Meh. I might have liked this when I was a James Patterson-loving teenager. It's just not my style anymore, but it's not exactly at the height of its gMeh. I might have liked this when I was a James Patterson-loving teenager. It's just not my style anymore, but it's not exactly at the height of its genre, either. I think the world is seriously hard up for "bad ass" female characters when a series like this becomes inexplicably popular. I'd rather read Carol O'Connell's Kathy Mallory novels--it's basically the same character, right?...more
I'm torn between one star and two. I would have given it a two just because the author seems to be making steps similar to those of Michael Pollan--"hI'm torn between one star and two. I would have given it a two just because the author seems to be making steps similar to those of Michael Pollan--"humane" meat, eating less meat, etc. And although the author seems to be conflicted with his own choices, I feel that these steps could make a difference if enough people adopted them. Would I much rather the guy be vegan? Well, duh, but that's not the world we live in. If this book manages to convince someone to even CONSIDER the moral implications of food, then that's progress, right?
However, I have to say he destroyed his credibility with me rather early on: at the point in which he states that Hitler was a vegetarian, to be exact. He neglects to mention documentation from various sources--one being Hitler's chef--that refutes this (unless you're one of those special people who think that vegetarians eat sausage, game, grouse, and caviar). He only cited one source to support it; I'm surprised it wasn't vegetariansareevil.com.
He would also like to link vegetarianism with anorexia (I WISH! Wouldn't that solve all my problems?*) and bulemia. (How this has ANYTHING to do with the relationship between animals and people is beyond my understanding--and I'm guessing it's beyond the author's as well. Does liking animals put you at a higher risk for an eating disorder?!? Instead of discussing his field of "expertise," his writing derails into an attempt to discredit vegetarianism as "dangerous.")
*This is a joke in bad taste; deal with it.
For someone who makes a career out of studying the relationships between animals and people, he seems as misguided and confused as anyone else. It's sad to see someone justify cockfighting by saying it's more humane than the way chickens are treated on factory farms.
"Karen Davis tells me that no chicken in the world would want to live the life of a fighting rooster. I'll lay 25-20 that she is wrong." (P 170)
I'm sure some people would rather be stabbed to death than be placed in a concentration camp for their entire lives, but that doesn't justify either action. (And no, I'm not equating human suffering and animal suffering; these are just analogous situations.)
"The war on cockfighting is about cruelty, but the subtext is social class. The eighteenth century movement against blood sports was directed toward activities that appealed to the proletariat, such as bull-baiting and cockfighting, rather than the cruel leisure pursuits of the landed gentry, such as fox-hunting. It's no different today. Cockfighters come from easy groups to pick on--Hispanics and rural, working-class whites. Animal activists, on the other hand, tend to be urban, middle-class, and well-educated. They dismiss rooster fighters as a motley group of shit-kickers and illegal aliens."
What a fucking generalization. Last time I checked every animal activist I know is against blood sport of ANY kind and probably even more resentful of those undertaken by the wealthy (ahem, trophy hunting). Perhaps it seems otherwise simply because the wealthy have lobbyists to protect their interests and so animal activists gain a lot less ground. I would also like to point out (just for the fuck of it) that I come from a rural family. I'm also currently vegan while making $8 an hour at a part-time job where I work less than ten hours a week. I don't pay rent, but I do manage to buy my groceries with money left for gas and general waste (concerts, dining out, the occasional shiny object, etc.) and so it irks me a bit when people dismiss animal concerns as something left to people who can "afford" to care. As I stated before, bravo to the author for buying meat from free-range, organic, grass-fed farms instead of factory farms(!), but honestly, touting this option as a solution for everyone comes across as the ignorance of the wealthy and "well-educated" middle- to upper- class. (Thanks to the author's picture on the back cover I can now envision him giving Michael Pollan a well-deserved reach-around.)
He mentions how people frame questions and situations to mislead and yet he's guilty of exactly this. His foray into animal research mentions nothing of the alternatives to animal research. You're either for torturing animals to save lives or against--never mind that we may just be beyond the necessity of such experiments. "Yes, I would swap a million mice to wipe out Dengue. In a heartbeat. But a million mice for a treatment for baldness? Or erectile dysfunction? Hmm...probably not." While that's a lovely sentiment, why is someone's desire for a hard cock any less important than someone else's desire to consume animal flesh for the sake of TASTE? Well, if a guy has less cholesterol blocking his arteries, he might have less trouble getting blood flow down there, but that's not the point. The point is: why draw the "moral high ground" between the desire for vanity or sex and the desire for taste?
At the end of the book, Mr. Herzog is content with not particularly understanding "why it's so hard to think straight about animals." He doesn't seem like a bad guy, just very confused for someone who dedicated an entire book to a question he doesn't answer. I'd suggest he read Why We Love Dogs, Eat Pigs, and Wear Cows by Melanie Joy... since she actually fulfills the promise of explaining the contradictions we feel towards animals.
Let me reiterate a third time: I WOULD RATHER SOMEONE EAT MEAT FROM A FREE-RANGE, ORGANIC FARM THAN FROM A FACTORY FARM. I WOULD RATHER SOMEONE REDUCE MEAT INTAKE RATHER THAN THROW THEIR HANDS UP IN DEFEAT AND DO NOTHING AT ALL, but what I don't see the need for is another book, echoing Michael Pollan's sentiments without adding any more clarity or understanding to the issue. I take a chapter titled "Why Is Meat So Tasty?" as seriously as I do t-shirts that proclaim "If we're not supposed to eat animals, then why are they made of meat?" At least other books that lean towards animal-welfare reforms instead of animal-rights lend the issue the gravity it deserves....more
Pretty much fluff... except I guess I'm supposed to take it seriously just because the cliched hookup--we're opposites, we hate each other, let's fuckPretty much fluff... except I guess I'm supposed to take it seriously just because the cliched hookup--we're opposites, we hate each other, let's fuck--doesn't occur within the confines of the book. It may as well have "TO BE CONTINUED" written on the last page though because, of course, they're going to fuck. When this is adapted into a Lifetime movie, they'll fuck....more
Worth a read/recommendation for anyone curious about the ethical implications of their eating habits, but doesn't want to be condemned for sometimes cWorth a read/recommendation for anyone curious about the ethical implications of their eating habits, but doesn't want to be condemned for sometimes choosing convenience over ethical considerations.
If you've already decided being vegan isn't for you, then at the very least, this book will debunk some common labeling misconceptions as well as assist you in opting out of factory farmed meat and fish that has been caught in a completely unsustainable manner.
There's also an interesting look into whether or not eating locally is an ethical decision, and it's far more complicated than I had realized....more
It had a promising start, but I was glad to be done with it. That in itself isn't a good sign since it's a relatively short book (under 300 pages), buIt had a promising start, but I was glad to be done with it. That in itself isn't a good sign since it's a relatively short book (under 300 pages), but felt much longer. Other than the soldier's perspective (and geez, it really gets drawn out), the novel doesn't feel like it is set in the 1950s.
The format--switching back and forth between different character POVs every few pages--felt a bit worn out thanks to having recently read Bloodroot. There are so many times when it became unbearably redundant and I would have to stop myself from skimming. This was especially true of Termite's chapters, which, for the most part, rehashed exactly what was just told from Lark's perspective. (The only difference was his interpretation gave me a headache more often than not.)
I felt like the best parts of book were early on and the last half of the book was used to spell out every little detail that had already been implied well enough.
There are some interesting sexual scenes I wasn't expecting though. One involved a young boy encouraging a girl to bleed into his hands while she was on her period. Sweet....more
I think this book would be a great start for anyone interested in losing weight. Unlike a lot of diet books, the recipes included are very short, withI think this book would be a great start for anyone interested in losing weight. Unlike a lot of diet books, the recipes included are very short, with ingredients not too difficult to find. I didn't get a chance to try out any of the recipes because I checked this out from the library in NC and will be headed back to FL soon; however, the simplicity of the recipes was appealing. They aren't too intimidating for new cooks or people cooking on a budget.
I definitely want to try some of these recipes in the future and incorporate them into my diet, although I don't know if I could go completely without oil in my diet on a permanent basis. Maybe long enough to lose some weight, but I'd cheat every Sunday during the buffet at Loving Hut.
(Note: this book isn't strictly vegan--a few recipes have optional honey and some of the variations include adding chicken or shrimp for people who try the less committed diet plan--but it isn't advertised as a vegan diet, either. It's plant-strong. On the plus side, it does discuss the negative health aspects of eating meat, eggs, and dairy--as well as refined and processed foods.)...more
Since I checked this out from the library, I only had time to make one recipe. I tried the red velvet cupcakes, but I wasn't crazy about it because ofSince I checked this out from the library, I only had time to make one recipe. I tried the red velvet cupcakes, but I wasn't crazy about it because of the spelt flour. Apparently gluten-free baking is an acquired taste. It might have helped if I had been able to make the icing to go along with it, but I couldn't find any dry soy milk powder in any stores. I may come back to this book in the future and give it another try. Right now it's just not economically feasible for me to spend so much on ingredients when the end result feels like a gamble....more
I only had time to make two recipes (corn fritters & rainbow rice) but both were delicious, simple, and affordable. I adore the book's layout. The ingI only had time to make two recipes (corn fritters & rainbow rice) but both were delicious, simple, and affordable. I adore the book's layout. The ingredients are conveniently listed on the side panel and every recipe includes a gorgeous photo to let you know what your food should look like. Any steps that may pose a small challenge are also depicted in pictures. I liked this book very much. :)...more
I'm not sure why it seems I'm reading about old white men lusting after young women often. It just worked out that way. The narrator here is Nathan ZuI'm not sure why it seems I'm reading about old white men lusting after young women often. It just worked out that way. The narrator here is Nathan Zuckerman, a writer in his seventies--and apparently a reoccuring character in Roth's novels. Zuckerman returns to the city after years of living isolated from world events in order to undergo a procedure promising to return his bladder control. One coincidence after another leads him further into the problems that had led him to flee in the first place. The novel addresses aging in a way that seems natural and depressing in the most realistic of ways. ...more
It took awhile to pick up pace/catch my attention. There isn't much groundbreaking material--a bit of it I've heard in his standup routines already. PIt took awhile to pick up pace/catch my attention. There isn't much groundbreaking material--a bit of it I've heard in his standup routines already. Part of that is probably my own fault for waiting until the book was on sale for $5 to read it. The essays just seem like common sense to me, but it's worth reading for the occasional line that is distinctly Lewis Black enough that you can imagine him shouting it at you.
As an Atheist, I don't think the book was offensive enough.
It ended with a play. I like plays well enough, but I could have done without this one. There's an added essay at the end that basically says "fuck you; you're stupid if you don't appreciate the play," but even that doesn't motivate me to pretend to have liked it.
What I agree with most out of everything Lewis Black wrote in this book is: Chapel Hill is a great place. It redeems North Carolina.
Also, religious people are fucking nuts--one of the biggest reasons North Carolina needs redeeming in the first place....more
After reading the first chapter of the textbook and skimming through the chapter titles, this textbook officially pisses me off. Out of 22 chapters, oAfter reading the first chapter of the textbook and skimming through the chapter titles, this textbook officially pisses me off. Out of 22 chapters, only one--chapter 20 at that, a full 19 pages--addresses nutrition. A whopping full PAGE is dedicated to obesity, because that isn't as much of a concern as "The Healing Power of Forgiveness," which receives more than twice the coverage. Pages 355-425 consists of the chapters: THE HEALING POWER OF FAITH, SPIRITUALITY, AND RELIGION; THE HEALING POWER OF ALTRUISM; and THE HEALING POWER OF OPTIMISM. There is even a chapter titled THE HEALING POWER OF HUMOR AND LAUGHTER, but there is no chapter on exercise. I am astounded that I was required to purchase this textbook--which pushes religion more so than it does a healthy lifestyle--for my physical education course. Pitiful. ...more
A truck driver picks up a beautiful young woman named Sati who claims to be God. She teaches the virtue of inner silence and seeking happiness and joyA truck driver picks up a beautiful young woman named Sati who claims to be God. She teaches the virtue of inner silence and seeking happiness and joy for oneself. Taking the best traits of religion, and discarding the less favorable ones,--such as the concept of Hell--the book presents a view of God that is easier to want to accept than many traditional religions, but remains just as unclear in its answers. It's an interesting premise, but despite being Christopher Pike's first adult fiction, it still reads like a YA novel. ...more
Overall, this is a more-than-decent reference book and place to start for people interested in various animal welfare/rights issues. The format isn't Overall, this is a more-than-decent reference book and place to start for people interested in various animal welfare/rights issues. The format isn't the most fluid and the writing isn't the most inspiring although it does have its moments of humor. Issues are broken down into chapters and then smaller sections, much like a textbook, only less dry. I don't see this effectively influencing most omnivores to make major lifestyle changes, but it might sway those already on the path towards being vegetarian or vegan.
The photographs included are largely courtesy of PETA, and this, of course, has its drawbacks. PETA often looks stupid just to get the media's attention. On the negative side, animal rights just becomes more of a joke to some people. On the positive side, animal rights gets coverage it arguably wouldn't otherwise. Which side outweighs the other? I haven't decided, and when I do, I'm sure my own answer won't be definitive. Just the fact that I have to ask myself this will clue you in that I'm leaning towards the negative at this point in my life. Still, the "hip and trendy" celebrities may draw the interest of teens and tweens. (One of the female stars of Twilight posed naked for PETA's anti-fur campaign recently. Is this publicity that might cause some Twilight fans to consider the plight of animals? Maybe, or it will at least give young boys something to masturbate to. But personally, eh, it's not for me. I don't even want the music I like associated with Twilight, much less a serious cause.)
On the other hand, there are a few amusing comics, mostly Bizarro.
The author takes on issues from fur to circuses to eating meat, but her stance is surprisingly more supportive of being vegetarian than vegan. It isn't until the last chapter that this becomes apparent. In a way, she makes a compelling argument. She says at home she eats vegan, but in a restaurant she will order a vegetarian option such as a veggie burger without asking about trace amounts of egg or milk. Her reasoning is that an increase in sales for veggie burgers (and other vegetarian meals) combined with contacting restaurants thanking them and requesting more vegetarian/vegan options will encourage others to eat less meat. She believes that being a strict vegan in social settings sometimes makes not eating meat appear too difficult to friends who might otherwise consider changing their lifestyle.
But doesn't this also add to the confusion about veganism when Karen Dawn is referred to as "wisecracking vegan ambassador"? It might seem like a small point, but it makes a big difference to people transitioning into a vegan lifestyle who are faced with people constantly trying to tempt them to "cheat" a little by eating something with dairy or eggs, as if it were the kind of dieting where it's okay to intentionally slip up now and then. It's also fuel for those antagonistic meat-enthusiasts searching for inconsistency/hypocrisy. It would be nice if these weren't concerns, but as it is, vegans are often put on the defensive and so it remains a concern.
Thanking the Monkey introduces a variety of animal welfare/rights issues and offers some enlightenment, but mostly opens the door for more questions, which isn't a bad thing in the least. These issues deserve more thorough research, which I suppose is why Karen Dawn includes website, book, and movie recommendations along the way. Dubious PETA association aside, the existence of this book is a good thing although (personally) it doesn't earn the same strong recommendation as Jonathan Safran Foer's recently published Eating Animals....more
If I had read this when it was released, I might have given it three stars, but the material here has recently been covered in Dave Cullen's ColumbineIf I had read this when it was released, I might have given it three stars, but the material here has recently been covered in Dave Cullen's Columbine, which was better written and covered the tragedy more in depth. However, I can see the necessity of such a book to help clear Brown's name, which the sheriff department tarnished.
This book might be more accessible to teenagers who might relate to the angst of being an outcast. Personally, because of mixed reports, I still wonder exactly how bad the bullying was at Columbine High; I cannot entirely discount the possibility that Brown uses the tragedy for his own anti-bullying agenda, just as some used it as an opportunity to convert teenagers.
Some of the incidents cited made me roll my eyes, and think "grow the fuck up and get over it." In primary school, Brooks and Dylan accidentally got mud on another student's coat and were forced to clean it with a toothbrush. Oh, the cruelty!
They were taunted for being the "smart kids" in the academic program during middle school.
I, too, was tested for and placed in a program for the "academically gifted" in middle school. As a result I was segregated from the rest of the school for my core curriculum. This did cause some small amount of teasing. I got over it fairly easily. I was teased on the bus rather aggressively because of my name and because there were cows in my yard. (Yeah, I know, it even sounds ridiculous without going into further detail.)
In high school, I made few friends, talked to few people, spent my lunch period isolated and reading. People later told me that they were kind of worried I was going to shoot up the school one day. I joked and said there weren't enough bullets.
Brooks mentions how the jocks would pour oil on the floors so that the outcasts would slip; they would call this bowling. This triggered a memory I had completely forgotten: on my way to class during my junior year, walking with the mistake I dated at the time, I slipped in baby oil that had been poured on the floor. I was irritated, slightly embarrassed, and even more irritated that my then-boyfriend laughed before asking if I was alright, but the people who did it were just typical dumb teenagers, not "bullies" in any way that I could see. If this type of behavior drives someone to build bombs and buy guns, then there's something inherently wrong with that person.
I suppose anti-bullying is as good a cause as any, but when I can't accept that as the cause of the Columbine shooting. Listing a few incidents of bullying hardly delves into the psychological mindframe of Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. Finishing this book, I felt no closer to understanding them; instead, I just felt depressed by the inept way in which the police responded.
(I was also left wondering how the author could be a fan of literature such as 1984 and Atlas Shrugged, yet still listen to Insane Clown Posse, but I guess there are some things beyond human understanding.)
^I wrote this before having read Atlas Shrugged. What a piece of shit. Oh, you like Atlas Shrugged AND ICP? No conflict of interests. You just like shitty things....more
Death of a Salesman is the story of Willy Loman, a salesman past sixty-years-old with a deteriorating grip on the present, his two sons and his wife LDeath of a Salesman is the story of Willy Loman, a salesman past sixty-years-old with a deteriorating grip on the present, his two sons and his wife Linda. It is his mental decline which allows the play to present both the present-day action and various scenes from the past without those scenes being actual "flashbacks." In short: Willy is a failure, and has set his sons--particularly his eldest Biff--up for failure by instilling in them the same belief that being well-liked is enough to ensure success. This leads to a tragedy, or not, depending on who you side with in the seemingly endless critiques that follow this edition of the play.
This edition features over a hundred pages of essays about Death of a Salesman (both the written play and the theatrical run) and Miller in general. It was a bit of an overload to read all at once (but hey, I've got to move on and focus on writing papers, which won't be about Miller). The analogous works included are:
- The Know-It-All Salesman by Walter D. Moody. This is just a selecton from his book Men Who Sell Things, and it isn't all that interesting. It reads like a pep talk for salesmen.
- "Death of a Traveling Salesman" by Eudora Welty. I was on the third page of this story when I realized I've read it before, but I'm not sure in which anthology I first found it. The story doesn't do that much for me, but I can see its relevance.
- "The Last of My Solid Gold Watches" by Tennessee Williams. This play is a brief exchange between a an older salesman and a younger salesman, as well as even briefer exchanges between the older salesman and the porter at the hotel. The southern dialect made me laugh, which I'm fairly certain was not its intention.
"NEGRO, solemnly nodding: The graveyard is crowded with folks we knew, Mistuh Charlie. It's might late in the day!
MR. CHARLIE: Huh!
He crosses to the window.
Nigguh, it ain't even late in the day any more--
He throws up the blind.
It's NIGHT!
The space of the window is black.
NEGRO, softly, with a wise old smile: Yes, suh . . . < I>Night, Mistuh Charlie!"
- "The Eighty-Yard Run" by Irwin Shaw. Despite two glaring typos ("beginnnig" and "here" instead of "her"), I liked this story best of the analogues. In it a married man, alone on a football field, reminisces the best day of his life--an eighty-yard run made during football practice fifteen years prior. Football just didn't work out for him, and after some cozy years working for his father-in-law, the economy went sour and his wife got uppity and got a better job than he could find. She didn't get uppity so much as grow up, improve herself, and grow apart from her husband while he stayed home and drank whiskey. It's a depressing story if you sympathize with the protagonist, the husband, but it's actually a bit empowering if you just see a woman who loved her husband, but didn't want to fall into the pit of depression and self-helplessness alongside him.
This is not nearly as interesting as the story of Schindler itself--a good half of the book is about the reception of the book, receiving the Booker AThis is not nearly as interesting as the story of Schindler itself--a good half of the book is about the reception of the book, receiving the Booker Award, and eventually having the movie made into the film--but it does has its moments. Leopold Poldek is introduced to the world as the driving force behind making sure Schindler's story was told. Poldek was a strong personality--he passed away in 2001 and the book is in part dedicated to his memory--and gave the book more "character." ...more
This isn't as much of a review of Jonathan Safran Foer's latest book as it is a reaction to it--a reaction to the reactions of others, even. The titleThis isn't as much of a review of Jonathan Safran Foer's latest book as it is a reaction to it--a reaction to the reactions of others, even. The title of this book garners a reaction from people who haven't read it and who may never read it. Just carry Eating Animals around for a few days and you'll understand. There's an assumption that a book about eating animals is going to tell you that it is in some way wrong to eat animals--whether for the welfare of animals or for your own welfare--and most people "don't want to hear it." We know something is wrong with meat today--with how completely estranged we are from the process that turns animal into product. We have that general feeling and we don't want the specifics. We don't want to face being held accountable for what we know. We don't want to think about eating animals. Why not? If there's no shame in it, then why is there such an aversion created by the title alone?
I say "we" because I'm guilty of the same, and it took this book to make me realize it. It took seeing how the people around me wanted nothing to do with a book that might challenge their eating habits. Allow me to explain with a little bit of backstory here, which is irrelevant to the book itself, but entirely relevant to my reading of the book:
I've been a vegetarian for close to five years. I've had a moral qualm about eating animals since I first made the connection between the meat on my plate and the animals in my backyard. (I grew up on a farm. There were cows and they had much happier lives than most do these days, though I never saw what end they met once my parents sold them.) Why then did I only become vegetarian at the age of eighteen? (I mean, obviously, I pieced together that burgers were made from cows long before then; I wasn't that slow of a child.) My various attempts to give up meat failed. I'm not sure why. The obvious answer would be that I had weak willpower, but I think that's a cop out. When vegetarianism did stick, I didn't feel any more self-empowered. In fact, the attempt that succeeded started as a fluke. I had no intention of seeing it through. I found out about PETA's 30-day challenge and I was curious. "I can abstain from eating animals for a month," I reasoned. When the month was over, I didn't want to eat animals anymore. No craving for meat was strong enough to compensate for the amount of suffering inflicted on animals. (What can I say? I'm a bleeding heart, a pussy, whatever.)
I surrounded myself with literature and images of slaughterhouses long enough to fend off the desire for flesh. The desire disappeared and I felt better. I felt better because I was eating better (fresh fruit and veggies was a vast improvement over my childhood diet of Hardees and Mountain Dew). I felt better once the nagging guilt the conflict between my beliefs and my actions caused was no longer. Or so I thought.
The truth is that over the years I became lax in my beliefs. Not eating animals became more habit and preference than moral conviction. People wore down my enthusiasm. Oh, the enthusiasm was there to begin with! There's nothing more exciting and refreshing than newfound vegetarianism! I felt better and I wanted other people to feel better, too. I thought I could help initiate that. I thought that I could lead by example--I wouldn't push my opinions down anyone's throat, of course, because I didn't want to be uppity about it. It doesn't work that way, or at least it didn't for me in rural North Carolina--in the county supporting the largest Smithfield slaughterhouse in the world, to be exact. People were interested, but only for the sake of arguing. Foer obviously experienced the same, writing:
"I can't count the times that upon telling someone I am vegetarian, he or she responded by pointing out an inconsistency in my lifestyle or trying to find a flaw in an argument I never made. (I have often felt that my vegetarianism matters more to such people than it does to me.)"
There's only so much antagonistic query I was equipped to handle at the age of eighteen. To be perfectly blunt, I stopped giving a fuck. I decided to be a vegetarian, not explain my reasons to others, and to stop giving a fuck what others thought about it. When someone asked me why I didn't eat meat, my responses ranged from "I don't like being overwhelmed by choices" to "I was raped by a butcher." When you stop giving a fuck, then people generally stop harassing you. These people aren't that clever to begin with, so they usually don't bother if they have to compete with another's nonchalance.
My initial reason for not considering becoming vegan was the difficulty. I felt it was a big enough change to quit cold turkey cold turkey. Yeah, I know, there's no excuse for my sense of humor. Over the years I should have made the necessary steps to eliminate eggs and dairy from my diet. I have no excuse for that either. I knew neither were essential to my nutrition or well being--that it was just a matter of putting forth more effort. In the back of my mind I knew, too, that my inaction was supporting animal cruelty towards laying hens, as well as indirectly promoting the veal industry. That nagging guilt was still there, but I pushed it aside.
I realized this past week that I can no longer do this. It is no longer acceptable. In fact, it never was. Nothing changed.
I was hardly beginning the book when I started to suspect that I was on the brink of a life-altering decision. Was Foer so persuasive that he alone managed to turn me vegan within the first few chapters? No. It wasn't even the news that Natalie Portman turned vegan after reading Eating Animals, either. ;)
It was my boyfriend telling me that he "didn't want to hear it" when I mentioned that piglets on factory farms have their testicles removed without anesthesia within the first ten days of their lives.*
It was the moment when my literature teacher asked me if Eating Animals contains information so disturbing and disgusting that she would probably never want to eat meat again; and then without pausing for a reply, she said, "I'd better not read it then."
It was this general reaction I received coinciding with what I read that made me re-examine my own unwillingness to live by what I know--something I've known without needing to be told, but something I needed to be reminded of: shame. I am ashamed to be part of a system that is inexcusable.
"Not responding is a response--we are equally responsible for what we don't do. In the case of animal slaughter, to throw your hands in the air is to wrap your fingers around a knife handle."
What does all of this say about the book? Not much. Just read it. Throw your assumptions away, quit looking for someone else to tell you what to expect, and just read with an open mind, and a willingness not only to accept what feels right, but to take the actions necessary so that you may be at peace with yourself.
* In defense of my boyfriend--although no defense is necessary--since the conversation mentioned took place, he has agreed to read Eating Animals. Ideally, he'll read it and never eat another bite of meat again; just as ideally, when I handed my copy of the book to my mother a few hours ago and asked her to please do me a favor and read it, she would have done so in earnest, in an attempt to understand her daughter's lifestyle, instead of putting it down after a few pages and resuming her crossword puzzle, which although not ideal, was what actually happened. I can't allow myself to expect much to come of it, because there's enough disappointment in life as it is, but I am grateful for this much: that he cares enough about me to read what he would otherwise rather turn away from.
Written 11/12/09.
Update (7/6/11): He never read it. We broke up, for reasons unrelated to diet. But if you know any cute, single, straight, literate, vegan boys, send 'em my way. If they do, in fact, exist.
Update again (5/2/13): I'm a feminist now, so I apologize for the derogatory use of the word "pussy" within the original review. If there were any point to it, I'd also amend the previous update to exclude the word "straight" and change "boys" to "men" (not the band) because it's creepy when grown men want girls, so vice versa? There's no point though, because I'm not looking. I'm no longer single.
We're dating again. Everyone advises against dating an ex, but everyone can go fuck themselves. I'd like to think compassion is about second chances. For whatever more-complicated-than-that reasons, I've decided to give it a second go. He recently read the book. Kudos, right? Everything in its own time, or something. He's been vegetarian since, but I announce that tentatively, because obviously, things change: you can see that in just the span of updates to this not-a-review review. I'm happy right now. I'm hopeful. I finally realized I can't change the people I love. I can't shake them until they see what I see if they don't want to look, but I can tell my truth and maybe, just maybe, it will reach someone willing to take off the blinders.
There's something charming about these simple drawings. If I give this book too much thought, I may get depressed because I can relate to it too well.There's something charming about these simple drawings. If I give this book too much thought, I may get depressed because I can relate to it too well. Maybe if this were available to me at a younger age, I would have been more prepared for the disappointments of life. Actually, the word "prepared" implies that the book offers some countermeasure to disappointment; it doesn't. I just mean that children should read this so they know what to expect from life: failure and loneliness. :D...more
Reading this was a breeze. It was just like watching the movie, but without a killer soundtrack. I've given it a high rating because I enjoyed readingReading this was a breeze. It was just like watching the movie, but without a killer soundtrack. I've given it a high rating because I enjoyed reading it and think it's a solid YA book, but I can understand how people might rate it lower if they're wondering whether or not this book was even necessary after the film....more
Interesting art consisting mostly of robots and naked Amazon women/lesbians. I like her style. Even though the author's name didn't ring a bell when IInteresting art consisting mostly of robots and naked Amazon women/lesbians. I like her style. Even though the author's name didn't ring a bell when I picked this book up, I immediately recognized the art from having read Zombies Vs. Robots. ...more
Loading...
