independence of animals. As a result, the owners end up reducing their responsibilities and becoming more observers who dictate the lives of their pets under their care. The constant accumulation of personal information regarding animals leads to questions about whether pets have a right to privacy and what it might mean to let animals be. The following ethical concerns arise from these implications: These concerns imply that while the technology of pet ownership improves the well-being of animals, the owners have new obligations not to interfere with the animal’s right to a life free from undue interference (Benis et al., 2023).
1.2 Wildlife Tracking and Conservation Technologies
GPS, along with remote sensing, have emerged as some of the most crucial technologies for tracking and monitoring in the field of conservation. Conservationists and ecologists employ these technologies to obtain data on emigrational pathways and their usage and the effects of environmental alterations on species. For example, GPS tracking devices help researchers identify how animals migrate over large territories, making conservation efforts for endangered species and proper management of ecosystems easier (Beausoleil, 2020). Such kinds of frameworks of determination have been helpful in developing policies that are useful in preserving habitats and species.
However, this setting means there is continuous tracking and data collection, which raises an ethical question of the autonomy of wildlife. While these technologies are developed to safeguard animals, they may interfere with the intended changes in behavior in a way that is potentially disturbing to the ecosystem. The transition from observation to monitoring in species preservation makes one wonder if animals are harmed by human interference to maintain the purity of the species in question (Beausoleil, 2020). This contradiction has emerged from the people’s appreciation of the need for animal conservation even as they strive to extend the natural life of every individual animal.
1.3 Genetic Engineering and Cloning
Genetic engineering has been extended to animals, an exciting development for conservation, agriculture, and biomedical sectors. For example, cloning techniques and gene editing enable scientists to control the genetic structure of animal species, aiming at avoiding extinction or promoting productive farming (Pelé et al., 2021). For example, recent developments like CRISPR are used to replace genes in endangered species to revive the gene pool or remove genes that increase the susceptibility of some animals to diseases. Cloning is the replication of organisms, and it has uses such as in the reproduction of endangered species for breeding and reproduction of animals that possess specific qualities.
However, as detailed below, genetic engineering and cloning offer significant ethical concerns. Somatic cell nuclear transplantation provokes basic questions regarding the right of humans to alter the animals’ genome in such a profound way. Genetic treatments inherently arouse concerns about the modification of species, especially in animals, and undermine the principles of liberty and dignity of a species. Such interventions destabilize the biological categories of species and thus challenge the normative systems that regulate humans’ relationships with other living beings. According to Pelé et al. (2021), this increases concerns regarding whether it is moral to strive for specific goals beneficial to humans, such as conservation or an increase in agricultural yields, at the cost of preventing an animal from spraining its genetic code.
2. Climate Change and Ecological Impact on Human-Animal Relations
Climate change has emerged as one of the leading forces impacting the relationship between humans and other animals’ and the physical environment. Whereas animals find ways and means of changing their habitat as they adapt or upgrade their mode of living, human is left with the challenge of meeting the change ethically.
2.1 Habitat Displacement and Species Migration
The escalating effects of global warming have, in recent years, caused a shift in the geographical structure of animals due to increased rates of habitat destruction. This is usually due to climatic changes that occur rapidly and which most species cannot accommodate topographically. In seeking suitable habitats, others invade human territories and, as a result, are forced to adapt to new life situations that entail interactions with humans. Conflict with people due to the expansion of animals’ territories in human-inhabited areas has made people have more stringent ethical issues in conservation, as societies require the protection of those species and their security and resource demands (Uenal et al., 2021). It brings many dynamics where issues like the conservation of the various species while simultaneously observing the physical barriers and safety limits become daunting.
To mitigate these challenges, conservationists have lately proposed innovative techniques, such as assisted migration, which entails influencing the species’ movements to more favorable habitats (Hanson et al., 2020). There is one more tactic, which is referred to as assisted migration or relocation, which is somewhat controversial. It also poses questions about species introduction and species transplantation, interferences in natural evolution, and the prospects of introducing a species to a habitat that it has not naturally evolved to live in. According to the proponents of this approach, it assists in conserving some species. However, the critics have stated that it could reduce native wildlife and enhance a new eco-synergy within ecosystems. For example, Hanson et al. (2020) maintain that assisted migration may establish new source-sink equilibrium and re-establish predator-prey relations or create a new resource competition to offer new habitats to these species.
However, the requirement for ethical issues has been realized as researchers and conservationists seek to limit human interaction with animals. Climate change aggravates the condition, and habitats decrease, increasing the confrontation between humans and animals. Consequently, there is a need to cultivate reasonable and intentional means of preserving the zones and reasonable use of the resources. As stated by Uenal et al. (2021), it should be developed with an interdisciplinary approach toward the role of various species in ecosystems, the potential dangers to the population, and other detrimental effects of direct manipulation by humans.
2.2 Sustainability Practices in Human-Animal Interactions
Climate change has also altered human understanding of their roles and duties towards animal rights and preservation. With the daily increase in environmental pollution, people and companies must recognize the issue of the conservation of endangered species and spaces. Specific interventions pursued in this line of action include the conservation of species and land, reduction of ecological impacts, and conservation of endangered species, which are essential in enhancing the ability of wildlife populations to withstand pressure. Significantly, conservationists have insisted on fostering harmonious associations within ecosystems while acknowledging that animal rights are linked to human rights and the overall stability of ecological systems (Beausoleil, 2020).
“Symbiotic sustainability” has become popular in recent years as people have been called to change their behavior to change the natural behavior of animals to ensure the protection of both human and animal life. Such an approach highlights interdependence and cooperation with all life forms in maintaining the environment’s integrity. Thus, symbiotic sustainability involves minimizing human impacts that have worsened the natural processes of deforestation, emissions of toxic chemicals, and overconsumption of resources that have led to endangerment of species and habitat loss (Beausoleil, 2020). Thus preserving animals and not destroying the animal species and preserving the entire species.
Critics of the utilitarian approach have argued that giving preference to some species in the conservation process is ethically questionable besides facing practical difficulties. Thus, more resources and attention can be given to the most striking or famous species at the risk of bringing some undesirable changes to the ecosystems due to a lack of attention to other, though not less important, species. Sociopolitical imbalances could also be detrimental to biodiversity because underrepresented species make vital contributions to ecosystem functions such as nutrient cycling, seed dispersal, and other factors that contribute to the stability of the ecosystem, as noted by Beausoleil (2020). Therefore, the assessment of ethical solutions for conservation entails an awareness of the dynamics of ecosystems and the conception of equal rights for all species, not merely those that captivate humans.
Given these difficulties, enhancing sustainable practices in human-animal interactions requires strategies that can be versatile and nuanced in response to the delicate balances of ecological interactions. As climate change redefines ecosystems and pushes species to adapt or move to new locations, conservation requires addressing various species’ needs and ecosystems’ general well-being. According to Uenal et al. (2021), it is necessary to emphasize that such practices should be based on an ethical perspective that recognizes the value inherent in animal lives and the role of biodiversity. It also notes that only by harnessing such an approach to conservation can measures against climate change protect people and animals as the world becomes more unpredictable.
3. Urbanization and Evolution of Human-Animal Coexistence
Modern society’s rapid urbanization has introduced new characteristics of interaction between people and animals in urban environments. Wildlife species are now becoming naturalized in urban environments, and pets are assuming new social functions.
3.1 Adaptation of Wildlife in Urban Spaces
Cities have become complex habitats for several animals, like raccoons, pigeons, foxes, and many others, who have settled well in these urban territories. Such animals adapt to human environments, gain specific abilities, and employ certain tactics to utilize urban goods and services (Apfelbeck, 2020). For instance, raccoons are intelligent animals using their hands and brains to pull a trash can cover or climb buildings. Hence, this has brought about a shift in the mutual dependence between wildlife and urban habitats. Pigeons, rats, and other animals that feed on waste have a stringent ecological significance in helping to recycle waste that people generate, hence aiding in bringing order in jogging the spaces and recycling nutrients within city limits.
Wildlife living within urban encroachment blurs the wildlife-domestic interface, thus making it difficult to draw a line between the two. Unlike rural or wilderness areas where animals are still somewhat detached from human interference, cities become blended landscapes of human-animal existence, sharing resources, territories, and schedules (Apfelbeck, 2020). This disintegration is not without consequences for the design and planning of cities and urban spaces, as these need to regulate and integrate wildlife into planned systems. Some urban planners and architects are working on the concept of wildlife structures, including green roofs, wildlife corridors, and urban parks. This change in urban development shows that it is now realized that the city of the twenty-first century cannot be solely a human city but a human-animal interface city, which means that people and animals both live together.
3.2 Transformation of Pet Roles and Urban Ecology
Urban environments have also changed the functions of pets, moving beyond using animals as simple companions and integrating them into human social lives. Increasingly, many city dwellers treat their pet animals as their children, which has caused the local legislation to adapt, resulting in more and more areas designated for pets and their owners, like dog parks, cafes, and events. This new perspective of pets as family members within modern cities could also be attributable to the new cultural norms of empathy towards animals and the desire to have pets as part of the household (Chambers et al., 2020). Some of these include companionship, which the growing culture of petting and owning, even in condos, as recommended for densely populated urban settings, promotes.
However, there are ethical issues as pets become a part of urban life. The increasing trend of owning pets means that it results in the exploitation of animals, where the focus is put on the external appearance or some lineage rather than the animals’ well-being. Such tendencies oversimplify animal cover or fur as a mere commodity in costume or a symbol of prestige, a position which erases their importance as beings capable of feeling pain and possessing rights to be protected (Chambers et al., 2020). However, other meanings associated with this commodification include increased overcrowding in animal rescue centers and cases of animal dumping. Pet-keeping has become part of the daily life of cities, and it is now a task of cities to accommodate pets sustainably without harming them. It is essential to inform the general public and policymakers about the best practices for the ownership of pets and fight for the animals’ rights to reduce these ethical issues and encourage harmonious and mutually beneficial human-animal interaction within the urban setting.
4.Human-Animal Morphological Fusion in Oil Painting
In the past, many artists have used oil painting to express complex ideas, such as the fusion of human and animal forms and the equipment used in creating artwork. Challenges for the artists who take up this metamorphosis are rather high, such as the extent of detail required in the human anatomy to blend human and animal forms seamlessly. Sometimes they use brush movements that indicate the skin, fur, and other body parts merging them harmoniously and convincingly. Ambiguity in light and shade persists in these works, as artists must masterfully use them to depict spatial perception, contrasts, and analogies between human and animal features. Additionally, smooth gradation of colors is also an issue here, and artists have to put in a lot of effort blending the skin tones with animal features so that the overall picture looks harmonized. These technical components enable artists to build visual storylines that make viewers rethink such significations as power, existence, and self-identity. In this context, oil painting is not simply narrative but also symbolic and existential, where the merging of the forms challenges and enriches one’s perception of self.
In “The Logic of Sensation”, Gilles Deleuze reveals Francis Bacon’s profound understanding of the human-animal relationship, which is often expressed through the unique handling of brushstrokes and distorted forms in his works. Bacon’s brushwork is not merely a technical tool but a means of exploring a “language of sensation” that transcends the boundaries between humans and animals. This language acts directly on the viewer’s senses, drawing them into an instinctual, almost animalistic state of perception rather than mere observation. Bacon’s brushstrokes convey a strong sense of corporeality, seeming to break down and reshape the human form. He often uses rough brushstrokes and blurred boundaries to dismantle the figure, bringing it closer to something wild or non-human. This approach blurs the distinction between human and animal, making his works an exploration of both human and animalistic traits. As Deleuze explains, Bacon does not attempt to depict “animals” or “humans” as isolated entities but uses distorted and transformed brushstrokes to express the process of “becoming animal”—the potential for humans to connect with animals through specific physiological or emotional states.
This “becoming animal” is particularly evident in Bacon’s dynamic, rough brushstrokes, which create twisted muscles, skin, and expressions, evoking a kind of repressed animality. The “fleshiness” of his brushstrokes renders his figures both fragile and powerful, as if struggling to break through boundaries between self and other, human and animal. Through this approach, Bacon’s brushwork challenges us to reconsider the relationship between humans and animals, illustrating that the divide between them is not absolute but can merge on the level of sensation.
Deleuze further argues that Bacon’s art emphasizes sensation rather than representation, which brings the viewer closer to the instinctual experience shared with animals—a direct, non-verbal sense. Thus, brushstrokes become central to his exploration of “animality within humanity,” conveying an experience that is primal and untamed. This method not only helps us understand humanity’s existence as part of the animal world but also highlights emotions and desires that transcend human experience, suggesting a resonance across broader forms of life.
So in my work that explores the complex relationship between humans and animals, I recreate new species. My work is all about human-animal hybridization, capturing the details of human-animal union, challenging the dominance of humans in society and blurring the lines between humans and animals. Prompting humans to reassess their relationship and identity with animals. I deliberately use the creative possibilities of painting to provide a powerful reflection for the viewer. By exploring the connection between humans and animals in a more subtle way, I aim to create a more realistic look. This approach aims to break the viewer’s suspicion of the picture, stimulate the synesthetic engagement of the senses, and deepen the viewer’s reflection on the intricate relationship with animals in their lives. Through the integration of different forms, the excessive distinction between human and animal in daily life is resolved. My art aims to integrate the subject matter in question, capture the surprise of deconstruction and reorganization from different perspectives, and deeply reflect on our identity and relationship with animals.
In conclusion, the contemporary relations between humans and animals are the combinations of new technologies, effects of climate change, changes in societal and cultural practices, and ethical concerns. With increasing growth and ability as humans invent and implement ways of observing, protecting, and even domesticating these animals, questions of ethics, such as whether animals should be given the right to control their own lives and decisions and whether their privacy rights ought to be protected, are called into question. Urbanization, climate change, and the portrayal of animals in the media also influence people’s perception of these animals, in extension to the depletion of their rights and importance in relation to the environment. How to solve these problems skillfully through painting or art form is not easy; We need to stand in the audience’s perspective to think about how to find a focus in a big problem and what kind of works can make the audience aware of these problems. Secondly, the form of artistic expression is equally important.
References
Apfelbeck, Beate. (2020). Designing wildlife-inclusive cities that support human-animal co-existence. Landscape and Urban Planning, 200, 103817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2020.103817
Beausoleil, N. J. (2020). I Am a Compassionate Conservation Welfare Scientist: Considering the Theoretical and Practical Differences Between Compassionate Conservation and Conservation Welfare. Animals, 10(2), 257. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10020257
Benis, A., Haghi, M., Deserno, T. M., & Tamburis, O. (2023). One Digital Health Intervention for Monitoring Human and Animal Welfare in Smart Cities: Viewpoint and Use Case. JMIR Medical Informatics, 11(1), e43871. https://doi.org/10.2196/43871
Chambers, J., Quinlan, M. B., Evans, A., & Quinlan, R. J. (2020). Dog-Human Coevolution: Cross-Cultural Analysis of Multiple Hypotheses. Journal of Ethnobiology, 40(4). https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-40.4.414
Hanson, J. O., Rhodes, J. R., Butchart, S. H. M., Buchanan, G. M., Rondinini, C., Ficetola, G. F., & Fuller, R. A. (2020). Global conservation of species’ niches. Nature, 580(7802), 232–234. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2138-7
Uenal, F., Sidanius, J., & van der Linden, S. (2021). Social and ecological dominance orientations: Two sides of the same coin? Social and ecological dominance orientations predict decreased support for climate change mitigation policies. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 136843022110109. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211010923
About the author
Yi Gu is an artist and designer based in Hangzhou, China or London, UK. Yi Gu graduated from MA Fine Art: Painting at Camberwell in 2024. He devoted himself to studying the relationship between humans and animals through painting.
Website: https://www.guyiart.com/
Instagram: @hygge_22_