The Anatomy of Cruelty
When H. G. Wells wrote his fantastic tale about a scientist who breeds human-animal hybrids with sadistic intent—created to destroy one another, plus any humans unfortunate enough to wash up on The Island of Dr. Moreau—that utopian socialist probably didn’t envision his own country becoming another island of lost souls.
Morally speaking, however, modern-day Britain increasingly resembles the futuristic dystopia Wells depicted in The Time Machine: a post-historic world where mutant cannibals, the Morlocks, sustain themselves upon the helpless descendants of modern men, the Eloi.
A harsh analogy? Just consider this breaking news: Britain’s own Moreaus have been given the all’s clear to farm human-animal hybrid embryos for stem-cell research. Like Moreau, these gods of the laboratory also create to destroy, but with the putative aim of doing good: saving sick people by curing incurable diseases. Creative destruction, if you will.
Even if this should prove possible, the notion of achieving good ends through destructive (or, if you like, evil) means is still a Devil’s bargain, smacking of hubris and destined to folly. Even if Grandma shouldn’t die of Alzheimer’s any longer, that won’t make the Grim Reaper reconsider his vocation. People will continue to die, however many nascent human beings (or, literally, human guinea pigs) are destroyed to delay the inevitable.
Despite the ghoulish attempts of men who would play God, it’s instructive to remind ourselves that no man can create a living being from scratch. Animal hybrids count no more than plant hybrids. In both cases, creation is merely manipulated to assume new forms, like lumps of clay molded into sundry forms.
Creating even the simplest organism is beyond our ability, a cell being incomparably more complex—and awe inspiring—than a computer chip. Playing God is best left to science fiction, where freak shows can entertain without incurring moral culpability.
*****
No man can create an animal, but history shows men terribly capable of making animals of themselves. To be fair to the lower orders of creation, however, they don’t deserve to be grouped together with self-debased humans. While we can lower ourselves, smothering the spark of the divine that makes us human, animals cannot rise above their natures. Besides, some animals have exhibited a certain nobility that reminds us that one Creator made us all for each other’s mutual benefit. So it would be cruel to put Lassie or Robert E. Lee’s horse Traveller in the same pen with disgraced football star Mike Vick, who cashed in civilization for savagery.
As most know, Vick faces prison time for running a dog fighting operation. Evidently his $130 million contract with the Atlanta Falcons didn’t serve to cultivate higher forms of leisure. With his cronies, he trained dogs to fight to the death. Stacks of bloody Benjamins exchanged hands as they bet on the winners. Pooches who weren’t up to the ultimate challenge were killed: some drowned, others hanged (yes, hanged: but how, and why?).
After the court hearing where Vick entered a no-contest plea agreement, he consoled his mother, his sobbing pregnant fiancée, and legions of distraught fans who live vicariously through such "heroes." His actions were "immature," he said, his tail between his legs.
"I want to apologize to all the young kids out there for my immature acts and, you know, what I did was, what I did was very immature, so that means I need to grow up.”
It’s unmanly to kick someone when he’s down, and there’s always hope for redemption: of "mak[ing] Michael Vick a better person," as he put it.
But such gruesome acts of cruelty, which is the sheer pleasure of inflicting pain upon the helpless, demand punishment. Of course, Vick’s masters would have preferred covering up their star player’s "immature" pastime off the gridiron. He was an incredibly lucrative fighting machine himself, and his #7 jersey was one of the best selling in the whole NFL.
Although the dog fighting angle may be shocking, is it surprising that rotten things should bob to the surface of our cultural swamp? Cruelty toward the weak and helpless is often mistaken for strength nowadays, though it’s usually packaged as a virtue. Destroy a country for democracy? It’s just a blessing in disguise, really, and the wogs—never called such, of course, but that’s how the benighted are regarded—will thank us when they trade in their bullets for ballots. Pry good jobs from your countrymen and ship them to strangers overseas? That’s just the marvel of free trade. Besides, lighter wallets can buy cheaper foreign manufactures at the local Wal-Mart. Don’t have cash? Put it on plastic.
When it comes to the Neanderthal realm of commercial sport, however, there is no window dressing. "Being a man" is celebrated as the in-your-face exhibition of the rawest characteristics of the male sex, human or not: unbridled aggression; using females as mere vehicles for sexual gratification; expressing language in grunts with the aid of gesticulations; all accompanied to the "music" of a primitive beat with lyrics from that ring of Hell where all evil is banal.
And whereas the ancient Romans never would have dreamed of treating their human fighting animals as heroes, the lucrative contracts showered upon males like Vick give their behavior an imprimatur of propriety, though as fake as the "gold" in bling jewelry.
Nor is cruelty masquerading as manliness the sole domain of over-muscled morons. Maybe Vick truly believes that staging his little horror show was merely immature, though this recognition may be more reflexive—the humiliated reaction to getting caught—than genuinely understood. Less can be said of otherwise admirable men like Ernest Hemingway and his friend, the great actor Gary Cooper. They should have known better.
In the biography Hemingway: Life into Art, Jeffrey Meyers recounts one of Papa and Coop’s hunting expeditions. They were accompanied by Ingrid Bergman’s first husband, Petter Lindstrom, and the gentle Swede was shocked by the indiscriminate slaughter: "We drove along the power lines in a jeep and they shot eagles off the power lines using telescopic scopes. ... Another day we went rabbit hunting. They engaged these farmers to ride in trucks chasing the rabbits towards them. They killed maybe fifty rabbits. Nobody wanted them."
Killing distant eagles and scurrying rabbits may be one thing, though Natty Bumpo (who felt such remorse for shooting an eagle) and Beatrix Potter would beg to differ. Cruelty to man’s best friend, however, is more beastly than anything a mere animal could contrive. It’s impossible to imagine Hemingway, Cooper, or any real man abusing a dog.
*****
On a lighter note, it’s worth mentioning that even when man’s best friend isn’t available to pet and play fetch, he sometimes has to be invented as an imaginary friend.
Strolling about Capitol Hill the other evening, I saw a little boy playing on the sidewalk in front of his home. He was maybe five years old. As I approached, he said, "Hi, you got a dog?"
"Yeah, but she’s on vacation," I answered, which is sort of true: It would be tough caring for a dog given my work schedule (a dog being not a cat), so Julia—a Pomeranian-Chihuahua mix consisting of equal parts charm and naughtiness rolled up into one furry roly-poly of a mutt—resides with my folks back in Chicago.
"Well, you wanna see my dog?" asked the boy. Of course I did.
So he ran into his front yard and pulled out a sort of toy dog—or so it appeared—attached to the end of a push cart resembling one of those make-believe lawnmowers with bobbing balls that a boy pushes alongside his father while the old man cuts the grass. And so the three of us walked a few yards down the sidewalk together.
It was twilight, and when the last rays of sunshine broke through the shady trees, I saw that the boy actually was pushing a toy frog.
"Hey, that’s not a dog, that’s a frog," I said.
"Yeah, I know he’s a frog, but I call him my dog," said the boy.
Then he swiftly turned around with his frog-dog and said, "Nice meeting ya’, but I’ve gotta go inside now!"
He didn’t abruptly depart because he was disenchanted by this statement of fact. He was just your usual uninhibited kid, in this case for the better. Some children can be the cruelest human beings for the same reason; others never are cruel, their marks of Original Sin expressed in other deformations of character; a few, alas, never develop the moral maturity requisite to conquer cruelty, becoming pathetic shades of the men we all are called to be.
Matthew Rarey writes from Washington. He can be reached at
Comments
I’m not quite sure I see the point. At the top, many men will get rich playing the part of Dr. Moreau doing things to humans - and animals which are the other half of the hybrid - of which we are complaining about Vick. But that same cruelty applies to the vivisection that is abortion (noting that Vick’s girlfriend could do something far crueler to his baby than anything involving the dogs). Yet even here, this evil is now banal. And we don’t think this is hell on earth? How many dogs v.s. how many babies?
I should look in the early 1800’s american journals to look for a critique of a mistreatment of an american flag or the seamstresses who made something else in cotton yet ignoring the peculiar institution below the mason-dixon line where the cotton was produced.
But take heart, both liberals and conservatives (even here) often welcome puritanical bans and ostracism for smoking cigarettes!
Click to flag this comment as abusive
About those Romans and their “human fighting animals”:
They most certainy did treat them as heroes; that is,
some Romans did, some of the time, just as some
Americans admire football thugs like Michael Vick.
Some gladiators became famous and wealthy,and were sought after as
“romantic” partners by Roman matrons of the more
adventurous sort.....and it was not unknown for free
men to voluntarily go into the arena to fight as
gladiators, in search of fame and wealth. The public
worship of brutality is nothing new.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
We are at the tail end of our culture. there are so many examples of the US being on the downward slope of greatness. Vick is just one example.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
The good Senator Robert Byrd had a lot to say about the Vick matter on the Senate floor. His speech is on YouTube, in two parts:
Part I:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qT3zrs4xR8M
Part II:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX9HRMDvZ_0
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I guess that when it comes to mistreating dogs, there
are no Libertarians. I have yet to hear complaints
about Government interfering and taking away the
property of a man (his dogs) without compensation
(even worse throwing him in jail) for an activity which
involved free agents. Those who wanted to watch dog
fights, paid for it, and those who did not like dogs
fights stayed away.
Yes, a Libertarian case could be made for Michael Vick.
That no one seems to be doing proves that there are
things that trump Liberty.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Whatever punishment may be assigned to Michael Vick,
I’m sure it won’t match his offense. In a society that
values wealth and power above honesty and kindness,
entities like Vick will never suffer adequately. This
is abetted by our human arrogance - we feel the animal
kingdom, even our beloved dogs, cats, horses, etc.
are of less value than we are. Humans like Vick are
helping put the lie to that line of thinking.
Twisting the gentle spirit of an animal into one
obsessed with killing is a vile act that only a
human would undertake. The ever-increasing violence
in our entertainment: movies, sports & music, is
symptomatic of a culture that has lost its way,
which our GPS devices and other technological bling
will never help us find.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Yeah, Adriana, by all means do us a huge favor and fill the lacuna: let us in on the great libertarian case for Michael Vick’s hanging and electrocution of dogs. Having seen your silly whinning about how Pat Buchanan’s daring to tell the truth about WWII is going to permit the neocons to (gasp!) engage in demagoguery and other nastiness (and thus how we should keep quiet about that) we all wait breathlessly for your lofty insights on this far more important matter.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Give me a break: the dogs were Michael Vicks,the property was his as well.He hurt no human that I am aware of.We have candidates who advocate sucking the brains out o babies heads and Michael Vick is ruined for life with years in prison.A lot of country people like dogs or cock fights or in Spanish culture bullfights.It isn’t pretty but please lets be rational.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Why make a distinction between torturing and killing dogs, and shooting countless wild animals that you don’t even need for food? Silly - getting all excited about dogs only.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give Taki's Magazine permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. Personal attacks, ethnic slurs, the riding of hobby horses and the beating of dead ones will be deleted as soon as they are detected by our small but alert staff. Repeat abusers of this policy will be barred from leaving comments. All comments reflect only the views of those posting them and not necessarily those of this website, its editors, or authors. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
Commenting is not available in this section entry.