Amazon.com

Natural-history writer David Petersen's Heartsblood is not so much about hunting, although that controversial subject is an important part of the book, as is a lively, deeply intelligent discussion of what it means to be a human animal aware of what lies outside. Petersen suggests that a true engagement with the natural world requires a keen knowledge of its workings--of how water flows, of how animal populations wax and wane--and a recognition of the realities of life and death.

An avid fisherman and hunter, Petersen has little patience with the yahoos who blast at anything in sight, those thoughtless persons who have given hunting a bad name. Neither does he suffer lightly those who maintain that hunting is morally wrong, for, he insists, in the absence of natural predators, hunters act as a necessary brake on overpopulation, which can lead only to suffering. He has little use for expensive gear, for GPS systems and top-of-the-line weapons, nor for most hunting magazines, which, he says, cater to just those yahoos with a taste for fancy goodies, and which he deems "greedy and increasingly immoral."

With all those peeves and qualifications, it would not be out of place for Petersen to assume a grumpy air. For the most part, however, he does not; he is cordial to those who disagree with his views, which he carefully backs with biological facts, philosophical and anthropological interpretations, and reflections gathered from a half-century's experience in the wild. His book deserves a wide audience, and the ideas within it merit much discussion as thoughtful men and women everywhere do what they can to protect what little is left of nature--a struggle in which hunting, Petersen holds, can play an important part. --Gregory McNamee ... Read more

Reviews (8)

Thoughtful and Compelling
I found this to be a thoughtful and compelling analysis of not only the issues involved hunting but in man's overall relationship with the environment. Petersen deftly cuts through the hyperbole surrounding the hunting debate and presents fascinating insights into the subject, often backed by personal experiences. Must reading for anyone involved in (or for that matter against) hunting.

With compelling first-person hunting narratives
In Heartsblood: Hunting, Spirituality, And Wildness In America, author, editor, and wilderness expert David Peterson provides the reader with an informed, intensely personal, candid, and occasionally unsettling exploration on the subject of hunting in American culture. Petersen documents his observations with compelling first-person hunting narratives, as he also draws upon philosophy, evolutionary theory, biology, and scholarly studies on hunters and the "hunting culture". Hunting issues are as topical as today's newspaper headlines. Heartsblood is a welcome and very highly recommended contribution to familial, environmental, and political dialogues over the role of hunters and hunting in our lives, culture, and society for both good and ill.

Compelling first-person hunting narratives
In Heartsblood: Hunting, Spirituality, And Wildness In America, author, editor, and wilderness expert David Peterson provides the reader with an informed, intensely personal, candid, and occasionally unsettling exploration on the subject of hunting in American culture. Petersen documents his observations with compelling first-person hunting narratives, as he also draws upon philosophy, evolutionary theory, biology, and scholarly studies on hunters and the "hunting culture". Hunting issues are as topical as today's newspaper headlines. Heartsblood is a welcome and very highly recommended contribution to familial, environmental, and political dialogues over the role of hunters and hunting in our lives, culture, and society for both good and ill.

thoughtprovoking, careful, enlightening
As a curious non-hunter who worries about the hunters in my extended family and what they will teach their children, I turned to this book for insights. I was not disappointed. I found what I wanted from Petersen. He is respectful, knowledgeable, and he writes from experience backed by scholarship. I will send this book to my brother-in-law and hope it inspires him to teach his children to hunt in an ethical, respectful, environmentally sound manner.

Where was the editor?
While I agree with much of what Peterson so enthusiastically preaches and have read many of his favorite sources, I found myself hating the book. This book calls out more than any book I have ever read for a rigorous editing. It is hard to believe it was not self published. This book lacks a thesis and is poorly organized. Worse, Peterson's vocabularly is often curiously wrong and his writing style is perhaps best described as ugly. Further, it is hard to get through a paragraph without one or more parenthethical interruptions -- he even uses parenthesis inside of parenthesis! Instead of bothering with this book, read A HUNTER'S HEART (some great essays which Peterson edited but thankfully did not write) and Meditations on Hunting by Jose Ortega Y Gassett. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Once revered as semidivine beings and collaborators in the hard work of transporting goods and materials, Thailand's elephants have fallen on hard times. With the destruction of their forested habitats, a consequent nationwide ban on hardwood logging, and the decline of traditional agriculture in the rapidly urbanizing country, their numbers have declined from tens of thousands just a decade ago to only a few thousand today. Many of the surviving elephants have been put to work in traveling circuses or used for black-market labor, subject to overwork and all manner of abuse.

Vitaly Komar and Alexander Melamid, Russian expatriates who have been working together for more than 30 years, have a knack, writes art curator Mia Fineman, for "transforming the solemn rituals of high art into high comedy." It was with the utmost seriousness, however, that the two, on reading of the elephants' plight, traveled to Thailand and established the Thai Elephant Art School, through whose offices elephants create pop-art masterpieces with palette, brush, and trunk. (Elephants, it seems, have a well-known gift for the visual arts and, in the Thai case, adore the work of Vasily Kandinsky.) Sold to collectors on the world market, pachyderm-painted pieces generated $75,000 at a single early auction, the proceeds of which were used to establish and maintain sanctuaries throughout Thailand.

Illustrated with elephantine artwork and more than 100 photographs documenting Komar and Melamid's project, this book makes a wonderfully offbeat gift, and one of a very good cause. --Gregory McNamee ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Dissapointing
Beautiful photography and interesting text, but I was interested in the actual art as painted by the elephants, but there is very little of that. Mostly pictures of jungles. If you like that you will like the book. If you want to see the acutual artwork you will be very dissapointed. ... Read more

Book Description

Living among Meat Eaters is the book for the over 20 million Americans who have adopted vegetarianism. In this mind-bending yet practical volume, Carol J. Adams discusses summer barbecues, Thanksgiving dinner, even the simple business lunch, which can all be cause for issues-packed discussions on the vegetarian lifestyle. This book also offers more than 50 mouth-watering vegetarian recipes that work! Living among Meat Eaters will continue to be every vegetarian's (and vegan's) most trusted source of support and information. ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Great for beginners, not very useful otherwise.
"Living Among Meat Eaters" addresses, in part, the bizzarre belligerent reactions that some meat eater have against vegetarians/vegans, oftentimes completely unprovoked.

In my experience, a particular co-worker would start YELLING at me and waving turkey slices in front of my face every time he saw me eating anything, and sometimes when I was just standing there. It really disturbed me - I assumed that he felt insulted, or judged, himself, but I wished to understand it further. I picked up "Living Among Meat Eaters" in hopes that it would shed some real light on this common problem.

Unfortunately, it tells me what I already know - the co-worker feels judged and is acting defensively. It also tells me that he, like ALL other meat eaters, is a 'blocked vegetarian'. This idea reeks of the moral snobbery that elsewhere in the book is pointed out as one of the reasons meat-eaters feel so defensive about vegetarians. In fact some meat eaters DON'T believe that what they're doing is wrong, and in some cases, they might be right.

"Living Among Meat Eaters" would probably be a valuable guide for a person who had just made the transition to vegetarianism or veganism. The reactions that meat eaters have to such a transition can be shocking, and if it's all new to you, a guide through what to expect and how to hold your ground might help. Adams points out the necessity of restraint, or not pushing your views into meat-eaters faces at every opportunity, which does indeed give us a pretty bad reputation at times, and prevents meat eaters from exploring the veg option further. But she does seem to negate this message with the persistent 'us aginst them' attitude: WE are definately right, no two ways about it... THEY are wrong and deep down inside they all know it and only wish they could be like us (hence they are all 'blocked vegetarians').

If you're a tried and true veg, there's really no need to read this book. If you're just starting out, or having a hard time, give it a go.

A Must Read For New Veggies :o)
I truly needed to read this book. I have recently made the decision to convert to vegetarianism and the hardest thing was not the adjustment to my new lifestyle, but the belligerent and ignorant meat eaters who are in my life. People are very unaccepting of my change and it has been difficult to deal with their hostility and their jokes that they inflict upon me.
Well, this book has helped me to cope with these situations. Adams goes in-depth with this book. It has been extremely helpful. Her methods of dealing with meat-eaters is effective.
There is one other advantage to this book; it provides several good recipes.
One thing I must note: this book is not for new veggies who are looking for information on a vegetarian / vegan diet. It does provide nutritional facts, etc.

Social advice for the committed vegetarian
Written for people everywhere who have adopted a vegetarian or vegan lifestyle, Living Among Meat Eaters: The Vegetarian's Survival Handbook by dedicated vegetarian Carol J. Adams is a very practical guide filled from cover to cover with thematically appropriate discussions of common issues facing vegetarians living in a meat-eating world. Ranging from fitting in during summer barbecues or Thanksgiving dinner; to living with non-vegetarian roommates, family, or significant others; to fifty delicious vegetarian recipes that broaden the vegetarian's palate selection, Living Among Meat Eaters is a superbly presented, down-to-earth, "user friendly", and thoroughly enjoyable compendium of tips, techniques and social advice for the committed vegetarian.

Practical and Precise
This is an excellent book for anyone who is or knows a vegetarian. It is clearly written and gives specific and practical advice, accompanied by empathic anecdotes, and explorations of many vegetarian philosophies. The authoress has educated herself well on the perspectives of vegans, vegatarians, and meat eaters, and suggests that non-meateaters think of others as blocked vegetarians (people who know that a vegetable-based diet is healthier for their bodies) but treat people as potential vegetarians (with respect, no preaching, and a simply 'live as an example' approach). She tells us to remind meateaters that apologize for their diet that we are not their alter-egos, and if they feel guilt over their choices, they need to examine their own beliefs, and not project their conflicts onto us. She tells us how to "be prepared," not only to supply our own food at events or outings, but how to be mentally and philosophically prepared for attacks, by meateaters who find our diet threatening (as an attack AGAINST their own beliefs, rather than a statement FOR ours). She has suggestions for what to say, in response to some of the most common attacks, and explains how both vegetarians and meateaters see their diet as a statement FOR life (vegetarians don't eat meat because to them, meat is death, and meateaters eat meat because to them, it is life-giving). Essentially, she gives a balanced perspective, insight into the minds of all Westerners. The problems with this book: (1)the responses she provides for us sometimes have a stilted language style that could easily sound unnatural and therefore confusing, to those that know us well (2) the authoress is a vegan, and her frequent statements about the vegan diet (though true) may make vegetarians who eat dairy feel guilty and less socially responsible than their vegan counterparts.

Going Vegetarian is Easy...
...it dealing with other *people* that is interesting. I wish I would have has this book long ago! Adams gives psychological insight as to why meat eaters react the way they do to vegetarians and how to address the reactions in several different ways, such as to continue the conversation or to dismiss it entirely. She gives responses to the many cliche remarks we hear, especially from family members. Her attitude is very optimistic, even with hostile people, but you can't let them get to you in any matter in life, be it vegetarian-related or not. I also bought her book The Sexual Politics of Meat, which covers historical vegetarian authors. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Contents:
Articles and essays from different people like philosophers, biologists, activists and lobbyists. Here you learn first hand accounts of the stories that have made headlines around the world...the plight of the Silver Spring laboratory monkeys, the freeing of the Island of the Dragon dolphins, the successful campaigns against the Draize and LD50 tests, extinctions of species, and confinement of animals in farm factories and zoos. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

If you love animals, you'll love this book!
What animal lover wouldn't like to hear true stories from Paul McCartney, Anita Roddick, and Maneka Gandhi?This is a must-read for anyone who appreciates the roles of animals in our lives.Or to quote Jane Goodall:

"...this collection of inspiring tales is so important.They are true tales about individuals who have dared to take positive action against cruelty to animals and won, individuals who have made a difference."

When you've read this book, you'll be inspired to make a difference yourself.Don't miss this opportunity!

Does have some good stories, but it's slow to start...
On the whole, Speaking Out for Animals by Kim Stallwood is written in a hopeful and progressive style - certainly it's worth a read. But as I read the heartwarming stories, I definitely felt mixed emotions. On the one hand, it is good to hear happy endings. On the other hand, it is terrible to think that humans could be responsible for so much suffering and cruelty.

This book's greatest fault, in my opinion, is the first 24 pages. I found myself nearly in despair, thinking 209 more pages, what if it's all like this! Fortunately, it is not all that bad. After I got through the relatively short and somewhat dull interviews, I finally reached something good. The interview with Sergeant Sherry Schlueter was just the first of a series of ten interesting and varied stories. I especially enjoyed reading how animal rights are viewed abroad, in the interviews with Maneka Gandhi of India and Tatyana Pavlova in Russia.

To often, it seems, I hear terrible stories of animal suffering. All this bad news can become quite overwhelming. That's why I like section two of this book, all 31 of these stories are strictly happy endings. From Ginny, the dog who rescues cats to Butch and Sundance, two runaway meat pigs, this section will leave you feeling good.

Section three is titled "Unsung Heroes," and I also found it to be interesting and inspiring. Tony and Vicki Moore who fought against Spain's blood fiestas, the Buffalo Field Campaign fighting for the wild buffalo and eight-year-old Amanda Walker-Serrano, alerting others to the truth about circuses. These three stories are among 21 true tales of animal heroes. --Reviewed by Starlynn Clarke

I agree with Mr. Strumboldt
I feel that, while their intentions are good, many of the people in this book have views so extreme that they defy common sense.I found Peter Singer's views on human-animal relations disturbing and troubling to say the least.Also, while I agree that animals are treated terribly here and all over the world, these people have no scientific basis upon which to state their views. They seem to rely on the hearsay of others who share their views.While I was reading this, it seemed to me that the entire book had been written for the purposes of fund-raising.Overall, the people described in this book, all taken together, seem to have developed a very detailed philosophical approach to the cause of animal rights.It's too bad that they don't do a better job of implementing it.There were numerous factual errors I found in this book.Whoever edited it doesn't seem to have done a very thorough job of fact checking or proof reading.

'Speaking Out For Animals inspires with success stories"
I think Mark S. missed the point of this book.Showing abuse cases of a wide variety with happy endings not only exposes the abuse but shows there can be a favorable outcome.Too often, we are overwhelmed with the depth of animal abuse issues.This uplifting book shows the wisdom of movement leaders along with courageous stories of ordinary people making a difference in animal lives.I bought a copy for my parents who read it cover to cover and have a better understanding of the animal issues I am fighting for. Is it just a coincidence that they now are doing volunteer work at a shelter in their area?

Not recommended
As a long-time animal rights activist, I can say that this collection of self-righteous interviews and melodramatic anecdotes adds little to the literature on the subject. A more serious discussion of animal rights advocacy would focus less on celebrity banter and mawkish rhetoric, and more on the entrenched cultural attitudes and public policies that perpetuate, and subsidize, the victimization of animals. This book is about people, self-important people, not animals. Sadly, I expected more, especially from such a reputable source. ... Read more

Book Description

Evidence is mounting that animal abuse, frequently embedded in families scarred by domestic violence and child abuse and neglect, often predicts the potential for other violent acts.As early intervention is critical in the prevention and reduction of aggression, this book encourages researchers and professionals to recognize animal abuse as a significant problem and a human public-health issue that should be included as a curriculum topic in training.The book is an interdisciplinary sourcebook of original essays that examine the relations between animal maltreatment and human interpersonal violence, expand the scope of research in this growing area, and provide practical assessment and documentation strategies to help professionals confronting violence do their jobs better by attending to these connections.

This book brings together, for the first time, all of the leaders in this emerging field.They examine contemporary research and programmatic issues, encourage cross-disciplinary interactions, and describe innovative programs in the field today.The book also includes vivid first-person accounts from "survivors" whose experience included animal maltreatment among other forms of family violence. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Thorough Review of Literature
This book is very abundant in resarch and exploration of the link between animal abuse and intimate violence. Addtionally, they focus on children and pet-care programs in the latter part of the book. This portion is signifcant since these programs assist in preventing further domestic violence and animal abuse. Frank Ascione and Phil Arkow produced a very good book, and this book should be read by all within the domestic violence field, vetererians, and law enforcement officials. ... Read more

Reviews (18)

Not Just Animals Suffer
Finally, voices against animal experimentation that the medical establishment will not successfully derogate! In this book, scientists and science-minded readers will find exhaustive proof that research and testing that uses animals is not only cruel, but also senseless and dangerous. It's high time someone uncovered how often funds allocated to useless animal-modeled research keep people sick, and how often animal-modeled data make people suffer and even die. Written by a doctor and a veterinarian, Sacred Cows and Golden Geese addresses the topic comprehensively, intelligently, and in a style most readers will appreciate. The Greeks' book should upend misinformation perpetrated by the many, many organizations and businesses that profit from this wholly unscientific convention. As the book explains, delirium over dollars perpetuates animal experimentation. The Greeks write that they regularly debate animal experimenters and animal experimentation lobbyists. Maybe this book will put one of those debates on national television so the public can appreciate the scope of danger and deception animal experimentation exposes us to. I look forward to the Greeks' next book, which they say will cover even more medical disciplines. Everyone should read Sacred Cows and Golden Geese.

why is so little careful criticism of this book to be found?
Animal experimentation is often called a "necessary evil." As the other reviewers say, this book blows the lid off the common claim that animal experimentation is, in fact, "necessary". The Greeks carefully argue that animal experimentation is not (and never has been) necessary for human health and medical progress and that, in fact, human health and safety is often compromised by animal experimentation. Thus, it is only an "evil," for both animals and humans (except for those who profit greatly from it).

Unfortunately, there is little criticism of this book in the literature: carefully read the book and then search for rebuttals. You won't find much. This is not surprising since Dr. Greek often attempts to debate those who make their living on animal experimentation, but more often than not, they won't show up for the debate. Some scientists whine and get emotional about Greek's book, but nobody seriously responds to the Greek's arguments. Nobody provides a scientific case in defense of animal research that is comparable in quality or sophistication to the case against. Animal researchers have, so far, utterly failed at defending what they do from a scientific perspective. Their attempts at doing moral philosophy are even worse. This is unfortunate and one wishes that they would do a better job.

...

The Greeks should hit the Lab!
The Greeks believe computer models and in-vitro work with isolated cells can solve our health problems. Perhaps they are right. But then, I suggest they hit the Lab and show this line of research is feasible. If they can do so, GREAT! I am pretty sure they will then get the attention of Washington to shift funding to such models. Until then, let Science work of us and wait patiently for the Greeks to cure cancer on their PC, or by drawing on the back of their napkin.

Regarding their qualifications: I quick search on www.pubmed.gov shows that "Anesthesiologist Ray Greek and veterinarian Jean Swingle Greek" (as they present their credentials) have produced a total of 0 (yes, that's a ZERO) pieces of research and 8 opinion letters sent to various scientific journals arguing against animal research.

It seems weird that someone without any research experience can write such a book...

best book on the subject--clear, cold-blooded logic
This book stands virtually alone as a well-reasoned defense against vivisection (a.k.a. animal research). The authors make no appeals to emotion. They do not deny that animal research is sometimes cruel. However, compassion and cruelty have nothing to do with their argument.

Greek and Greek-a medical doctor/ veterinary team-argue that animal research hurts people. They point out the countless ways in which animals differ from humans. Veterinarians know that, although the same drugs are used in multiple species, these drugs behave differently and achieve different results in different kinds of animals. Mammals are alike only on the level of gross anatomy. Biochemically, even rats and mice differ enormously, to say nothing of humans and mice.

Tracing the history of western medicine, Greek and Greek show how animal models for disease became part of the expected protocol. They show how these models have hindered doctors and scientists far more than they have helped. They point out that nearly all major breakthroughs in medicine have been initiated not by study in animal models, but by autopsy and clinical studies. Careful observation of human beings by doctors and caretakers has, time and again, led to medical breakthroughs which are later "confirmed" or "substantiated" by animals research. The vivisectionists then claim the laurels for these discoveries when the animals were, in fact, superfluous. Greek and Greek also point out the tremendous harm that animal models have caused. Such models lead to a sense of false confidence that drugs will not be harmful or that the risk is low. In fact, the recall rate for drugs is 50%. Fifty percent have adverse, unexpected side affects after they are loosed on a population that has trusted in animal models. 50% is the toss of a coin! Millions upon millions of dollars are poured into animal tests yearly.

In addition, animal models have slowed the recall of harmful drugs. Thalidomide is one of many examples. This drug causes hideous birth defects in humans, but no birth defects in rats, mice, most rabbits, guinea pigs, and other animals. Doctors realized that the drug was causing birth defects and warned the company, but thalidomide could not be recalled until an animal model was found in which the drug caused birth defects! So thalidomide remained on the market, causing children to be born with flippers, until an obscure species of rabbit was found who also produced deformed kits when given the drug. Only then could thalidomide be recalled!

Greek and Greek show how the idea of the animal model is based on greed and bureaucracy, not good science. They explain that, while scientists of the past were primarily wealthy people doing a hobby they enjoyed, today's scientists are required to continually produce statistically significant results in order to keep their jobs. Just to graduate with a PhD requires a candidate to perform meaningful research. Under these conditions, the temptation to reach for something quick, easy, and difficult-to-disprove are enormous. Rats and mice fit the bill. They breed rapidly, are easy to house, and it takes a long time to show that the result of research in rats does not actually have any useful application for human beings. Clinical students in human beings, on the other hand, can take decades. In addition, human beings are far less corporative than rats, and there are limits to what you can legally do to them and what they will allow you to do. The catch, of course, is that clinical studies in human beings actually produce useful results, whereas animal models very often lead nowhere. Yet university professors anxious to keep their jobs and young students desperate to get their degrees continue to reach again and again for cheap and easy research models. In addition, huge companies manufacture expensive equipment for miniature surgeries on rats, dogs, cats, birds, mice, monkeys, goats, guinea pigs, rats, and all manner of other beasts. These creatures require all manner of housing, some of it vary expensive, and human-type surgeries on them require very specialized and expensive instruments. Animal models are a multimillion dollar industry.

With today's technology, even many clinical studies could be circumvented by using invetro methods. Human cells can be cultivated on a Petri dish or in a test tube and then exposed to various drugs. There is no reason to keep using the clumsy and inaccurate barometer of four-legged creatures.

Greek and Greek fill much of their book with one example after another. Their research is superb. I began the book as a skeptic and ended it as a believer. I have a degree in biology, and I could find nothing wrong with their research. I passed the book on to one of my college biology professors. He was impressed and decided to start including the material in his ethics course.

Whether you are a member of the medical community or merely a consumer, I strongly recommend this book. Whether you agree with all of the Greeks' conclusions or not, they certainly make some valid points and have taken pains with their research. Read the book.

Eye Opening and Logical
After reading this book, I was horrified to learn just how wasteful and archaic live animal research is. I also began to realize just how ridiculously illogical it is. What is the value of using a mouse or monkey model for medical research when it is *humans* that the research is supposed to be benefit?

This also makes great reading because as, one reviewer already put it, it doesn't tackle the ethics of animal research or at least not in the way most would expect it to. There is no room for the reader to whine "I hate that little bunnies are killed but how are we going to cure caaaanncer?". The Greeks deftly show that no, animal research will not cure cancer, at least for humans. ... Read more

Book Description

This is a book about animals and the moral life. The kinds of questions it raises are profound and consequential: Do animals have moral standing? Do human beings have moral obligations to animals? If so, how extensive and weighty are those obligations? Robert Wennberg finds it troubling that society at large seems to care more about such concerns than the Christian community does, and he invites people of faith not only to think more deeply about ethical concerns for animals but also to enter into a richer, more sensitive moral life in general.

Over the course of his thought-provoking discussion, Wennberg educates readers about some of the history of ethical concern for animals and the nature of that concern. He also invites serious reflection on the moral issues raised by the existence of animals in our world, while granting readers considerable latitude in reaching their own conclusions. Wennberg arrives at his own conclusions through careful interaction with church history, Christian theology, the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, and the best philosophical thought on the moral status of animals. Two compelling case studies — of factory farming and painful animal research are also included.

All in all, "God, Humans, and Animals" offers a complete, balanced, and convincing argument for the moral recognition of animals. Most readers will be challenged — and some may be changed — by this provocative study. ... Read more

Book Description

Respect for animals has always been a part of human consciousness.Poets, thinkers, philosophers, scientists and statesmen have long celebrated our compassion towards Earth's other beasts.

Awe for the Tiger, Love for the Lamb compiles the most significant statements of sensibility to animals in the history of thought.From the myths of the ancient world to the Middle Ages to Darwin and beyond, Preece captures the most telling and fascinating accounts of humankind's relationship to the wild world, placing them in historical context.

Jung called it "an unconscious identity with animals," while Wordsworth saw it as the "primal sympathy which having been must ever be." Linking the diverse chords of human experience that are touched by the animal world, Preece shows that despite a historical thread of cruelty, there still remains in all humanity a constant underlying concern for other beings as an integral part of the moral community.

With musings and meditations from Lao Tse to Mohammed, from Plato to Jane Goodall, from classical religion to parliamentary proceedings, Awe for the Tiger, Love for the Lamb is an original, superbly researched history that deepens our understanding of all living beings. ... Read more

Book Description

The idea of human cruelty to animals so consumes novelist Elizabeth Costello in her later years that she can no longer look another person in the eye: humans, especially meat-eating ones, seem to her to be conspirators in a crime of stupefying magnitude taking place on farms and in slaughterhouses, factories, and laboratories across the world.

Costello's son, a physics professor, admires her literary achievements, but dreads his mother's lecturing on animal rights at the college where he teaches. His colleagues resist her argument that human reason is overrated and that the inability to reason does not diminish the value of life; his wife denounces his mother's vegetarianism as a form of moral superiority.

At the dinner that follows her first lecture, the guests confront Costello with a range of sympathetic and skeptical reactions to issues of animal rights, touching on broad philosophical, anthropological, and religious perspectives. Painfully for her son, Elizabeth Costello seems offensive and flaky, but--dare he admit it?--strangely on target.

Here the internationally renowned writer J. M. Coetzee uses fiction to present a powerfully moving discussion of animal rights in all their complexity. He draws us into Elizabeth Costello's own sense of mortality, her compassion for animals, and her alienation from humans, even from her own family. In his fable, presented as a Tanner Lecture sponsored by the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University, Coetzee immerses us in a drama reflecting the real-life situation at hand: a writer delivering a lecture on an emotionally charged issue at a prestigious university. Literature, philosophy, performance, and deep human conviction--Coetzee brings all these elements into play.

As in the story of Elizabeth Costello, the Tanner Lecture is followed by responses treating the reader to a variety of perspectives, delivered by leading thinkers in different fields. Coetzee's text is accompanied by an introduction by political philosopher Amy Gutmann and responsive essays by religion scholar Wendy Doniger, primatologist Barbara Smuts, literary theorist Marjorie Garber, and moral philosopher Peter Singer, author of Animal Liberation. Together the lecture-fable and the essays explore the palpable social consequences of uncompromising moral conflict and confrontation. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Do Animals have Consciousness?
Literature in many respects is very similar to music. In order to catch the subtle nuances, the beauty or message of the piece, requires more than one sitting. A single piece can appear deceptively simple on the first hearing or reading. But on closer examination, the book, poem or song takes on a more complex significance; you find yourself pouring over the work time and time again, digging deeper into its potential meaning. J.M. Coetzee's ~The Lives of Animals` is one such example.

This book is short, simple but elegantly written; containing ideas and arguments that could well take weeks to adequately unpack to reach a semblance of understanding of the many issues it proposes we ponder. In short, the novel concerns itself with the contentious issue of animal rights. More specifically, animal cruelty, in regards to our treatment of the edible, warm blooded variety: cattle, poultry et al. Reaching for a hard hitting comparison to make his point, Coetzee uses the Nazi concentrations camps and the genocide of the Jews as an example of how we currently treat and prepare the animals for slaughter in the henhouses and abattoirs around the planet. This comparison is flawed to some extent, (which a character in the novel points out) but Coetzee manages to make the similarities work as the novel progresses and the arguments are fleshed-out. However this is not the main thesis of the book.

The central question the book proposes we consider is whether animals have consciousness. And if they do have 'reasoning' consciousness, how can we justify their slaughter for our own gain? Our current Darwinian view of the world, that is, human beings hovering at the top of some evolutionary hierarchy, and all other living things falling in neat categories below, at the end of the 19th century, paved the way for some pretty horrific wars and some juicy justifications for the crimes committed in the 20th century. The Nazis used Darwin and his theories to justify their massive slaughter of Jews, gypsies, homosexuals and avant-garde artists, particularly the German Expressionists, calling it 'degenerative art'. Are animal's mere biological automatons? Are they 'degenerate', and therefore an easy target for exploitation? And if animals do have consciousness, what rights do they have?

This is not the place to launch into the arguments of animal rights or human rights for that matter. But what Coetzee has done with this exceptional book, is to present these important issues and complex philosophical arguments in a fictional format, enabling the subject to be more accessible to anyone interested in the way we treat our fellow creatures.

Spend an hour reading this book; then read it again - you will not be disappointed.

Good answers for questions about vegetarianism
The Lives of Animals by J.M. Coetzee is a philosophical look at the heart of vegetarianism and animal suffering rather than a discussion of the hard raw facts that most books include on the subject. It takes a look at both sides of the issue, including some hypothetical thought-provoking questions from the "opposition". This is done in the form of a short novel in which author Elizabeth Costello is invited to give two lectures to her literary peers.

She chooses to deliver her talks about the plight of animals, not by relating facts about slaughterhouses and veal crates, but by establishing certain theoretical truths about the way animals think and feel. "Reminding you only that the horrors I here omit are nevertheless at the center of this lecture," she says.

Coetzee's book presents the case for animal rights in a way I had never seen before. It offers some good answers for those who ask about our vegetarianism, and it raised many questions for us to answer for ourselves. The Lives of Animals reaffirmed why I had chosen this lifestyle in the first place and strengthened my resolution. No longer do I do this simply because I can't bear to be a cause of suffering, but rather because animals - as thinking, emotional beings - deserve it. A highly recommended this book that will renew convictions, but since it's heavy in philosophy it can be a little hard to follow. A collection of essays by various contributors following the story helps to clarify and extend the message of the book. --Reviewed by Rachel Crowley

Brilliant clarification of the questions involved
This is an ingenuous work about animal rights, ethical treatment of animals and vegetarianism. I expected it to be a persuasive polemic on animal rights, and what I found was that it was a brilliant complilation of writings on a theme that raises many issues and questions on the relationships between humans and other animals with great respect for many viewpoints.

Coetzee (1940-), who won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 2003, is a critic and writer who was born in Cape Town, South Africa. His novels include: Dusklands, In the Heart of the Country, Waiting for the Barbarians, Life and Times of Michael K, Foe, Age of Iron, The Master of Petersburg and Elizabeth Costello. He's won the Booker Prize twice (the first author to do so). He also has written two volumes of autobiography. He has a Ph.D. in literature from the University of Texas at Austin,and also spent time, between his master's and doctorate, as a computer programmer. He's spent several stints in the United States as a visiting scholar.

I share this level of background on Coetzee because I think in this case, it is warranted. THE LIVES OF ANIMALS is a volume comprising many kinds of writing, fiction, argument, scholarly responses and, even I think, memoir in context. And it asks and doesn't answer the question of what Coetzee, personally, thinks of the ideas raised within.

The main text of THE LIVES OF ANIMALS comes from the 1997-1998 Tanner Lectures at Princeton University. Atypical of the usual philosophical essays given in the series, Coetzee read two short stories on the way humans treat and view and philosophize on animals, and within these stories, are lectures and question-and-answer series on animal issues. The main character, Elizabeth Costello (an apparent pre-apparition of the so-named Elizabeth Costello of his most recent novel), has been invited to lecture at Appleton College in America. A writer, she has been invited to speak on whatever she likes, and she chooses humanity's treatment of animals to talk about at several events. Her son, John, is a physics and astronomy professor there, and is hosting her -- he calls her interest in animal rights her "hobbyhorse." The son's wife, a philosophy professor who can't seem to get a tenure-track position in the same city as her husband, and his mother do not get along, and Costello's "radicalism" on animal rights confounds the son and irritates his wife to no end.

Coetzee's lecture was broken up into two sections, "The Philosophers and the Animals" and "The Poets and the Animals." In each, Costello deals with human treatment of animals in that context, among others. In the first, she gives a philosophical essy on animal treatment at the college, and in the second, she addresses a literature class using poets' treatment of animals as inspiration for her talk. Her last event is a debate.

During her lecture, Costello, who deeply and emotionally values the lives of animals, makes a connection between the Holocaust and the mechanized system of animal slaughter for food and byproducts in the developing world. This likening offends a literature professor, Dr. Stern, who declines to dine with Costello and her son along with other college elites that night at a special dinner. The next day, she receives a letter from him, including the lines, "You took for your own purposes the familiar comparison between the murdered Jews of Europe and slaughtered cattle. The Jews died like cattle, therefore cattle die like Jews, you say. That is a trick with words which I will not accept. ... Man is made in the likeness of God, but God does not have the likeness of man. If Jews were treated like cattle, it does not follow that cattle are treated like Jews..."

This is one example of an exchange within the main story of the book, and the rest follows this style, in which Costello raises issues, and an opposing point, in various settings, is raised in various demeanors and humors. Often, they are not settled, and the narrative gives no hint as to a right or moral authority on the issue. At the lecture, at the dinner, in the classroom, at the debate and in pillow talk at John's home with his philosopher wife. The point and counter point is woven within a compelling character sketch.

What follows in the book are essays in response to Coetzee's lectures by Wendy Doniger, the Mircea Eliade Distinguished Service Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago; Marjorie Garber, William R. Kenan, Jr., professor of English at Harvard University and Director of Harvard's Center for Literary and Cultural Studies; Amy Gutmann (who wrote the introduction), Laurance S. Rockefeller University Professor at Princeton University, founding director of the University Center for Human Values; Peter Singer, professor in the Centre for Human Bioethics at Monash University; and Barbara Smuts, professor of psychology and anthropology at the University of Michigan. Each essay focuses on various aspects of Coetzee's characters' statements and viewpoints, drawing them out and parsing them, elaborating on the cultural background, and providing more point and counter point for consideration. One particularly charming piece is written as a fictional account of a poor professor asked to write a response to a lecture that was actually a short story... what is he to do?

I found the final piece by Smuts almost as compelling as the Coetzee fiction she was responding to. Smuts has spent countless hours observing wild primates, and she writes movingly of her interaction with baboons in the wild and Diane Fossey's gorilla groups. She writes also of her close relationship with her dog, Safi, who understands complete sentences and cooperates with Smuts out of mutual respect, not because Smuts controls her, Smuts asserts. She makes one of the most thoughtful observations in the book, that personal relationships are had with animals. "In the language I am developing here," she writes, "relating to other beings as persons has nothing to do with whether or not we attribute human characteristics to them. It has to do, instead, with recongizing that they are social subjects, like us, whose idiosyncratic, subjective experience of us plays the same role in their relations with us that our subjective experience of them plays in our relationships with them. If they relate to us as individuals, and we relate to them as individuals, it is possible for us to have a personal relationship."

The book, taken as a whole, invites strong consideration of how we use, view and relate to animals. Costello, who refuses to eat meat, admits that she wears leather shoes, stating it's "degrees of obscenity." Another writer asks if an unanticipated death after a happy life is cruel to the animal. And if it isn't, perhaps it is still bad -- bad for the killers even if not bad for the killed. Taken as a whole, the book reads as if the issue is still a question for Coetzee and the other writers, who continue to ask after the moral and ecological role of humanity as a whole. If not a question, the book is, certainly then, respectful, and for that reason alone should be read by anyone who wants to make a considered decision on the issue, whatever his or her final decision may be.

Does Coetzee have a wrong argumentation?
A book plenty of sophisms, and a bad argumentation on philosophical and onthological topics. That's the synthesis of this book written by the south african writer J. M Coetzee. In this writing the author tries to identify himself as a professor linked to movement Vegana (an strict and extremist branch of vegetarianism that consists not only on stop eating meat but also not to use any kind of animal product -which is very very difficult, and almost imposible, since many things are made from animal; from gelatin, brushes, clothes, shoes, most of the aliments, etc-) who gives speeches about the rights of the animals, falling into many errors about the soul and the consciusness of the animals (for those who have studied philosophy it is clear that only we -the homo sapiens sapiens- have a rational soul, in order to understand the world, and that the animals doesn't matter whether we care of them or not)Along with this arguments, Coetzee seems he does not know the ontological and metaphisical diferences of the soul (what I would prefer to call life principle) on the animals and on the human beings. Coetzee claims to stop the 'butchering' (maybe he doesn't know that almost neither of the "big religions" ban animal products consumption -obviosuly, and as well as the other natural resources, animals can be used to human consumption MODERATELY)Coetzee has wrong ideas about the topic, this makes "The lives of animals" a bad book based on its argumentations. It's sad that authors cannot have clearful bases for what they say. Coetzee, you are wrong.

Of no use...A real bummer of a read.
This book was dull and lifeless. I found the story to be just plain irritating and could not wait to reach the end. The only part of the book where I felt that there was at least something to grasp onto was the section written by Peter Singer. Other than that small snippet, I found nothing else of interest. It was like eagerly anticipating a lecture only to have it be really, really, really boring and nothing like you expected. Only the book is worse than that because you have to read it, so you can't let your mind wander or do other things while the speaker is speaking. I know I didn't have to finish it, but I always try to finish books in hopes that they get better. This one didn't. Perhaps it was because I was hoping to learn something new about animal rights and where it is heading, or at least to solidify the knowledge that I have, but instead it did nothing but waste my time. I highly suggest getting a different book. ... Read more

Book Description

Animals and Modern Cultures investigates the dramatic transformation of relationships between humans and animals in the twentieth century. In the early part of the century these were based on a categorical distinction between humans and animals, where animals were still largely a resource for human progress. At the close of the century that distinction and the subordination of animals is being seriously questioned.

The book demonstrates that changing relationships with animals can only make sense by relating them to key aspects of social and cultural change. It is not focused on how humans should act towards animals; rather it is concerned with how humans relate to animals and how this has changed and why. Key changes are related to the moral crisis of humanity resulting from a breakdown of the modern world order. Moreover, it highlights, through chapters on companion animals, hunting and fishing, animal leisure's such as bird watching and wildlife parks, meat ad livestock industries, how attitudes and practices towards animals vary widely according to social class, ethnicity, gender, region and nation.

Written in a lively and accessible style, the book will be of interest to upper level undergraduates and postgraduates in sociology, cultural studies, anthropology, history, zoological, biological, life and veterinary studies.

Amazon.com

Zoos are places where animals are protected, kept safe from the ravages of the outside world and sheltered from extinction, right?Not necessarily, writes investigative reporter Alan Green, who takes his readers behind the bars in Animal Underworld to tell an unsettling tale of deception and cruelty.

That story opens at a zoo in northern Virginia, one of many such places around the United States in which black bears, once an exotic sight, have become a too-common commodity. Baby bears bring crowds, Green writes; unruly juveniles and listless adults do not. What happens to the bears who cannot contribute to the zoo's overhead? Animal sanctuaries are already overfull; individuals are not allowed to keep bears as pets without hard-to-obtain licenses; and bears raised in cages do not know how to fend for themselves in the wild. There is simply no place for them, Green writes, and the bears have economic worth only for their parts--the claws for jewelry, the flesh for restaurants, the paws for Asian apothecaries.

The nefarious means by which supposedly protected animals--many in danger of disappearing in the wild--are brought to market forms the heart of Green's disturbing report. Some of the country's most important zoos and museums turn up as villains in his pages, and readers will likely never visit such places again without wondering at the fate of the creatures that look out at them from the other side of the cage. --Gregory McNamee ... Read more

Reviews (15)

Animal Outrage
After reading this book I don't know how anyone could comfortably visit a zoo or animal park. I find what goes on behind the scenes a moral outrage. There is no doubt in my mind that the private ownership laws in this country have to be changed. I think that exotic animals should only be bred by organizations doing so for genetic reasons. Private dealers and the like should never be permitted to breed exotic animals. When you can read a magazine like Animal Finder's Guide and see Bengal tigers advertised ... you have to realize that this is a serious problem. Why are the licenses so easy to obtain? Why do zoos, which are publicly funded in many cases, have no responsibility to publicly disclose what they do with their animals? After all we support them. This book shows once again how cruel we as people are to the other species around us. I think it should be required reading for anyone who desires ownership of an exotic species or supports animal rights.

The Only Good Pet Monkey is a Pet Sea Monkey
There is no doubt that there is a huge, lucrative, underground trade in exotics, and that many of the people involved in it are unethical scumbags. Of course, not ALL individuals who own exotic pets are nasty: some of them are conscientious and care enough to be well-informed about the species they choose to own.

But the author of this book provides an important service to the public. Green sheds light into the dark corners of the exotics business, part of which involves shuffling zoo and research animals to canned hunt facilities or roadside petting zoos. It all works through middlemen who assure legitimate keepers that their surplus animals are going to qualified handlers, when in fact they are often laundered through pet auctions or given to animal collectors who abandon them at the first sign of difficult behavior or ill health.

Take monkeys and apes. They're cute and smart, but mishandling can create a strong, deranged primate that will pose very real risks to anyone not familiar with their needs. Also, they harbor all kinds of diseases that are a direct threat to public health, and some that haven't jumped the species barrier yet but, in the future, may do so. Hardly any sanctuaries exist that can care for them once they are no longer needed for research or public display. What should we, as a society that frowns on animal cruelty, do for them?

Anyone who is interested in exotics, animal-based research, or even visiting the zoo should read this book. Yes, Green almost exclusively discusses the creepy side of the issue. But he also describes some very ethically-run sancutaries and some individuals in the zoo and research sectors who truly care for their charges' welfare.

As for owning exotic pets, I personally think there are some people who actually are qualified to do so. Who decides those qualifications? That's another issue. Also, "exotics" include everything from hedgehogs and sugar gliders to tigers and the great apes. I've owned the former two, and found them to be sweet little companion animals. (But if someone offered me a giraffe, I'm afraid I would have to decline.) Not all exotics are totally inappropriate for all people. But some exotics are totally inappropriate for most people.

I do think that certain surplus zoo animals should be euthanized rather than forced to live out their remaining years in misery. I also think that the surplus itself should be examined: why aren't certain species more aggressively sterilized? And, I think all zoo and research animals should be microchipped so that they can be tracked once they leave their original home.

Green isn't afraid to name names and cite specific examples of cruelty. I know there are readers who are angry about what he wrote, and dispute his findings, but they haven't countered with any specifics that undermine this book. If any of his critics can prove that the incidents Green discusses didn't happen, then I'd like to hear about it.

An absurd collection of lies to further a cause
I read this book in a bookstore because I certainly would not want to pay money for such trash. I don't know where this author did his "research" in this subject but it couldn't have been on this planet. I raise exotic animals and the stories and examples he gives in his book are ridiculous. He has taken a few examples of "bad apples" and stretched the truth to have us thinking that all zoos and people who raise exotic animals are bad. I especially found humorous his portrayal of the exotic animal auction where the attendees are a secret society and don't want the public to know about them or what they're doing. Gee, it's hard to get that impression when you see all of the people there freely handing out their business cards, website addresses, dressed in their shirts and jackets that advertise their business, driving their pickups pulling the trailers that also have their business names plastered on them. This book is so typical of most books dealing with animal rights. When you can't find enough "truth" to further your cause, twist things out of proportion, make things up or just plain lie!!

Unimaginable
This was the first book that I had read on animal rights, but I was absolutely blown away with the information the author presented. It is unbelievable that the types of cruelty of what is told in this book actually takes place, every day. Why is it so easy to obtain required licences throughout this country, and why is little done to prevent further exploitation? And why don't zoos have a craddle to grave policy with the animals they are entrusted with? Overall, I feel that this book should be required reading for ANYONE who is interested in animals, or is even concidering caring for an exotic animal.

Can't believe what I'm seeing
I haven't read this book, and I don't think I ever want to. To see that this book portrays all keepers and owners of exotic animals as animals themselves is horrible. I don't know how the author of this book could call himself an animal lover if he's putting down the reputation of the people who take care of these animals. Some, yes, some people do abuse their right to care for and/or own the animals, and sometimes even abuse the animals themselves. I can say I'm pursuing a career in exotic animal training for the likes of television and movies, and I think it's horrible that people like myself are getting a bad name. I personally love animals and would never cause my animals to be afraid, abused, or hurt in any way. Even if this book doesn't say that all exotic owners abuse their animals, the reviews I read are horrible - saying they'll not enjoy zoos anymore and such. I love zoos, I know how much work goes into such an establishment, and I commend their breeding programs. Maybe the author just has something against exotic keepers. I'm not even saying all keepers and owners are good-natured and animal-loving people, but the reviews make it sound like they're all to be hated as far as this book is concerned. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong, but I just want everyone to know that you can't base all your beliefs on one book, and it doesn't speak for everyone. There are still a lot of good people out there who genuinely love all animals and would never hurt them. I look forward to owning my own exotics someday in *several* years once I'm well educated about them, have all the legal and necessary permits, my own business established, and several acres of land with proper housing for them. Not all owners are irresponsible, but apparently some authors are ignorant. ... Read more

Book Description

From Mickey Mouse to the teddy bear, from the Republican elephant to the use of "jackass" as an all-purpose insult, images of animals play a central role in politics, entertainment, and social interactions. In this penetrating look at how Western culture pictures the beast, Steve Baker examines how such images--sometimes affectionate, sometimes derogatory, always distorting--affect how real animals are perceived and treated.

Baker provides an animated discussion of how animals enter into the iconography of power through wartime depictions of the enemy, political cartoons, and sports symbolism. He examines a phenomenon he calls the "disnification" of animals, meaning a reduction of the animal to the trivial and stupid, and shows how books featuring talking animals underscore human superiority. He also discusses how his findings might inform the strategies of animal rights advocates seeking to call public attention to animal suffering and abuse. Until animals are extricated from the baggage of imposed images, Baker maintains, neither they nor their predicaments can be clearly seen.

For this edition, Baker provides a new introduction, specifically addressing an American audience, that touches on such topics as the Cow Parade, animal imagery in the presidential race, and animatronic animals in recent films. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

a nice & original study of animal imagery
Picturing the beast is about the way animals are depicted in the media (cartoons, photography etc.) The thesis of the book is that such depictions partly determine the way we think about and treat animals. Picturing the beast is a highly original study and is recommended for anyone interested in media & communication, or the animal rights debate ... Read more

Book Description

Collection of historical, theoretical and applied articles on the ethical considerations in the treatment of animals by human beings. ... Read more

Book Description

There are groups out there that want to radically change the way you live your life. They want to stop you from hunting and fishing in the great outdoors. They want to stop life saving medical research. They want to ban circuses and zoos. They want to force you to stop eating meat and using other animal based products. They even want to stop you from owning pets. These groups resort to a variety of tactics, from lobbying Congress, to protests and rallies. They even resort, in some cases, to violence.

Who are these groups? They are proponents of the Animal Rights agenda. Read this book to find out who these groups are, and what they are doing to change the way you are allowed to live your life!

This book debunks the shaky foundations of the AR agenda with equal doses of common sense and scientific evidence. It is fully referenced for further research by the curious reader. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

Read the book and make up your own mind
Read the book and make up your own mind. Heck, if you don't like it, you can return it! It's interesting that the reviews are either 5 stars or 1 - nothing in between. Even the casual observer must conclude that this is a "hot" issue that deserves careful analysis. However, none of the negative reviewers bothers with rational analysis. Their approaches range from ad hominem attacks on the author ("He has has [sic] nothing but contempt for people who support animal rights") to hysterical characterizations of the book ("mindless right-wing ranting", "reminiscent of those who claim the holocaust never happened") that do nothing to further the "serious intellectual debate" called for by one of the negative reviewers. Instead, in the negative reviews there are comments like these: "it is filled with half-baked truths, misleading facts, and specious misrepresentations", "Ward's arguments hold no water", and "he needs to stick to facts". Yet none of these reviewers bothers to specify a single factual error or provide any factual refutation. There's also a revealing comment by one reviewer who referred to the book as "bonfire-worthy." That reviewer invites comparison of the "intelligent [AR movement] people reviewing this ... book" to Nazis in Germany in the 1930's whose favorite tactic for dealing with people they disagreed with was to burn their books.

typical
One could buy this book for help sleeping soundly on a stomach full of flesh, but there are dozens of anti-AR websites that work toward the same end.Before diving into opposing arguments, one should be versed in the philosophy of the movement (a good start is Singer's "Animal Liberation").

Clearly demonstrates the descent of man from higher animals.
As many other reviewers pointed out previously (and I am so thankful to see a preponderance of intelligent people reviewing this bonfire-worthy book!), this book is mindless right-wing ranting about the "wackos" who seek to protect for other animals the rights they already have--but which are not observed very often by the oh-so-glorious species that is not all that far above them...humans. The only wackos I see are those who don't take animal rights issues seriously. This book is infuriating. Try reading something that will inspire you to make a positive difference in the world, like Ingrid Newkirk's "You Can Save the Animals." This book can only serve to poison minds. Honestly...what good was it intended to do? Glorify the hideous acts of cruelty performed by humans in a pathetic attempt to disguise them as necessary to peoples' survival? Defend anyone who wants to carelessly use and abuse their fellow creatures to their own terribly selfish ends? How can these authors actually feel more pity for the perpetuators of cruelty than for the innocent victims, ie the animals? In trying to convince themselves and others that other animals are nothing more than unthinking, unfeeling, non-reasoning and solely instinct-driven machines, they turn off their compassion and ability to extend it to species other than their own; an extremely important natural quality that should never be lost in humans. Someone who has elevated themselves to a state where they need not harm any animal except out of absolute necessity is a far better and more advanced person than one who believes he is the supreme being on earth and may trample all over the 'lower creatures' to stay there.

Compassion is only misplaced when it is taken away from beings that suffer, or removed from the realm of extension to ALL living souls, be they encased in the body of a human or a dog or a fish. This book is misplaced when it is placed anywhere but the garbage--excuse me, the recycling bin! We don't want to create more pollution than we already have, but these authors-considering their political viewpoint-don't much care about significant things like that, now do they?

Inane diatribe
As a human being, animal rights advocate, and open-minded individual it seemed only right to review this so-called book. Needless to say, Ward's arguments hold no water--ethical or intellectual. Even my husband who is a hardcore meat-eater would never make the same, sad excuses that Ward makes in this book. I suggest serious intellectual debate be left to more apt-minded individuals.

An example of the hurdles the AR movement has yet to clear.
This does for non-human animals what Mein Kampf did for humans.Even the title of the book is infuriating.Where does Mr. Clark think I should place my compassion?Oh, the poor, poor hunters, the evil wolves and mountain lions are daring to support themselves and their young by eating elk and deer that would be better dismembered and hanging on my wall.
Oh, or I could send charitable contributions to billion dollar pharmaceutical companies who are clearly the only beneficiaries of the "life saving" research he speaks of.The medical discoveries that have been the most beneficial to humans are the ones that have NOT used animals as subjects.
As far as research, the only legitimate studying of the subject Mr. Clark seems to have done is to find how much support (financial or otherwise) he will recieve from the profiteers of this worthless book.
It will be okay though, many books exactly like this one were written in the late 1800's about the civil rights movement, and look at where African Americans are now.It takes a long time for opinions like these to evolve, but they always do. ... Read more

Book Description

This visionary book of hope for a world at peace is also an excellent reference for animal activists who wish to explore the interconnectedness of animal rights, ecology, world peace, and social justice. "Peace to All Beings" shows how animal rights and liberation are essential to any movement that is working toward making the world a better place.

This is a guidebook full of miracle-making tools. Lighten up your journey with inspiration, meditations, heartfelt stories, over seventy prayers, and solid, fact-based reasons that explain why we human beings must make peace with the animal nations if we are ever to find true inner peace, heal our earth, and create authentic world peace.

This is a valuable aid for those seeking to live in harmony with the values of compassion, nonviolence, and reverence for all life. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Perfect companion to Judy's "Born To Be Blessed"
From Doug Peschka:

"Peace To All Beings" is an extension of a spiritual odyssey
that Judy began in her first book "Born To Be Blessed: Seven
Keys To Joyful Living".

It should be noted that, while I do not normally subscribe to
the teachings and writings of "A Course In Miracles" which
forms a part of the basis for "Born To Be Blessed", for me it
is Judy's unique interpretations of it and all other sources
that make her writings in both books work so well for me.

As with Judy Carman's special gift of being able to make you
feel like you are the most important person in the world
when having a conversation with her, she also has a highly
unique gift for being able to touch something deep in every
belief all at the same time.

Judy has a very gentle healing and uniting spirit, and it
serves her work on behalf of animals very well indeed.

In this activist's humble opinion, the message of
"Peace To All Beings" and of the author herself, by her very
compassionate and caring example each day, points in the way
that the entire Animal Rights movement can and should
evolve next.

Religions teach us that without Love,
all good works are only noise.

The same holds true for the Animal Rights movement.

With Love, together, we can make a world of difference for all
animals. All persons. All Beings.

That is the most important thing I have learned from reading
Peace To All Beings, and also personally from it's author.

Get to know Judy Carman through her books.

You'll never regret it!

Fantastic!
What an inspiring book! To everyone who loves animals: read this book! You won't regret it!