Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T17:10:41.108Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

“HOW DOES YOUR COLLAR SUIT ME?”: THE HUMAN ANIMAL IN THE RSPCA'S ANIMAL WORLD AND BAND OF MERCY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2012

Monica Flegel
Monica Flegel*
Affiliation:
Lakehead University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There is a central contradiction in human relationships with animals: as Erica Fudge notes, “We live with animals, we recognize them, we even name some of them, but at the same time we use them as if they were inanimate, as if they were objects” (8). Such a contradiction is also, of course, present in human interactions, in which power relations allow for the objectification of one human being by another. In an analysis of images and texts produced by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA) in the nineteenth-century, I want to examine the overlap in representations of animals and humans as subject to objectification and control. One common way of critiquing human treatment of animals within the RSPCA's journals, Animal World and Band of Mercy, was to have humans trade places with animals: having boys fantastically shrunk to the size of the animals they tortured, for example, or imagining the horrors of vivisection when experienced by humans. Such imaginative exercises were meant to defamiliarize animal usage by implying a shared experience of suffering: what was wrong for a human was clearly just as wrong for an animal. However, I argue that some of the images employed by the society suggest the opposite; instead of constructing animal cruelty in a new light, these images instead work to underline the shared proximity of particular humans with animals. In texts that focus specifically upon humans wearing animal bonds – reins, collars, and muzzles – the RSPCA's anti-cruelty discourse both critiqued the tools of bondage and, I suggest, invited the audience to see deep connections between animals and the humans taking their place. Such connections ultimately weaken the force of the animal/human reversal as an animal rights strategy, suggesting as they do that humans themselves often have use value in economies of labor, affect, and are subject to the same power relations that produce an animal as “animal.”

Type
Work in Progress
Information
Victorian Literature and Culture , Volume 40 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 247 - 262
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

WORKS CITED

Baker, Steve. Picturing the Beast: Animals, Identity and Representation. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1993.Google Scholar
“The Band of Mercy Movement.” Band of Mercy Advocate 4.37 (January 1882): 1–8, 6–7.Google Scholar
Behlmer, George K.Child Abuse and Moral Reform in England, 1870–1908. Stanford: Stanford UP, 1982.Google Scholar
“Bend or Break.” Chapter III. Animal World 3.28 (January 1872): 49–64, 59–60.Google Scholar
“Bobby.” Band of Mercy 8.95 (November 1886): 81–88, 82.Google Scholar
Bolton, W. J. “Kindness to God's Creatures.” Band of Mercy Advocate 3.27 (March 1881): 18.Google Scholar
Bogle, Evelyn E. “Fast Friends.”” Animal World 14.162 (June 1892): 41–48, 46.Google Scholar
, C. H. “Vivisection: A Vision.” Animal World 6.67 (April 1875): 59.Google Scholar
Cook, Eliza. “A Song for the Workers.” The Broadview Anthology of Victorian Poetry and Poetic Theory. Ed. Collins, Thomas J. and Rundle, Vivienne J.. Peterborough: Broadview, 1999: 559–60.Google Scholar
“Dogs as Draught Animals.” Animal World 11.132 (Sept. 1, 1880): 129–44, 137–38.Google Scholar
“Fattie-Fee.” Animal World 14.160 (Jan. 1, 1883): 1–16, 7.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Moira. Animal Advocacy and Englishwomen, 1780–1900: Patriots, Nation, and Empire. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fudge, Erica. Animal. London: Reaktion Books, 2002.Google Scholar
Harbolt, Tami L. Bridging the Bond: The Cultural Construction of the Shelter Pet. Bloomington: Purdue UP, 2002.Google Scholar
Harrison, Brian. Peaceable Kingdom: Stability and Change in Modern Britain. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1982.Google Scholar
Creatures.” Animal World 13.154 (July 1, 1882): 97–112, 106.Google Scholar
Kete, Kathleen. The Beast in the Boudoir: Petkeeping in Nineteenth-Century Paris. Berkeley, U of California P, 1995.Google Scholar
Kreilkamp, Ivan. “Dying like a Dog in Great Expectations.” Victorian Animal Dreams: Representations of Animals in Victorian Literature and Culture. Ed. Morse, Deborah Denenholz and Danahay, Martin. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007: 81–94.Google Scholar
Kreilkamp, Ivan. “Petted Things: Wuthering Heights and the Animal.” Yale Journal of Criticism 18.1 (2005): 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“A Letter from Herr Max to John Mastiff, Esq, Chairman of the Animals’ Jubilee Committee.” Animal World 18.216 (Sept. 1, 1887): 129–44, 133–34.Google Scholar
Mangum, Teresa. “Animal Angst: Victorians Memorialize their Pets.” Victorian Animal Dreams: Representations of Animals in Victorian Literature and Culture. Ed. Morse, Deborah Denenholz and Danahay, Martin. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2007: 15–34.Google Scholar
Marcus, Sharon. Between Women: Friendship, Desire, and Marriage in Victorian England. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“News and Notes.” Animal World 23.279 (Dec. 1, 1892): 177–92, 178.Google Scholar
“Notice to Band of Mercy Societies.” Band of Mercy 5.49 (1883): 2–8, 2–3.Google Scholar
“Our Object.” Animal World 1.1 (Oct. 1869): 1–16, 8.Google Scholar
Pearson, Susan J.The Rights of the Defenseless: Protecting Animals in Gilded Age America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perkins, David. Romanticism and Animal Rights. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“The Protection of All Defenseless Animals.” Animal World 1.5 (1870):81–96, 94–95.Google Scholar
Ritvo, Harriet. The Animal Estate: The English and Other Creatures in the Victorian Age. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1987.Google Scholar
“A Spoilt Pet.” Band of Mercy 15.174 (June 1893): 41–48, 42.Google Scholar
Turner, James. Reckoning with the Beast: Animals, Pain, and Humanity in the Victorian Mind. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiener, Martin J.Men of Blood: Violence, Manliness, and Criminal Justice in Victorian England. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wollstonecraft, Mary. Original Stories from Real Life. Oxford: Woodstock Books, 1990.Google Scholar
Wood, J. Carter. “A Useful Savagery: The Invention of Violence in Nineteenth-Century England.” Journal of Victorian Culture 9.1 (Spring 2004): 22–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolson, Constance Fenimore. “Tom – Our Hero.” Animal World 22.262 (July 1, 1891): 97–112, 108.Google Scholar
“A Word to Parents.” Band of Mercy Advocate 2.18 (June 1880): 41–48, 43.Google Scholar