Response to Berger, Baker, Haraway and Fudge
Baker
Thesis: We limit our viewpoint of animals through cultural stigmas and the various representations and uses of animals.
Baker writes, “Culture shapes our reading of animals just as much as animals shape our reading of culture” (Baker 4). Baker concludes with an interesting aspect of the human-animal relationship. We tend to limit our understanding of animals, not just through ourselves, but also through cultural stigmas. How we treat animals exhibits how we view ourselves and treat others. We tend to fall into this trap with our uses and representations of animals generally.
Baker hits on a similar capitalist idea as Berger. The mass commercialization of society has lead to a shift in our stance towards animals. Society forms them into stuff animals: property waiting to be owned and sold. This can help demonize animals and undermine our behavior. The example of the French citizens slaughtering and torturing cats for amusement assists in exemplifying the extreme ends of human behavior. The mentalité towards dehumanization enables animal abuse. Humanity must avoid its shortcomings to erase stigmas and prevent toxic behaviors against animals, and dogs. They aren't arguing for equality, just fair and decent treatment.
Berger
Thesis: Zoos show the degrading effects of human capitalism and imperialism on dogs. Humans implement their various forms of punishment on animals, akin to what they do themselves.
Berger introduces an interesting idea and concept to the human-animal relationship: the effects of capitalism are apparent within the animal kingdom. The construction of zoos is the foremost symbol of their underlying argument. The connection of the middle and lower classes to animals within public zoos additionally portrays the wealth gap and economic inequality pertinent in society. Our views on wealth and property coincide with the ownership of animals. Capitalism doesn't necessarily provide a positive effect on the well beings of animals- specifically dogs.
They then shift towards the material effects of zoos. The true inner spirit of the animal is controlled and crushed. Their lives are monotonous and the glassy attitude shines through their eyes. Speciesism and the true human viewpoint of our relationship protrude with zoos. We portray ourselves as the owner and superior in our interactions with animals. It almost becomes metaphorical reasoning of how we see ourselves as a result of capitalism.
Haraway
Thesis: Dogs matter and play a visual representation of social issues and within society.
Dogs Matter. A simple yet stunning argument that Haraway employs through their use of cyborgs and a near dystopian feel to their article. The different social issues that dogs help represent are shown through their interactions with humans. Showing and not telling is the strongest portion of the story, however, their writing was the longest, by far, and at some points very confusing. This can be disheartening towards their audience; only the truly invested will indulge the complete work. Chances are as well that those who are invested agree with a similar viewpoint as their thesis. This questions the effectiveness of the work and if it is truly revolutionary in highlighting the various aspects of the representation of dogs.
Fudge
Thesis: Humans suffer from a severe disconnect with animals and pets. We lack the perspective and understanding to describe the relationship adequately with animals on equal footing.
Fudge eludes to a similar point as Baker. Yet, they form a distinct argument. We have developed a lack of perspective to accurately describe the human relationship with animals. They write, “We construct animals as beings like us to show how powerful we are in our control over them and simultaneously we make it appear that our power is natural…” (Fudge 51). The power structure between animal and man exemplifies this human shortcoming. We can view animals from a human perspective but not from an animal viewpoint.
“Language after all is not only spoken” (Fudge 53). Humans focus on the speaking aspect in language, with minor cues to body language, expression, etc. Meanwhile, dogs and other animals cannot speak our tongue. This exhibits the disconnect and the main force behind it. We almost form a, "... surrogate human ..." (Fudge 39) when we speak about animals. The poodle is just like us: it has a daily routine, attends errand duties, and even sleeps with us. Humanity's frequent treatment of dogs as sub-human and ignoring their natural tendencies towards, well, being an animal, has devastating consequences on the dog and us. We aren't capable of treating dogs, and other animals, on equal footing if humans cannot recognize what it means to be a dog.
Conclusion
The four readings touched on different aspects of the human-animal relationship to form a social critique of how we behave and see the world as humans. The disconnect weakens our understanding of the animal. The effects of capitalism push our issues onto them. Our blindness hinders our ability to view the dog within a society. Finally, the cultural stigmas we form as a result of these factors, and many more, feature our main discrepancy. We disrespect and mistreat animals for what we are. This attitude isn't just harming dogs and animals- it degrades ourselves. The more poorly we view ourselves and treat others, the more inhuman we become.
Comments
Post a Comment