Regarding Animals (Animals, Culture, & Society) [Paperback]

Regarding Animals, by Arnold Arluke and Clinton Sanders, explores the special symbiosis that exists between human animals and non-human animals. Theirs is a sociological exploration navigated by their skills in ethnography that ventures them into cultural frontiers seldom seen and therefore left uncharted by sociological experts. For Arluke and Sanders, fieldwork took place wherever human-animal interaction was likely to occur, "the pet store, circus, riding stables, and countless other settings where animals play a part" (p. 19). This interaction united them with "exotic tribes" they identified as "pet owners, veterinarians, animal trainers, slaughterhouse workers, mounted policemen, and any other group that works with or cares for animals..." (p. 19). Arluke and Sanders attempt to record what was happening in these places and to articulate the meanings that animals have for people. Traditional sociological ethnography was the framework utilized for the authors' research. Their job as sociologists was to identify some of the social forces that are behind the inconsistent treatment of animals and to show how they work. Their ultimate goal was to convincingly argue the merits of sociological analysis in popular and scholarly discussions about animals in Western cultures. The purpose of Regarding Animals is to dissect how humans regard animals in modern Western societies.

The book's format divides its discourse into two sections. Part one, "The Human-Animal Tribe," discusses a myriad of issues ranging from studying the social construction of animals to understanding ethnography to recognizing the existence of the non-human animal "mind." Particularly striking was Arluke and Sanders' rhetoric on social constructs. They regard the social construction of animals to be the meanings that animals have for cultures, and, consequently, determine them to be dependent upon the variables of place and time. Then, after a discussion of the criticisms of ethnography, the authors move on to the animal "mind," which can only be described as a modern paradigm drama. Arluke and Sanders testify to the "mind's" existence, and consequently refute conventional positivistic assumptions by reasoning that the animal "mind" is capable of more than just capricious, instinctual thought response.

In the next section, Living with Contradiction, ethnography plays a key role. The authors infiltrate the world of animal shelter workers, animal trainers, primate labs, and the history of Nazi Germany. The chapter entitled The Sociozoologic Scale was particularly compelling. The scale ranks animals "according to how well they seem to `fit in' and play the roles they are expected to play in society" (p. 169). Arluke and Sanders deduce that society constructs good animals and bad animals. They discuss the latter as being characterized as freaks, vermin, and demons. Good animals, characterized as pets and tools, included minority groups that, according to the majority's perspective, seem to accept their subordinate role in society and are patronizingly treated like children. This same society has a tendency to treat pets and children very similarly. Therein, the authors infer that this is the reason why society finds it easy to dehumanize minorities like women, blacks, children, the elderly, and the mentally challenged to the status of animal when using descriptive language about them. The discussion on animals as valued tools was also very compelling. Here they recalled the infamous Tuskegee experiment where more than four hundred blacks were unknowingly infected with syphilis and subjected to forty years of suffering with no treatment. These people were dehumanized to the subhuman level of a tool or guinea pig.

The only fault of Regarding Animals lies in some of the excerpts used from interviews. The responses appear staged. And, although I am convinced that people would feel these things, I only question the lack of vernacular used by those respondents who talk about their pet.

Regarding Animals takes an informative yet critical look at society's relationship with animals. They expose the "constant paradox" (p. 4) defined as the consistent inconsistency of human's emotions toward animals, like advocating the vivisection of a dog as long as it was not their pet. Arluke and Sanders' fieldwork gives the reader access to places, like research laboratories and veterinary hospitals, that permit a broader understanding of our four legged friends that we worship and who sometimes worship us.

Subcultures like pet owners, veterinary personnel, and breeders have always had a greater perspective of the dynamics of human-animal symbiosis. It is only within the crucible of academe that the "mind," social influence, and the pragmatics of animals have been omitted from discussions. Arnold Arluke and Clinton Sanders are determined to increase our knowledge and question our values regarding animals. This book is an asset to anyone interested in deconstructing myths we have made that separate us from the wet nosed companion nestled by our feet.