15 November 2009
Hubris and Book Titles
How presumptuous for Jonathan Safran Foer to conclude that telling most people that he was writing a book entitled “Eating Animals” would elicit their unprejudiced opinion that vegetarianism is ethically superior to meat-eating. Another word for it is hubris—assuming that one’s choice for a book’s title cannot sway a reader’s perspective on its subject.
After all, humans are still on top of the food chain. That does not keep us from being humane in our treatment of other animals, but we don’t do that in order not to cause them pain. The real reason for making the effort to treat other creatures as gently as possible is to obviate brutalizing ourselves.
Perhaps Elizabeth Kolbert should have suggested another title to Mr. Foer in the November 9, 2009, New Yorker, as she did in the August 31, 2009, issue to Colin Beavan, the equally egotistical author of “No Impact Man.” How about “Denying We’re Animals.”
How presumptuous for Jonathan Safran Foer to conclude that telling most people that he was writing a book entitled “Eating Animals” would elicit their unprejudiced opinion that vegetarianism is ethically superior to meat-eating. Another word for it is hubris—assuming that one’s choice for a book’s title cannot sway a reader’s perspective on its subject.
After all, humans are still on top of the food chain. That does not keep us from being humane in our treatment of other animals, but we don’t do that in order not to cause them pain. The real reason for making the effort to treat other creatures as gently as possible is to obviate brutalizing ourselves.
Perhaps Elizabeth Kolbert should have suggested another title to Mr. Foer in the November 9, 2009, New Yorker, as she did in the August 31, 2009, issue to Colin Beavan, the equally egotistical author of “No Impact Man.” How about “Denying We’re Animals.”
Comments:
Post a Comment
