So I also took Justin's survey because clicking a bunch of answers and getting an animal was much easier. And I got a tie for the results as a horse and a crow. It says "You are the Horse. You are powerful and fast. You value your freedom and like to keep yourself busy whenever possible" and "You are the Crow. You are able to discover your own character and help others find themselves as well. You are very creative in the field you are in and tend to be the intelligent one of the bunch."
I thought it was interesting and a relatively good read, particularly because I am a free soul and value intelligence. However, I had a general idea of what animal I was in my head and they weren't even possible choices here. If I picked my totem animal, I think it would either be a penguin or a monkey. The penguin is awkwardly cute, short and stocky. This is me. Also, the penguin believes in self-sacrifice for the benefit of his family. He enjoys being around others, but the penguin also appreciates his personal space. And finally, the penguin is clumsy and comical.
Penguins make me smile[1]
I also like the monkey because he is intelligent and a free soul. He travels in communities that care for each other and seems friendly. At least from my own personal experiences at the zoo, I've seen that monkeys do whatever they want. They make any space their own and disregard what other monkeys think about them. They are intelligent but use their brilliance to be mischievous. And most importantly, like monkeys, I like bananas. And showing my buttocks off.
In reading "The Miracle of Purun Bhagat" and "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi", I thought the theme of perception versus reality ran throughout. In the former, the Baghat that dies in the landslip is worshipped as a great holy man posthumously. Though "they worship there with lights and flowers and offerings to this day ... they do not know the saint of their worship is the late Sir Purun Dass ... once Prime Minister" (181-182). The people of the village know him only as a holy man, but had they known he was a powerful and highly educated Prime Minister, it surely would have changed the way they perceived him. In reality, he gave up much more to live the life of holiness, and this is reflected in the sacrifice of his own life to warn the villagers to get to higher ground.
The way other people see us isn't always the same with how we see ourselves [1]
In "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi", the perception of the mongoose is much different that the reality that is reflected by the views of the big man. Teddy's mother says shortly after interacting with Rikki, "Good gracious, and that's a wild creature! I suppose he's so tame because we've been kind to him" (88). However, the big man corrects her by saying that, "All mongooses are like that. If Teddy doesn't pick him up by the tail, or try to put him in a cage, he'll run in and out of the house all day long" (88). The reality of the situation is that Rikki is a friendly creature, and that mongooses are the natural predators of cobras. I also thought it was interesting that the family regarded Rikki as providence simply because they used him to protect their family. I suppose the animal is god-sent, but the family should realize that all animals are god-sent and should be treated with such love and care, not just because their natural instincts are beneficial to the family.
While reading these stories, it becomes apparent how unique Mowgli is to both man and animals. It is obvious that he has characteristics that qualify him in each society, but it proves difficult to distinguish whether he is more man or more animal. In "The King's Ankus", he shows both qualities in his interactions with Kaa, especially when they wrestle. Kaa "played carefully, and never loosed one-tenth of his power. Ever since Mowgli was strong enough to endure a little rough handling, Kaa had taught him this game, and it suppled his limbs as nothing else could" (236). The fact that Mowgli can learn from Kaa shows his unique ability to understand animals as a part of their society. Even the beginning of the story shows his acceptance into the culture because "Kaa never made fun of Mowgi any more, but accepted him, as the other Jungle People did" (235).
Animals wrestling [1]
A major contributing factor to his inclusion as a Jungle Person was his ability to communicate to many of the animals. Mowgli continually has dialogue with wolves, snakes, bears and tigers. The power of language is prevalent in these stories as Mowgli is the only character that can communicate to both animals and humans. This can be seen in "Tiger-Tiger" when it is stated that "It was not for fun that he had learned while he was with the wolves to imitate the challenge of bucks in the jungle and the grunt of the little wild pig. So, as soon as Messua pronounced a word Mowgli would imitate it almost perfectly, and before dark he had learned the names of many things in the hut" (50). Here, Mowgli understands the usefulness of language and quickly learns how to communicate with village people other than the simple gestures he uses in the beginning of the story to show he is hungry. In this sense, it is easy to see the differences between man and animal independent of their actions. The depiciton of what qualifies each as animalistic and human is a completely different story based on actions, but for language it is clear. And for Mowgli, his ability to bridge both barriers shows his inclusion in each realm.
Mowgli's got some power[2]
I have a friend that works at the Rosetta Stone stands in the mall, and it's basically the same concept. By equipping ourselves with knowledge to speak other languages, we are giving ourselves power to be a part of their culture and society. She's been trying to convince me to purchase a language by discussing the opportunity cost in doing so. The price of $500 to learn a language is a bargain if you think about how valuable it would be to talk fluently to my grandparents in the only language they speak, Tagalog. Improving my power for a lifetime is priceless, and proves true for Mowgli. Here is the Top 10 Reasons to Learn a Language taken from the Rosetta Stone website.
Even in the Philippines, there are several languages with the 2 main ones having unique differences that create language barriers. The following video shows how these barriers create problems and very strong opinions about language and culture associated with that.
In examining philosophical ethics, it is important to keep the 3 types of ethics it concerns in mind. The first, metaethics, determines the nature of moral concepts and judgments through a logical or rational scope. The second, normative ethics, looks into how humans should act, or simply, what is right and wrong. And the final area, applied ethics, is the application and practice of these theories to major issues of concern, which in this case is animal humanities. I have recently had an opportunity to examine and practice my own philosophical ethics when I took a trip to the Houston Livestock and Rodeo this past spring break.
For the past 3 years, I have thoroughly enjoyed mindless entertainment at the Houston Rodeo by watching bull-riding, wrangling, concerts, playing amusement park games, and stuffing myself sick with fair food. It wasn’t until after I enrolled in Dr. Bump’s class and watching Earthlings that I stopped to think about all the different aspects that go into running such an event and suddenly became disgusted with myself.
As was our routine, the livestock exhibits were the first stop for the day, and they were also the first instance in which I began to see the inhumanity shown towards these animals. The sheer fact that this was called a livestock exhibit began to unsettle my stomach! The first exhibit I saw when I walked in was a demonstration of a cow being milked.
Not even enough room to move[1]
The idea of subjecting a living being to such a demonstration was completely illogical and helped shape my metaethics through logic. This poor cow was confined by large bars and given only enough room to stand, while her udders were hooked up to a machine that automatically milked her. Never in a million years would another human pressure a lactating mother to demonstrate how breast milk is pumped, nonetheless force her to do such a thing. When I thought about how this cow could barely move, I immediately connected this illogical idea with how obviously inhumane it was when the Nazis transported Jews to concentration camps and packed them so tightly that they too, could not even sit down. It was even more irrational that after the presentation was over, the milk was poured out without being used! Sickened, I walked only a few feet more to see a Borden stand with a live version of Elsie, the poster-cow of the company. She was forced to wear a decorative costume, and just like the cow being milked, could not move.
Depressed "Elsie" in "her place"[2]
The sad part is that she had plenty of room to move around, but it seemed like she had no desire to do anything but lie there and wait for the garb to be removed.
Close by, our own school mascot, a longhorn, was being subjected to the same kind of treatment. As can be seen in the picture, the tips of his horns have a green tint.
Green horns?[3]
The employee standing by pointed out that it was paint rubbing off from the rails in front of him, but said so in a manner that suggested it was because of the longhorn’s strength, not because of his lack of room. An old woman who overheard the employee exclaimed that this was “neat”, which pointed out that some people choose not to see what can logically be justified as what is ethically wrong (normative ethics). In a sense, I think people so often do this because they don’t consider animals a part of society. However, Utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham suggested that “the capacity to feel pain, not the power of reason, entitled a being to moral consideration” and “that cruelty to animals was analogous to slavery.”[4] Author Greg Garrard agrees that “The Utilitarian ‘principle of equality’ states that everyone is entitled to equal moral considerations, irrespective of family, race, nation or species.”[5] In the scope of a utilitarian society, people that ignore injustices to animals like this longhorn are ignoring these animals the right to be considered a part of society. Derrida agrees that “No one can deny the suffering, fear or panic, the terror or fright that humans witness in certain animals” [6] and that this suffering qualifies those animals to be considered.
My girlfriend and I were scheduled to watch a famous country singer perform immediately after the rodeo and livestock events for the day, as is typical for all the concerts at the rodeo. However, at this point I no longer wanted to go because applied ethics. If I really believed that these animals deserved better treatment based on a utilitarian philosophy, then how could I knowingly support the rodeo by allowing myself to attend the concert. The more I walked around, the more I started to believe I had to apply these ethics in this situation. I saw more unethical exhibits such as birthing stations for pigs and chickens, sheep that were identified by the tags stapled in their ears, and petting zoos.
Painful, just like branding [7]
When I went to take a picture of the animals in cages at the petting zoo, I thought it was ironic that a group of kids were stuck in the exit gate and one was crying because she was scared. If only the supporters of the livestock exhibits could see how similar it was for a scared baby kangaroo to be trapped in a cage with a goat!
Animals in a cage [8]
Humans in a cage [9]
If humans caged up children like this and made other people pay to feed and pet them, it would be unquestionably unethical. But just because animals are a different species, then that makes it okay to turn the ethical cheek? As can be seen with the joey, some of these animals were taken far from their natural habitats and forced to live in a designated area with a designated lifestyle. Though it took several decades to realize this and compensate for it, the founders of our country did the same thing to the Native Americans. Maybe one day I’ll see animals gain special privileges as a way to repay them for their suffering.
Another logical question that the livestock exhibits pointed out dealt with economics. If the attractions that gross so much monetary profit are so heavily focused on these animals, then why are the animals not treated better? Because it is not fair to assume they are treated poorly when not on display (which I doubt), by just looking at the conditions they face while they are on display is absolutely appalling.
Prices to take a picture with this steed [10]
Looking at this example alone, if a group of 5 wants to take and buy a picture then it would be $14, $12 for the 4x6 and $2 for an additional person. If 3 more groups of 5 want the same deal and it only takes a total of 30 minutes, then that would mean this longhorn would make $70 and $140 in an hour. Imagine how much they could make in a day and how much of that actually goes to the care for the longhorn. Investing more money to create larger work spaces would be a start. If we imagined that these animals are in fact doing a job, they should be paid for going to work. Instead of investing the money that they make in better work and living conditions, they are given just enough food and shelter to live. This picture of a live merry-go-round shows how close the ponies must walk to each other.
Live merry-go-round[11]
Even if a pony wanted to, he couldn’t stop and move away to defecate due to the restraints. Instead, they would simply keep on working and do so on the run, right into the face of another worker. If these were humans, people wouldn't hesitate to file a report for working for less than minimum wage and health violations in the workplace. I once worked with a girl who filled a complaint that the mall bathrooms weren't private enough and that all stores should have at least one personal lavatory!
I couldn’t bring myself to watch the opening acts of the rodeo, but instead elected to walk around the outdoor exhibits. I soon realized I had made a terrible choice because the outdoor shows were exactly like a children’s version of the rodeo. Pig races where the emcee encouraged children and adults to cheer for a numbered pig, an eclectic group of farm animals subjected to do tricks, and even a type of sheep riding for children called “Mutton-Bustin." I couldn’t believe that just a year ago, I enjoyed these shows and never thought about how the animals felt.
Pig races [12]
Tricks show [13]
Mutton Bustin[14]
The only thing I had left that could possibly be enjoying from the previous year was food, and that would quickly change. I knew there was no way I could enjoy the food after seeing this grill.
Murderer[15]
Now not only are animals unnecessarily put to work, but they are also mass murdered for sausage-on-a-stick and turkey legs. Soon after seeing this, I left the fair grounds disgusted and began to think about how to work towards making things ethically right. In order to apply ethics properly, I think the first step is awareness. As in my own case, once I was educated and my eyes were opened, it wasn’t hard to experience how much suffering went into the rodeo. Author Goleman says that “empathy builds on self-awareness; the more open we are to our own emotions, the more skilled we will be in reading feelings” [16]. As we read the feelings of suffering animals like one ones depicted here, it is easier to understand that their treatment is unethical and that something should be done about it.
As for action against the rodeo, I think it would be easier to view the rodeo apart from the monetary profit that comes from it. Nearby gas stations, restaurants, hotels, and parking lots get some of their best business during rodeo season, and if there could be another humane event that would bring the same economic boom to the city, then it would be much easier to just take it retire it completely. With the implementation of stricter animal rights laws, these logical justifications for the rodeo’s dissolution would certainly expedite the process. A John Mayer song entitled "Waiting on the World to Change" has the same message: that there are unethical problems that we face in the world, and unless we do become active about it, we will just have to wait for the world to change which is highly unlikely.
Without quotes and captions: 1,617 With quotes and captions: 1,733
1. Houston Livestock and Rodeo, personal picture. 2. ibid. 3. ibid. 4. Greg Garrard, Egocriticism, (London: Fourth Estate Limited, 1993), 136. 5. ibid, 137. 6. Jacques Derrida, “The Animal That Therefore I am (Following)”, (Chicago: Critical Inquiry, 2002), 11. 7. Houston Livestock and Rodeo, personal picture. 8. ibid. 9. ibid. 10. ibid. 11. ibid. 12. Houston Livestock and Rodeo, personal video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgnGlTy_xFQ&feature=channel_page. 13. Houston Livestock and Rodeo, personal picture. 14. Houston Livestock and Rodeo, personal video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFShUdhRseI&feature=channel_page. 15. Houston Livestock and Rodeo, personal picture. 16. D. Goleman, The Roots of Empathy, (Bantam Books, 1996), 96.
In part 3, Black Beauty is sold to Jerry and appropriately renamed Jack. I can think of at least 2 reasons the name is fitting for the artist formerly known as Black Beauty. Up to this point, Black Beauty has been tried in 2 parks, as a job horse, and now as a cab horse, all at which he excelled. And so naturally, our first pun emerges making Black Beauty a "Jack of all trades." The second part of the figure of speech, "master of none", is yet another pun. This one is rather easy though, as its obvious that Black Beauty could not possibly be a master of anyone or anything, as he is definitely the servant in every case.
Men mastering control of a horse [1]
The second layer of the pun lies in economics. As I recall from basic history, trading became possible through specialization, which eventually blossomed into capitalism. Economically, if you were the only or the best person at a skill, you could charge more because supply of that skill would be low, and demand would be high. For a Jack of all trades that is a master of none, Jack is left in the middle as the working class, doing the same labor for cheaper pay. So the kicker is that when Black Beauty adopts his new name from his working class owner Jerry, he is also adopting Jerry's social class. The life of some of these horses is difficult with having to deal with inconsiderate customers and negligent drivers. But for all, the horses and their drivers face long and hard days in harsh working conditions. For those drivers that own their horses, they had the opportunity to work less. But for those that did not own their horses, they had to work even harder and faster to make ends meet, often at the expense of their rented horses. Jack shows the differences within the working class when he says, "I should say that for a cab horse, I was very well of indeed; my driver was my owner, and it was his interest to treat me well, and not overwork me" (165) while pointing out that other horses weren't so lucky. Seedy Sam is a prime example of how hard it can be when his dying words are "I never had a Sunday's rest" (168).
Working class horse and human [2]
Treating injured animals at the rodeo [2.5]
Though Jerry and Jack share the same well-off working class and similar, admirable traits, they differ in the simple fact that one is human and the other is an animal. It's sad and unfair that when Black Beauty has knee problems caused by injuries from man, he loses prestige, dignity and a better quality of life for several years. But when Jerry is permanently injured from sickness caused by man, he finds himself in a circumstance that his daughter describes as "there never was anything so beautiful" (193). In a new home in the country and an easier job, Jerry now finds himself in a wonderful life with his family. Jack did not find the same happiness in retirement immediately, but instead admits, "This was heavy news for me, for I was not young now and could not look for any improvement in my condition" (193). Fortunately, because this story has a happy ending, the parallels of Jerry and Jack stay true when Black Beauty finally finds peace on the countryside with good owners.
Joe Green waiting for Black Beauty [3]
On a side note, I thought it would be fun to look at other reasons Jack is an appropriate name for Black Beauty by looking at famous Jacks.
Injured doing manual labor [4]
Jack from Titanic faced ridicule for being in the working class [5]
This screams blue-collar [6]
Used by man to lift heavy objects [7]
Captain Jack Sparrow faced terrible work conditions [8]
I absolutely love puns and after reading peoples' posts about this novel coming straight from the horses mouth, I chuckled. But when I thought about it a little more while reading the part 1, I thought that it was actually really appropriate, especially during Chapter 6 - "Liberty". At this point in the novel, I was completely into it and forgot for a second that this is actually a human writing in the voice of a horse. Then I realized how similar this chapter would be if I wrote a story in the voice of a horse for others to read.
Horses can be happy too [1]
When Black Beauty asks himself "What more could I want? Why, liberty!" (22), I thought immediately about my dogs. I know I'm not a terrible father for my dog Milo, but I also know I could do better. On those long, terrible days I have at school and work when I come home too tired to play with him I believe he would think like when Black Beauty says, "Sometimes, when I have had less exercise than usual, I have felt so full of life and spring, that when John has taken me out to exercise, I really could not keep quiet; do what I would" (22). He also says "It was a great treat to us to be turned out into the Home Paddock or the old orchard. The grass was so cool and soft to our feet; the air so sweet, and the freedom to do as we liked was so pleasant" (23). So when I thought about Milo and how he gets jittery after being by himself all day, I thought about the times when I was able to bring him out into nature and let him play for hours. On his one year birthday, I threw a party for him and his other dog friends. We went to Zilker's dog friendly section and let them run around while we grilled, flew kites and threw around some frisbees. I have never seen so many dogs simultaneously pass out when we were leaving the park. Milo must have ran around non-stop for at least 2 hours. When I think about Milo being as happy as Black Beauty when he gets the liberty to do as he pleases, I definitely think that I would write this chapter the way Sewell does.
Odie, Anh and Rupert
Happy Birthday buddy.
Outdoor fun for everyone
Cleaning Milo's face
However, when I thought even longer, I realized that if I was the horse, and I was writing in my own voice as a horse, it would be completely different. There would definitely be a significant amount of swearing, sarcasm, and a hint of sass. I would be furious with having to live a certain way, especially after seeing what it is like to be free. When Black Beauty talks about being stabled and strapped up, he simply says that "I am not complaining for I know it must be so" (22). It just seems like this chapter is too much rainbows and butterflies for my liking. I mean, I get that these animals have things provided for them that helps them live comfortably, but does it make it okay to them that we take away their liberties? I think not. I know that when I was a kid, I always tried to find my way around things that "must be so" and often times I did get around them. I just wish I knew exactly what my dog was thinking. But I guess that would make it all too easy.
Rainbows and butterflies[2]
Like this video, I think we associate nice, cutesy voices to our animals to make ourselves feel better. When we do this, we don't really have to think about how horrible it has to be to be walked on a leash or ridden around like Black Beauty. With that being said, I think Sewell's novel is interesting in that it uses the voice of a horse, but I think it could be even more effective if Black Beauty was a little more opinionated. Let's hear what you really have to say, Black Beauty.
As an avid aficionado of professional basketball, this second section had some huge parallels to the NBA that I felt necessary to point out. Both Black Beauty and veterans of the league share the same mistreatment in common. Usually, once a player has passed his prime (even if he once was an All-star), he immediately becomes trade bait. Often times, these wily vets that understand the game and have experience are put on the trading block to trade for healthier, younger athletes. Growing up in Dallas, I follow the Mavericks religiously. A good example of this is Jerry Stackhouse, a shooting-guard who once won the 6th man of the year award in 2005-2006, the year we made it into the championship. Now with a wave of younger and injury free players, Stackhouse finds himself on the bench with little to no playing time. When I read Black Beauty and saw the way he was treated after being injured, I quickly connected the two. Black Beauty says, "I was turned into a small meadow for a month or two; no other creature was there, and though I enjoyed the liberty and the sweet grass, yet I had been so long used to society that I felt very lonely" (108). Shortly after, Ginger joins him because "she had been ruined by hard riding, and was now turned off to see what rest would do" (108). After being in the spotlight for such a long time in his career, Stackhouse has to be experiencing the same feelings of Black Beauty. All injured players or veterans in the NBA face the same hardships as this. They are expected to be loyal to their organizations when resigning contracts, but once they get injured or too old to produce, they are shown no loyalty in return. Horses are shown the same treatment as injured players as can be seen by Black Beauty's owner: "the black one, he must be sold; 'tis a great pity, but I could not have knees like these in my stables" (109).
Stackhouse riding the bench at a game [1]
The discontent of older players in the NBA can be seen in this article on Stackhouses role with the Mavs. He says, "The teams that make sense for me are close and need a veteran, some toughness and a guy that knows how to win big games. Hopefully we can find that, but if not I'll be here in the same role I've been in: continuing to encourage the young guys. That's what the team has been asking me to do. It's just that I feel I could serve a better role somewhere else." [2] The article continues to say that "Stackhouse wasn't angry. He's not demanding a trade. He just feels he still has something left, and he doesn't fit in the new Mavericks' offensive scheme." If it were me though, I would be extremely upset. This guy was a vital part of our team in the development of the franchise into a succesful powerhouse and the only thing we can show him in return is that if we can develop younger athletes at the expense of him, then that's OK? I say that's horse shit.
In the same vein of professional sports, I was reading an article in a magazine (that I can't find online anywhere) about a man who started a ranch with his wife for retired race horses. Apparently, after race horses get injured or are past their prime, they are put down. These horses win people hundreds of thousands of dollars, and once they are hurt, they pay to have them permanently retired. What has happened to loyalty, people? This wonderful old man and his wife would purchase these thoroughbreds, and nurse them back to being healthy. The ranch was spotlighted on ESPN's Sportscenter when a blind and dying child's wish was to meet one of the most prestigious race horses ever. He got to pet this horse, and I think was allowed to ride him around. Just like Stackhouse, this horse along with these horses have become forgotten champions.
Petting an old champion race horse [3]
In an extreme light, these injured veterans can face an even harsher light such as Black Beauty. When he was sold, he said that "in this place I was to get my experience of all the different kinds of bad and ignorant driving to which we horses are subjected" and that he "was oftener let out to the ignorant drivers than some of the other horses, because I could be depended upon" (111). Instead of being shown loyalty for these admirable traits, Black Beauty was exploited and given to ignorant drivers. One of his drivers even goes on to say that "He's a hired horse ... I don't know what's the matter with him, but it's a great shame to send out a lame beast like this" (113). I feel sorry for professional atheletes, both human and animals alike. It's just unfair to treat these earthlings with strictly business like manners. These are living beings and should not be subjected to these feelings of abandonment and worthlessness. They are much more than what they are good at and to send them packing to hit the road is a very cruel punishment.
