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.