Hi,
I'm currently writing a script and need some info...in the script, a hair (or perhaps feather) is going to be found at the scene of the crime, leading investigators to a house with a back room full of taxidermy.
The taxidermist in question is deceased, so has not mounted anything for over ten years. I'd like to know if there is any kind of material/chemical that might be found on this hair/feather, that would be peculiar to the way folks used to pratice taxidermy awhile ago?
Many thanks for any input,
Sharon
Return to Beginners Category Menu
are being presented.
Sorry go find another profession to pick on. How about a hispanic chicken plucker?
We try to be professional and yet writers want to keep us down.
Hey how about a screen play writter thats off the deep end!
Bite my ass sharon, u expect us to help u in makin a movie/book whatever the hell it is that is gonna degrade our buisness and demonize the ppl that practice this profession, pull ur haed out DEAR
But I'll answer your question in the hopes that SOME publicity is better than no publicity.
I'm sorry to report that you've picked a bad time frame. Not very much, from the chemical standpoint, has changed in the last 10 years. You'd have to go back at least 30 or 40 to find the telltale clues of arsenic, DDT, and a few others to make the plot intriguing. About 20 years ago endolan U, an insecticide, was also removed from the market. The mounts themselves might have worked as epoxy hide pastes weren't around a decade ago, but a hair or feather on the floor won't do you any good on that concept as well.
I think you're jumping to concussions.I dont see anything in Sharon's post that insinuates all taxidermist are serial killers or child molesters.Like it or not,a large portion of the general public views taxidermy as"creepy".She did'nt even say if the taxidrmist was the suspect in the story.Relax.
The lady is a writer for god's sake, its not like she's asking for some trade secret that is going to outlaw the art. It seems like I am always having to justify my trapping/hunting to some narrow minded "animal lover" who doesn't want to give me a chance. Look at the big picture before you start chewing peoples asses. Oh yeah, and when you do start, you could at least have the gumption to put your name behind what you say.
yep arsenic, borax, also boric acid
I love this site but the way "some" attack other people is getting out of hand , isnt it.
I know, i know, if i dont like it p..s-off.
But im not going to let a couple of angry taxo's ruin it for me.
Besides, everyone i know thinks of 'Norman Bates' when i mention what i like to do anyway, and nothing i say will ever change thier mind.
How do we know this is not some Peta person? Maybe going to mislead on what was is really being done?
Now, I know John C. has inhaled a little too much Epo-Grip fumes.
She's writing a play or a movie. She's not making a political statement. If she is, she is. But I can guarantee you if she didn't have a sour opinion of taxidermists before, she may now. A hispanic chicken-plucker? Is that a racial slur? If so, is that the image you want taxidermists to have?
This is a sad, sad thread . . .
Hi John & everyone,
The killer is not a taxidermist. However, the manner in which the killer is traced has to do with a friend of the family the killer drops in on a regular basis, who is elderly now, but who was once a hobbyist (which is why I'm interested in methods that may have been used 10-15 years ago, but aren't now). The cops traces the fiber evidence to this amateur hobbyist, finds a photo of the killer there (someone they'd previously interviewed, but dismissed as a suspect), and the script goes on from there. I really just wanted to use taxidermy as an interesting element of forensics -- the taxidermist himself is just a normal elderly guy, and doesn't figure prominently in the story other than what I described. The killer has taxidermy-related fiber evidence on him only becasue he visits his friend.
Sorry for confusion & thanks to everyone who responded (and also to those who defended me....)
Again--I meant no harm.
thanks,
sharon
P.S. looks like my idea of using 10-15 year old methods isn't going to work--perhaps there is a kind of animal I could use---one that was legal to mount awhile ago, but isn't now? (not sure why that would be, just a shot in the dark). or, perhaps there were certain animals were popular to mount awhile ago, but aren't so popular now?