Dogs in Film
We take a shift, a drastic one, to the modern era. Photography and film find themselves as new and popular mediums for art. Even with this new shift, literary traditions remain similar, or the same. Humans find modern metaphors derived from the past, subtly adjusting with time. Although, most traditions die hard: so does humanity's representation of dogs.
The satire and dry humor throughout the film are atypical to most films with animals. In A Dog's Purpose, the purpose of the dog is to exhibit people's emotional relationships and the ensuing pain from loss. The actual tragedy doesn't focus on the dog's death as well; it focuses on how mankind copes and grieves. Similar themes are found in Bambi and Charlotte's Webb, where animals are used as a tool to teach emotion. The usage of dogs, and animals, in humor and satire, is rarer.
In the film Best in Show, we find a continuation of some similar themes from the past. Even with dogs, and dog shows, being the main focus of the film, the dogs still become side characters. The main focus is on humans and our human-centered thinking. This is a continuation of past views on human-animal relationships.
The dogs become side characters; akin to Baroque art they are there to emphasize a point. The dogs in the show showcase how naive and overdramatic the dog owners are. Emotionally unstable, they are unable to take control of their lives. They instead hamper over their dog, living their lives vicariously through their animals. The canine's collective stable mood is a stark contrast from the chaos surrounding the show.
The movie becomes a social critique. The historical roots of a capitalistic system that enables the upper classes to have pets are pertinent in today's society. Delving through political and social traditions showcases what the middle and lower classes see as foreign and pointless. The subjugation of dogs as a handbag accessory is extremely apparent. It all showcases how society influences animals, and how society and animals will influence culture overall.
While the movie makes fun of stereotypes, I believe it's beneficial. The commentary frequently degrades lesbian and gay people through stereotypes and commentary. The sexist side comments rummage through the film. The human-centric views about animals ring through the way the owners talk to people. The blatant racist and anti-immigrant side commentary are bizarre.
Once you weave past the movie's shortcomings, you realize it's all part of the social critique. Society has evolved to the point where animals and slurs can be used as literary symbolism. One that criticizes the posh and snobby nature of dogs shows. One that criticizes the sheltered, egotistical stereotypes of the wealthy. One that criticizes the demonic nature of our treatment of animals.
This film isn't going to win an Oscar. Nevertheless, it helps portray humanity's evolving relationship with animals. It also has some pretty decent actresses, including Jane Lynch and Jennifer Coolidge. While societal practices change, traditions remain relatively stable. Working our way through the everlasting literary critique of ourselves, through the use of animals, is far from over. If people could effectively work through our problems, we probably wouldn't undertake art, literature, and film.
Comments
Post a Comment