b'T3 Journal - Student Writing in Drama, University of Exeter 2019-20Even though these efforts are often undertaken in the name of naturenoticed that human enjoyment remained unchallenged. If and the restoration of wild things that used to be, they more closelya child or young adult sees a tiger for the first time and is resemble a collective construction of alternative natures that obeyscompelled to do something positive, how could that energy cultural impulses more than scientific ones. (2016: 4) be used as momentum after the zoo visit?Like the contradiction Heise describes, a zoo visitor contributes to animal conservation while simultaneously contributing to global emissions which affect these animals. Visiting a zoo as an act of conservation, like buying a reusable coffee cup or avoiding plastic cutlery, is geographically and culturally distanced from the catastrophic effects of the climate crisis and further from the projects that WWCT sponsor, support and champion as outlined in their marketing.It is since the twentieth-century that zoos have undergone a change in positionality. The WWCT was set up after Whitleys passing and the zoological gardens became immersion exhibits. Susan Warren highlights in a field study article that the twenty-first century zoo has potential to change visitor behaviour in favour of conservation (2018: 1). However, she reported that visitors of Paignton Zoo were experiencing a dissonance between emotions and behaviours (2018: 4), suggesting that the gap must be bridged between encountering the animal and pro-environmental behavioural changes. We felt this dissonance when walking around. Looking at information plaques about different species, the WWCT labelled populations from Least Concern to Extinct. We were shocked to see nothing was labelled safer than Vulnerable until we reached the reptile house, and most species were Endangered to Extinct in the Wild. ThisIs the entertainment and the playground a distraction to labelling was daunting, and trivialised the damage done toconservation aims? There were Adopt-An-Animal scheme these animals, contributing to the dissonance that Warrentrustees framed by different species, where visitors could highlights as an issue. The WWCT is protecting what isHelp us [WWCT] care for your favourite animal and left as if they are living museum exhibits.support us from only 35 a year (adoption valid for 12 months) (2019: np), but the term adoption also reinforced In discussing this with my peers, we agreed that seeinghuman ownership over the species and likens them to wild animals when we were younger was fascinating, anddomestic pets. Other than this, we were not sure where we that the charisma and visual beauty of an animal couldcould channel our feelings to contribute in a positive way.incite emotions in a visitor. However, the problem Berger suggests is that the cultural marginalisation of animalsAs a visitor, I felt like my compassion for animals was not is, of course, a more complex process than their physicalfollowed by an improvement of my knowledge or agency marginalisation (2009: 15). The issue extends beyond theto contribute to conservation. WWCTs vision of a world encounter in the zoo, in the way people encounter animalsrich in wildlife and wild places (2019: np) cannot become through cartoons, stories and superstitions. As well asa reality if they do not bridge the gap between visitors seeing children roar at resting lions and parents inscribeand conservation projects. Like Susan Warren suggests, responses onto the animals, we were also surprised toa rethink is needed to take advantage of the zoos power see extensive playground equipment for children. Afterto elicit feelings of empathy, care and concern (2018: 2). comparing visits before and after starting this module, IApplying reading and semiotic analysis to my experience, 40'