The major difference is the style of creative understanding which this story requires. The shift in this story is the realization that the occupant and viewer of the traditional zoo is switched in the intergalactic zoo of Professor Hugo. The ``animals'' in the cages are really the spectators; the cages are there to protect them from the barbaric ``creatures'' on the worlds they visit (including Earth). However, this is not as radical a concept shift as that seen in Men Are Different. The basic concept of ``zoo-ness'' is still correct, the roles have simply shifted around. Thus, this novel concept needs analogical mapping to be understood--the base is a normal concept of zoo and the target is the zoo concept as it is being used in the story.
When the story begins and the idea of the zoo is first referred to, ISAAC successfully retrieves the standard concept. This normal view of a zoo permits the understanding of the story concept and allows comprehension to occur for much of the story. Indeed, the predictions which would arise from the standard zoo concept will be fulfilled as the system reads the story. This is true until the last section of the story when the system is provided with fact that the ``animals'' in the zoo are sentient and believe themselves to be the viewers of the dangerous inhabitants of the various planets being visited. This triggers problem reformulation. A new concept of zoo is needed, but there is not another concept of zoo in the system's memory. At this point, memory retrieval has failed. But, analogical mapping will be successful due to the similarities which exist between the two zoo concepts. The role of the aliens (inside the cages) is functionally equivalent to the role of the viewers (outside the cages) in the standard concept. Thus, the system has two concepts of zoo at the end of the story--both the Earth people (and the other planetary inhabitants) and the aliens on Hugo's ship view themselves as the viewers of the zoo and the others as the ``dangerous'' creatures. One concept is consistent with one viewpoint; the other concept is suited for the other aspect.