Issue 40
Vanishing Points

In the Place of the Donkey: The Subjectivity of the Nonhuman Animal and the Anti-speciesist Perspective in 'Eo'

Enric Burgos
Universitat de València
Bio

Published 2025-07-01

Keywords

  • Animal Subjectivity,
  • Antispeciesism,
  • Film Analysis,
  • Eo,
  • Jerzy Skolimowski,
  • Animalism
  • ...More
    Less

How to Cite

Burgos, E. (2025). In the Place of the Donkey: The Subjectivity of the Nonhuman Animal and the Anti-speciesist Perspective in ’Eo’. L’Atalante. Journal of Film Studies, (40), 159–172. https://doi.org/10.63700/1269

Abstract

This article investigates how the anti-speciesist message conveyed in Eo (Io, Jerzy Skolimowski, 2022) hinges on the assertion of the subjectivity of its donkey protagonist. Following a consideration of the “animal turn” and a discussion of its manifestations in audiovisual studies and recent film production, Eo is examined using the methodology of textual analysis. Attention to key sequences reveals the authentic leading role played by a non-anthropomorphic donkey who is presented as a subject with agency. The analysis also highlights the access the film provides both to the donkey’s subjective way of experiencing his surroundings (Umwelt), including the depiction of his interaction with other species, and to his inner world (Innenwelt). It also explores the director’s unorthodox technical approach, which places us in the donkey’s point of view and connects us to him on sensory and emotional levels. The conclusions underline Eo’s subversive message supported by cinematography that is at once experimental and transgressive and the original alternative the film offers to the traditional depiction of non-human animals and the relationships we establish with them.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Abram, D. (2017). The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a More-than-human World. New York: Vintage Books.
  2. Adams, C. (2010). The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. New York: Continuum.
  3. Burt, J. (2002). Animals in Film. London: Reaktion Books.
  4. Couchot, H. (2023). L’Ânimal cinématographe: notes d’un spectateur sur le film EO (2022) de Jerzy Skolimowski. In Vivo Arts, 1, 1-10.
  5. Coy, J. (2023). Un âne au Zénith. Humanisme, 338, 105-108. https://doi.org/10.3917/huma.338.0105
  6. Fijn, N. (2007). Filming the Significant Other: Human and NonHuman. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 8(4), 297-307. http://doi.org/10.1080/14442210701654032
  7. Finn, S. (2023). Animal Rights and Narrative Films. In S. Finn (ed.), Farmed Animals on Film: A Manifesto for a New Ethic (pp. 121-171), London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  8. Freeman, C. & Tulloch, S. (2013). Was Blind but Now I See: Animal Liberation Documentaries’ Deconstruction of Barriers to Witnessing Injustice. In A. Pick & G. Narraway (eds.), Screening Nature: Cinema Beyond the Human (pp. 110-126), New York: Berghahn Books.
  9. G’Sell, E. (2023). Anti-Speciesist Interiority? Jerzy Skolimowski’s Eo and the Limits of Human Imagination. The Hopkins Review, 16(2), 155-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/thr.2023.0055
  10. García Serrano, F. (2023). Eo, la fábula del asno y el cine de Jerzy Skolimowski. El puente rojo, 1-6. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/72374
  11. Hoffmeister, M. (2022). Towards an Ethics of Nearness: A Study on Cinema, Time and Animal Vitality. Doctoral thesis. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.
  12. Imanjaya, E., Amelia, A. & Meilani, M. (2021). Three “ecological monsters” in Bong Joon-Ho’s films. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 729. http://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/729/1/012103
  13. Jin, J. (2019). Making the Global Visible: Charting the Uneven Development of Global Monsters in Bong Joon-Ho’s Okja and Nacho Vigalondo’s Colossal. Comparative Literature and Culture, 21(7). http://doi.org/10.7771/1481-4374.3659
  14. Koilybayeva, B. (2023). On Animal Subjectivity in Contemporary US Cinema. Doctoral thesis. Prague: Univerzita Karlova.
  15. Lee, F. (2022). Bong Joon-ho’s Okja: Transatlantic Racism, Transpacific Capitalism, and Intimate Subversion. Polity, 55(1), 34-58. http://doi.org/10.1086/722726
  16. Lee, N. (2020). The Films of Bong Joon Ho. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
  17. Malamud, R. (2010). Animals on film: The Ethics of the Human Gaze. Spring, 83, 1-26.
  18. Malamud, R. (2017). “Creature Comforts”: Crafting a Common Language Across the Species Divide. In D. Ohrem & R. Bartosch (eds.), Beyond the Human-Animal Divide (pp. 77-94). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  19. Marzal, J. J. & Gómez Tarín, F. J. (2007). Interpretar un film. Reflexiones en torno a las metodologías de análisis del texto fílmico para la formulación de una propuesta de trabajo. In J. J. Marzal & F. J. Gómez Tarín (eds.), Metodologías de análisis del film (pp. 31-56). Madrid: Edipo.
  20. McMahon, L. (2019). Animal Worlds: Film, Philosophy and Time. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
  21. Mouton, M. R. (2023). Bête comme une âne. La prise en charge de la répresentation animale par le cinema. Alkemie, 32, 267-282.
  22. Oh, Y. (2022). Post-imperial spaces and alternative imaginaries of the human and nonhuman in Bong Joon Ho’s transnational films. Postcolonial Studies, 25(3), 417-432. http://doi.org/10.1080/13688790.2021.2018771
  23. Pick, A. (2011). Creaturely Poetics: Animality and Vulnerability in Literature and Film. New York: Columbia University Press.
  24. Pick, A. (2013). Some Small Discrepancy: Jean-Christophe-Bailly’s Creaturely Ontology, Journal of Animal Ethics, 3(2), 176-187. https://doi.org/10.5406/janimalethics.3.2.0163
  25. Pick, A. (2015). Animal Life in the Cinematic Umwelt. In M. Lawrence & L. McMahon (eds.), Animal Life and the Moving Image (pp. 221-237). New York: Columbia University Press.
  26. Pick, A. (2018). Vegan Cinema. In E. Quinn, E. & B. Westwood (eds.), Thinking Veganism in Literature and Culture. Towards a Vegan Theory (pp. 125–146). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  27. Porter, P. (2023a). Cow and Gunda. Society & Animals, 31(4), 561-565. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-bja10143
  28. Porter, P. (2023b). Eo, a Donkey’s Story. Society & Animals, 32(4), 451-453. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306
  29. -bja10149
  30. Reijnen, A. (2023). Luma and Gunda Stare Back: Integrating Non-human Animal Perspectives in the Ecofeminist Documentary. Animal Ethics Review, 3(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.31009/aer.2023.v3.i1.02
  31. Safit, I. (2014). Nature Screened: An Eco-Film-Phenomenology. Environmental Philosophy, 11(2), 211-235. https://doi.org/10.5840/envirophil201471011
  32. Schultz-Figueroa, B. (2022). Death by the Numbers: Factory Farms as Allegories in Cow and Gunda. Film Quarterly, 75(4), 47-57. https://doi.org/10.1525/fq.2022.75.4.47
  33. Skolimowski, J. (2023, 2 February). Jerzy Skolimowski on his surreal donkey drama Eo: “I took Bresson’s Au hasard Balthazar like a lesson from the old master”. Sight & Sound. Retrieved from https://www.bfi.org.uk/sight-and-sound/interviews/jerzy-skolimowski-donkey-drama-eo
  34. Uzuner, N. (2020). Bong Joon Ho, Okja (2017): Wounding the Feelings. Markets, Globalization & Development Review, 5(2), Article 7. http://doi.org/10.23860/MGDR-2020-05-02-07
  35. Von Uexküll, J. (2014 [1909]). Umwelt und Innenwelt der Tiere. Berlin: Springer.
  36. Yong, E. (2022). An Immense World: How Animal Senses Reveal the Hidden Realms Around Us. New York: Vintage Books.