Fantastic animals have always attracted the attention of people. Myths, fairy tales but also belles lettres are full of various monsters – dragons, sea snakes etc. Whereas, for a contemporary person, all these animals seem to be scary, in the past not only were they not perceived in a negative way but many times in a positive and even protective way. For example, the Egyptian Sphinx was considered to be a protector of sacred places in the Ancient Egypt. Only later, it was the Greeks who changed it into a spiteful being. They placed it near a pass through an abyss where it used to terorise passers with its riddles. A dragon has similar destiny. In China it represented an angel of a divine origin. But in Iran, a dragon breathing out fire and smoke was a symbol of everything bad. In such a sense it was copied by an Antique Europe and later by Christianity. So the original meaning was reinterpreted either on purpose or by mistake. Anyway, they were not completely imaginative beings but actually they represented a combination of real animals or people. The Sphinx itself was a lion with the human head, the Antique griffin representd a combination of a lion and an eagle, Minotaur was a human with a bull’s head. The dragon is something special in a way that, in fact, it represents an extinct dinosaur which people had no chance to see. However, its genesis does not have to be linked with an archaic thinking, in spite of the fact, that according to the Chinese mythology it stepped out of a river and appeared in front of a emperor to whom it confided a secret of jin – jang and thus became the vital part of the Chinese empire. On the other hand, it was China where discoveries of fossils belonging to the extinct reptiles from the Mesozoic era might have been made. These could have been the reason why the Chinese cosmology included them into the prehistoric bipolar matter from which the space has originated.

        However, the aim of this preview is not to deal with a question of the existance of these creatures. The most imporatnt is that, at some point in the past, there were people who believed in their existance.

        Apart from the fact that these creatures are interpreted by many scientific disciplines, e.g. ethnology, archeology etc., the first person to sort them was an Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges in his famous book of imaginary beings El libro de los seres imaginarios (Barcelona 1979). He set up a bestiary in a form of a catalog. The individual creatures were not collected only from the historical literature and etnographic sources but also from the modern belles-lettres (F. Kafka, A. E. Poe etc.).

        The monsters of P. Klucik, an important Slovak graphic artist, are different from the ones in Borges’ book in the way that the artist did not imitate mythological creatures already created by people in the past. According to his own fantasy he created completely original beings in his graphics. His inspiration came out from the idea that God, when creating world, managed to make also animals which were not perfect so he was forced to throw them into a dustbin. From this point of view, Klucik’s monsters are similar to Careless wherewas which was made up by an English poet and writer Ted Hughes in his Tales of the Early World (London 1988). This being was created by God from rubbish of clay used in creation of other animals. Therefore it was apparently created by mistake, without any special care, under the delusion of sausages which his mother was preparing for the dinner. In this way, the creation of the first predator, the lion Lea, the king of animals longing for meat, is interpreted by Hughes.

        However, in the book, we are going to try to examine Klucik’s monsters are not  results of God’ purposeful deed but a secondary consequence of the act of creation on the third day which was not originally included in his plan.

The Third Day

        When God made a decision to creat our world (he is the only one to know why to try something of this sort), he did not know exactly who and what he would create. It was maybe because he had no idea why he had created this world. Maybe it was purely his whim – ”capricios”, and thus the affair became uncontrollable. But nobody is infallible, neither is God.

        When God, because of himself, decided to create the world, it was not so austere as it is described in the Holy Bible. But it does not mean that nobody knows about God’s errors. Just look around. The world is full of miscellaneous mutants and hybrids. The reason why God´s lapse can not be found in the Holy Bible results from its ideological essence. It has not been allowed to argue about the person who the whole Book was dedicated to. In this way the Bible would lose its significance. On the other side, the creator of the Bible has forgotten to hide some shortcommings.

        If you read the First Book of Moses – Genesis, you will learn that on the first day of the creation God says: ”It will be the light and it was light. And God saw the light, and it was good, and God separated the light from the dark. And God called the shine the day and the dark the night. And it was evening and was morning, the first day” (M 1, 3-5). By the way, even an amateur without a detailed knowledge of the astrophysics can see that day and night are connected with the sun, which was paradoxically created on the third day. ”And it was evening, and it was morning, the third day. And God says: It will be lights on heavenly sky which will be detached the day from the night and it will be the signs, for definite times, for days and years. And will be lights on heavenly sky for shinning on the earth. And it was so. And God made two big lights, bigger light, which will be ruled over the day, and smaller light, which will be ruled over the night, and also the stars. And God gave them on heavenly sky for shinning on the earth and for ruling over the day and the the night and for dividing the light from the night. And God saw, that it was good” (M 1, 14-18). God as a cosmocreator certainly had better knowledge about the physical substance of the light than people so he created the sun and the stars on the first day, indubitably. How could plants, which are dependent on the sun and live only thanks to photosynthesis, exist if they were created on the second day, that is before the creation of the sun? What is the reason of the discrepancies published in the Holy Bible? Was it because of the carelessness of the writer or because God deliberately wanted to mislead the public?

        What happened on the third day that its occurences must be camouflaged? A key to solve this mystery can be found in the Holy Bible. For example, in the case of the creation of plants on the second day, their reproductional system is evidently defined as follows: ”And the earth yielded fresh grass, herbs, beared seeds by its origin. And God saw, that it was good” (M 1, 12). Paradoxically, the reproduction system of fishes and birds, which were created on the fourth day, is not mentioned there: ”And God blased them and said: Reproduce and filled the water in the seas, and birds should reproduce on the earth” (M 1, 21). The other animals created on the fifth day are dealt with in the similar way: ”And God said: May the earth put out lively spirit in accordance its species: beefs and reptiles and earthly animals in accordance with its class. And God saw, that it was good” (M 1, 24-25). What is the reason for such an informational embargo? If you reckon that this is only the formal mistake, then you are not right because by creating a man on the sixth day, God intentionally defined two sexes: ”And God created the human on its own picture, on God’s picture he created him, male and female sex created them” (M 1, 27). Here, we can put forward another question. How could God create a man on his own picture without having tried the reproductional system? Obviously, he had no previous experience with it as he has always been the greatest everlasting substance, the trinity being.

        From the analysis it is probable that, on the third day, God encountered difficulties concerning this problem, when he was creating animals without two sexes in every species. Can you imagine what resulted from the copulation of males resp. females with males resp. females of different species? Undoubtedly, nothing what God could be proud of and what he could say about ”that it was good”.

BESTIARY

        Present knowledge about the development of animals on our planet corresponds with the Genesis in the Holy Bible. Paleontological finds of fossil animals have proved that life originated in sea. The first animals lived in sea from the very beginning (the fourth day) and later became slowly accustomed to the life ashore. More sophisticated animals known as dinosaurs, which are poetically refered to as beefs and reptiles (the fith day) in the Holy Bible, were the part of the next stage after which the age of mammals followed. From them, God predestined the humans to have the dominant position (the sixth day). All those stages are supported by archeological sources. The third day, which we identify as a day when God was not succesfull or when he experimented with reproductional process of animals, can not possibly be confirmed by archeological materials for a simple reason: God, after seeing these freaks, skilfully sweeped away all traces, which means that he annihilated every single proof of his unsuccesfull deed. How he did it we do not know. He might have simply pulled the mouse and thrown every freak into the rubbish bin. That is why the reconstruction of the third day is only hypothetical. We have simulated individual observations in a form of a laboratory diary assorted by individual animal species, which God after having finished his research naturally destroyed, too.

        Following animal species are systematically described according to the modern zoological taxonomy created by the well-known Swedish biologist and naturalist Carl von Linne (1707 – 1778). It means that the names of animals are derived from Linne’s principle of binomial nomenclature which consits of two-part scientific name including genus and species. Whereas the name of genus expresses which systematic group an animal belongs to (e.g. a Catpoint – Felispunctum), the name of species expresses the diversity of the same species (in the case of a catpoint, the pecies is tigerlike – Tigris and headless – Sinecapitis). Other systematic groups represent animals of similar classes, e.g. reptiles, fishes, birds or mammals and define their position in the upper groups, e.g. family, order, class. To the other systematic terms recommendations by the International Commision for the Paleozoological Taxonomy were added: they specify the origin – the identification of males and females, the genesis – conditions od copulation together with the physiological deformations of animals and a laboratory note – explanation of the reasons of the animals’ incapabilities to survive.

Catpoint Tigerlike – Felispunctum tigris
Species: Chordata
Subspecies: Vertebrata
Genus: Gnathostomata
Class: Mammalia
Origin: male – python, female – cat
Genesis: A big python has swallowed a cat. Unsuccessfully, he digested it without a rest so the cat was excreted by anus with the python’s body.
Note: The movement disposition of the animal, which was squeezing his body to move, prevented it from hunting food, which means, that the cat was unable to hunt mice. Consequently, the animal died from starvation.

Scheethead – Velum capitis Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Agnatha Class: Mammaosteychthyes Origin: male – cheetah, female – skate Genesis: A cheetah has pissed a flood-out skate-eggs on the bank of a sea. From them, cheetahs with skate-head turned over 180 degrees hatched out. Note: Such an anatomic deformation prevented the animal from the consuption of food. It died from starvation.

Pigeonchops – Columba ornithorhynchus Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Aves Origin: male – pigeon, female – platypus Genesis: A pigeon have hatched an egg of a platypus. From this, a bird with platypus beak came out. Note: The anatomic deformation has not prevented the animal from the consumption of food. This species still lives on an unknown island in the Pacific Ocean. It sometimes flyes to Bratislava in rainy season. Without any special effort we can see it in bratislava’s Park of Janko Kráľ.

Spooncat – Felis platalea Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Mammalia Origin: male – cat, female – spoonbill Genesis: A cat has eaten an egg from the nest of a spoonbill. That is why a lower lip of the cat puffed into the form of spoonbill’s beak. Note: The deformation of the lower jaw prevented the animal from an active consumption of food, which means, that what did not fall directly into the mouth on its own (for example roasted pigeons), could not be eaten.

Catpoint – Felis punctum Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Mammalia Origin: male – python, female – cat Genesis: The big python swallowed the cat. He was unsuccessful digested it without rest, so he excreted by anus the cat with python body. Note: The moving disposal of the animal, moved with using his body, defended him hunt the food, that means, the cat was unable to hunt the mouse. One died of starvation.

Catpoint NoHead – Felispunctum sine capitis Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Mammalia Origin: male – python, female – cat Genesis: A big python has swalloved a cat. He digested only its head so the cat without head was excreted by anus. Note: The anatomic deformation prevented the animal from the consumption of food - he had no mouth and consequently died from starvation.

Toocan – Rhamphastos mammonteus Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Aves Origin: male – toocan female – mammooth Genesis: Out of the blue, a toocan has unexpectedly fecundated mammooth which was grazeing on a meadow. The mammooth layed a giant egg. The toocan with a bending mammooth tusk instead of beak hatched from it. Note: The anatomic deformation prevented the animal from the consumption of food and consequently, it died from starvation.

Warted Hippopotamus – Hippopotamus phacochoreus Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Mammalia Origin: male – hippopotamus, female – warted wild boar Genesis: A hippopotamus has fecundated warted wild boar, which was drinking from a river. The warted wild boar gave birth to a hippopotamus with the muzzle of a boar. Note: The animal became extinct because of the absence of the primary food in the river, that is peanuts.

Doublebrush – Duo caudatus Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Mammalia Origin: male – tiger, female – jackal Genesis: A tiger has raped a jackal, which was trying to steal a morsel from the tiger’s prey. The jackal gave birth to a creature with a tiger’s ass and a jackal´s rest of the body. Note: The anatomic disposal of the animal prevented it from flowing movements, which means that its hind legs run faster than the fore ones, so the animal fell down on the hooter at all times. That’s why the doublebrush eats mainly carcasses and might still eat them somewhere even today.

Spiral jaguar – Panthera spiralis Species: Chordata Subspecies: Vertebrata Genus: Gnathostomata Class: Mammalia Origin: male – jaguar, female – squirrel Genesis: A jaguar has fecundated a squirrel when relaxing on a tree after having eaten condor’s eggs, that had already eaten berries from a spiral tree (a type of paleopalm). The new born creature has a body of jaguar with a squirrel’s brush, condor’s feathers and a a spiral-formed limbs.

English by Marcela Vancova and Viera Radziwill-Anoskinova

- - -