Skip to main content

Conclusion: Undumb

  • 429 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter asks the question: How could television representations change in order to attend to animals in a manner that is not exploitative? It argues that ideas of species, as well as human superiority, need to be abandoned, and media such as television should explore newer forms of representation that attempt to account for animals’ subjectivity. It also argues that a key problem is the humanities themselves, which by definition prioritise the human. The chapter therefore ends with a call for a rejection of the humanities, arguing for the animalities to take their place.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-51683-1_7
  • Chapter length: 22 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-1-137-51683-1
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   149.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)

References

  • Berger, John (2009/1980) Why Look at Animals?, London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettelheim, Bruno (1976) The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales, London: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Compassion in World Farming (2013) Strategic Plan 2013–2017: For Kinder, Fairer Farming Worldwide, Godalming: Compassion in World Farming.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuneo, Pia F. (2014) ‘Introduction’, in Pia F. Cuneo (ed.) Animals and Early Modern Identity, Farnham: Ashgate, 1–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, Jacques (2008/2006) The Animal That Therefore I Am, trans. David Wills, New York: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • DogTV (2016a) ‘About DogTV’, DogTV, https://www.dogtv.com/about-dogtv, accessed 1 May 2017.

  • DogTV (2016b) ‘Programs’, DogTV, https://www.dogtv.com/programs, accessed 1 May 2017.

  • Foucault, Michel (1982) ‘The Subject and Power’, Critical Inquiry, 8 (4): 777–95.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Green, Miranda (1992) Animals in Celtic Life and Myth, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malamud, Randy (2012) An Introduction to Animals and Visual Culture, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milius, Susan (2007) ‘Science Behind the Soap Opera: The Cute and Shocking at Meerkat Manor’, Science News, 171 (9): 138–40.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mills, Brett (2010) ‘Television Wildlife Documentaries and Animals’ Right to Privacy’, Continuum: Journal of Media and Cultural Studies, 24 (2): 193–202.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, Thomas (1974) ‘What Is It Like to Be a Bat?’ The Philosophical Review, 83 (4): 435–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Audit Office (2009) The Health of Livestock and Honeybees in England, London: Stationery Office Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Meara, Radha (2014) ‘Do Cats Know They Rule YouTube? Surveillance and the Pleasures of Cat Video’, M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture, http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/view/794, accessed 1 May 2017.

  • Pick, Anat (2015) ‘Why Not Look at Animals?’, European Journal of Media Studies, 4 (1): 107–25.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Poniewozik, James (2007) ‘Looks Like Meerkat Love’, Time, 170 (20): 142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, Karsten (2013) ‘TV For Dogs (Not as Weird as You Think)’, Forbes, 7 September, 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Urton, Gary (1985) Animal Myths and Metaphors in South America, Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werness, Hope B. (2004) The Continuum Encyclopedia of Animal Symbolism in Art, New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, Roy (1974) Man and Beast, London: Granada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wynne, Clive D.L. (2004) Do Animals Think? Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brett Mills .

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mills, B. (2017). Conclusion: Undumb. In: Animals on Television. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51683-1_7

Download citation