Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Introduction: Dumb

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Animals on Television

  • 627 Accesses

Abstract

In what ways are animals represented on television, how might we go about thinking about those representations, and what are the consequences for animals of those depictions? This chapter outlines how we might go about noticing the representation of animals on television, and argues for the necessity of doing so. In particular it attends to the specificity of television, demonstrating that animals function within that medium in a particular way because of television’s domestic consumption and interest in the everyday. It introduces frameworks for thinking about animals on television through the case study of four different television dogs, from the programmes Downton Abbey, Family Guy, Britain’s Got Talent and Dogs Might Fly. And it also outlines what kinds of animal representations are absent from television.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adams, Carol J. (1994) Neither Man Nor Beast: Feminism and the Defence of Animals, New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, Carol J. (1995) ‘Comment on George’s “Should Feminists be Vegetarians?”’, Signs, 21 (1): 221–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, Carol J. and Josephine Donovan (1995) ‘Introduction’, in Carol J. Adams and Josephine Donovan (eds.) Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical Explorations, Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1–8.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, Carol J. and Lori Gruen (2014) ‘Introduction’, in Carol J. Adams and Lori Gruen (eds.) Ecofeminism: Feminist Interactions with Other Animals and the Earth, London: Bloomsbury, 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguilera, Leanne (2013) ‘Family Guy’s Shocking Death: Boss Decides Why They Decided to Kill Off [Spoiler]!’, E! Online, http://www.eonline.com/news/484172/family-guy-s-shocking-death-boss-reveals-why-they-decided-to-kill-off-spoiler, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Alger, Janet M. and Steven F. Alger (2003) ‘Drawing the Line Between Humans and Animals: An Examination of Introductory Sociology Textbooks’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23 (3): 69–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Benedict (1983) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, Kay (2014) ‘Mind Over Matter? On Decentring the Human in Human Geography’, Cultural Geographies, 21 (1): 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Animal and Plant Inspection Service (2015) ‘Annual Report Animal Usage by Fiscal Year’, Animal and Plant Inspection Service, https://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/7023/Animals%20Used%20In%20Research%202014.pdf, accessed 20 April 2016.

  • Baker, Steve (2001) Picturing the Beast: Animals, Identity and Representation, Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, John (2006) ‘Resistance is Fertile: From Environmental to Sustainability Citizenship’, in Andrew Dobson and Derek Bell (eds.) Environmental Citizenship, Cambridge: MIT Press, 21–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baynton, Douglas C. (1996) Forbidden Signs: American Culture and the Campaign Against Sign Language, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beauvoir, Simone de (1972/1949) The Second Sex, trans. H.M. Parshley, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Birke, Lynda (2010) ‘Structuring Relationships: On Science, Feminism and Non-Human Animals’, Feminism and Psychology, 20 (3): 337–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blue, Gwendolyn and Melanie Rock (2014) ‘Animal Publics: Accounting for Heterogeneity in Political Life’, Society and Animals, 22 (5): 503–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bousé, Derek (2000) Wildlife Films, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boyle, Danny (2014) ‘Hugh Bonneville: “Anyone who Thinks Isis the Dog Being Killed off Because of Terror Group is a Complete Berk”’, The Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/downton-abbey/11211384/Hugh-Bonneville-Anyone-who-thinks-Isis-the-dog-is-being-killed-off-because-of-terror-group-is-complete-berk.html, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Broad, Garrett M. (2016) ‘Animal Production, Ag-Gag Laws, and the Social Production of Innocence: Exploring the Role of Storytelling’, Environmental Communication, 10 (1): 43–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Lydia (2014) ‘The Crisis of Disability is Violence: Ableism, Torture, and Murder’, Tikkun, 29 (4): 31–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, Clifton D. (1979) ‘The Zoological Connection: Animal-Related Human Behavior’, Social Forces, 58 (2): 399–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buller, Henry (2014) ‘Animal Geographies 1’, Progress in Human Geography, 38 (2): 308–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, Jonathan (2002) Animals in Film, London: Reaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, Jonathan (2005) ‘John Berger’s “Why Look at Animals?”: A Close Reading’, Worldviews, 9 (2): 203–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Fiona A.K. (2001) ‘Inciting Legal Fictions: “Disability’s” Date with Ontology and the Ableist Body of the Law’, Griffith Law Review, 10 (1): 42–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, Fiona Kumari (2009) Contours of Ableism: The Production of Disability and Abledness, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, Licia (2007) ‘The Human as Just Another Animal: Madness, Disability, and Foucault’s Bestiary’, in Corinne Painter and Christian Lotz (eds.) Phenomenology and the Non-Human Animal: At the Limits of Experience, Dordrecht: Springer, 117–34.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carswell, Cally (2017) ‘Trump’s Wall Threatens Thousands of Plant and Animal Species on the US-Mexico Border’, Scientific American, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-rsquo-s-wall-threatens-thousands-of-plant-and-animal-species-on-the-u-s-mexico-border/, accessed 1 May 2017.

  • Cochrane, Alasdair (2009) ‘Do Animals Have an Interest in Liberty?’ Political Studies, 57 (3): 660–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, Alasdair (2010) An Introduction to Animals and Political Theory, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Cookman, Liz (2016) ‘Dogs Can Fly! Meet the Trainers Turning Puppies into Pilots’, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2016/feb/26/dogs-might-fly-meet-the-trainers-turning-puppies-into-pilots, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Corner, John (1999) Critical Ideas in Television Studies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cudworth, Erika (2015) ‘A Sociology for Other Animals: Analysis, Advocacy, Intervention’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 36 (3/4): 242–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danta, Chris (2013) ‘The New Solitude: Melancholy Anthropomorphism and the Molecular Gaze’, English Studies in Canada, 39 (1): 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daston, Lorraine and Gregg Mitman (2005) ‘The How and Why of Thinking with Animals’, in Lorraine Daston and Gregg Mitman (eds.) Thinking with Animals: New Perspectives on Anthropomorphism, New York: Columbia University Press, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, Karen (1995) ‘Thinking Like a Chicken: Farm Animals and the Feminine Connection’, in Carol J. Adams and Josephine Donovan (eds.) Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical Explorations, Durham and London: Duke University Press, 192–212.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, Simon (2014) ‘Broadcasting and the Public Sphere: Problematising Citizens, Consumers and Neoliberalism’, Media, Culture and Society, 36 (5): 702–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Waal, Frans (2016) Are We Smart Enough to Know How Smart Animals Are? London: Granta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deckha, Maneesha (2012) ‘Critical Animal Studies and the Law’, Animal Law, 18 (2): 207–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMello, Margo (2012) Animals and Society: An Introduction to Human-Animal Studies, New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Descartes, René (1649/1970) ‘Descartes to More, 5 February 1649’, in Anthony Kenny (ed.) Descartes: Philosophical Letters, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 237–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickens, Peter (2004) Society and Nature, Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobson, Andrew (2003) Citizenship and the Environment, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, Sue and Will Kymlicka (2011) Zoopolis: A Political Theory of Animal Rights, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elías, Carlos (2008) ‘Science and Scientists Turned into News and Media Stars by Scientific Journals: A Study on the Consequences on the Present Scientific Behaviour’, Journal of Science Communication, 7 (3): 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2012) EU Animal Welfare Strategy: 2012–2015, Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2013) Seventh Report on the Statistics on the Number of Animals used for Experimental and other Scientific Purposes in the Member States of the European Union, Brussels: European Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernández-Armesto, Felipe (2004) So You Think You’re Human?: A Brief History of Humankind, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fjellstrom, Roger (2003) ‘Is Singer’s Ethics Speciesist?’ Environmental Values, 12 (1): 91–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, Clifton P. (2003) ‘A Course is a Course, Of Course, Of Course (Unless it’s an Animal and Society Course): Challenging Boundaries in Academia’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23 (3): 94–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, Bob (2001) British Television Policy: A Reader, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fudge, Erica (2000) Perceiving Animals: Humans and Beasts in Early Modern English Culture, Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Furness, Hannah (2015) ‘Britain’s Got Talent Offers Refunds Over “Misleading” Stunt Dog Double’, The Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11807474/Britains-Got-Talent-offers-refunds-over-misleading-stunt-dog-double.html, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Gentilluci, Maurizio and Michael C. Corballis (2007) ‘The Hominid that Talked’, in Charles Pasternak (ed.) What Makes Us Human? Oxford: Oneworld, 49–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, Kathryn Paxton (1994) ‘Should Feminists be Vegetarians?’ Signs, 19 (2): 405–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, Kathryn Paxton (1995) ‘Reply to Adams, Donovan, and Gaard and Gruen’, Signs, 21 (1): 242–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, Lesley (2013) ‘Family Guy: Did Brian Return from the Dead?’ The Hollywood Reporter, http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/family-guy-brian-lives-665836, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Goodley, Dan (2011) Disability Studies: An Interdisciplinary Introduction, London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gregersdotter, Katarina, Johan Höglund and Nicklas Hållén (eds., 2015) Animal Horror Cinema: Genre, History and Criticism, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruen, Lori and Kari Weil (2012) ‘Animals Others—Editors’ Introduction’, Hypatia, 27 (3): 477–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Stuart (1997a) ‘Introduction’, in Stuart Hall (ed.) Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices, London: Sage, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Stuart (1997b) ‘The Work of Representation’, in Stuart Hall (ed.) Representation: Cultural Representations ad Signifying Practices, London: Sage, 13–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, Stuart (1997c) ‘The Spectacle of the “Other”’, in Stuart Hall (ed.) Representation: Cultural Representations ad Signifying Practices, London: Sage, 223–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna (1991) Simians, Cyborgs and Nature: The Reinvention of Nature, London: Free Association Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway, Donna (2008) When Species Meet, Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, John (1999) Uses of Television, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, John (1999) ‘Disentangling the Beast: Humans and Other Animals in Aeschylus’ Oresteia, The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 119 (1): 17–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger, Martin (1998/1946) ‘Letter on “Humanism”’, trans. Frank A. Capuzzi, in William McNeill (ed.) Pathmarks, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 239–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, David (2014) ‘Animal Worlds in Modern Fiction: An Introduction’, MFS: Modern Fiction Studies, 60 (3): 421–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinchcliffe, Christopher (2015) ‘Animals and the Limits of Citizenship: Zoopolis and the Concept of Citizenship’, Journal of Political Philosophy, 23 (3): 302–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holslin, Peter (2013) ‘Why Family Guy Killed Brian’, Rolling Stone, http://www.rollingstone.com/tv/news/why-family-guy-killed-brian-griffin-20131126, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Home Office (2014) Advisory Notes on Recording and Reporting the Actual Severity of Regulated Procedures, London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Home Office (2016) Annual Statistics of Scientific Procedures on Living Animals, Great Britain 2015, London: Home Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hooton, Christopher (2014) ‘Seth McFarlane Reveals Why He Killed Brian Griffin in Family Guy’, The Independent, http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/seth-macfarlane-reveals-why-he-killed-brian-griffin-in-family-guy-9058894.html, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Houde, Lincoln J. and Connie Bullis (1999) ‘Ecofeminist Pedagogy: An Exploratory Case’, Ethics and the Environment, 4 (2): 143–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humane Society, The (2013) ‘Questions and Answers about Biomedical Research’, The Humane Society, http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/biomedical_research/qa/questions_answers.htm, accessed 20 April 2016.

  • Humane Society, The (2014) ‘Farm Animal Statistics: Slaughter Totals’, The Humane Society, http://www.humanesociety.org/news/resources/research/stats_slaughter_totals.html, accessed 20 April 2016.

  • Johnson, Lisa (2012) Power, Knowledge, Animals, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kean, Hilda (2009) ‘Balto, the Alaskan Dog and his Statue in New York’s Central Park: Animal Representation and National Heritage’, International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15 (5): 413–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladd, Paddy (2003) Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladd, Paddy (2008) ‘Colonialism and Resistance: A Brief History of Deafhood’, in H-Dirksen L. Baumen (ed.) Open Your Eyes: Deaf Studies Talking, Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press, 42–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, Michael and Laura McMahon (eds., 2015) Animal Life and the Moving Image, London: British Film Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Raymond (1970) Not So Dumb: Animals in the Movies, New York: Castle Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, Emmanuel (1990/1963) Difficult Freedom: Essays on Judaism, trans. Seán Hand, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Justin (2002) ‘Mass Communication Studies’, in Toby Miller (ed.) Television Studies, London: British Film Institute, 4–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, Justin, Sanna Inthorn and Karin Wahl-Jorgensen (2005) Citizens or Consumers? What the Media Tell Us About Political Participation, Maidenhead: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, S. Matthew (2010) ‘The Basis of Human Moral Status’, Journal of Moral Philosophy, 7 (2): 159–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lidchi, Henrietta (1997) ‘The Poetics and the Politics of Exhibiting Other Cultures’, in Stuart Hall (ed.) Representation: Cultural Representations ad Signifying Practices, London: Sage, 151–222.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz, Konrad (2002/1949) Man Meets Dog, trans. Marjorie Kerr Wilson, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, Thomas (1989) ‘Introduction’ in Jürgen Habermas (1989/1962) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, trans. Thomas Burger with Frederick Lawrence, Cambridge: Polity, xi–xvi.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, David B. (2006) ‘Pushing the Limits of Humanity? Reinterpreting Animal Rights and “Personhood” Through the Prism of the Holocaust’, Journal of Human Rights, 5 (4): 417–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, Kevin (2016) ‘From Online Video Store to Global Internet TV Network: Netflix and the Future of Home Entertainment’, in Kevin McDonald and Daniel Smith-Rowsey (eds.) The Netflix Effect: Technology and Entertainment in the 21st Century, New York: Bloomsbury, 203–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell, Jennifer (2013) ‘Literary Studies, the Animal Turn, and the Academy’, Social Alternatives, 32 (4): 6–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHugh, Susan (2011) Animal Stories: Narrating Across Species Lines, Minneapolis and London: University of Minnesota Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McHugh, Susan (2012) ‘Bitch, Bitch, Bitch: Personal Criticism, Feminist Theory, and Dog-Writing’, Hypatia, 27 (3): 616–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahan, Jeff (1996) ‘Cognitive Disability, Misfortune and Justice’, Philosophy and Public Affairs, 25 (1): 3–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMahan, Jeff (2002) The Ethics of Killing: Problems at the Margins of Life, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mangum, Teresa (2002) ‘Dog Years, Human Fears’, in Nigel Rothfels (ed.) Representing Animals, Bloomington and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 35–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marceau, Justin F. (2015) ‘Ag Gag Past, Present and Future’, Seattle University Law Review, 38 (4): 1317–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • McHugh, Susan (2004) Dog, London: Reaction Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, Mary (1985) ‘Person and Non-Persons’, in Peter Singer (ed.) In Defence of Animals, New York: Basil Blackwell, 52–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milam, Jennifer (2015) ‘Rococo Representation of Interspecies Sensuality and the Pursuit of Volupté’, Art Bulletin, 97 (2): 192–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molloy, Claire (2011) Popular Media and Animals, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morus (1954) Animals, Men and Myths: A History of the Influence of Animals on Civilisation and Culture, London: Victor Gollancz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullin, Molly H. (1999) ‘Mirrors and Windows: Sociocultural Studies of Human-Animal Relationships’, Annual Review of Anthropology, 28 (1): 201–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulvey, Laura (1975) ‘Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema’, Screen, 16 (3): 6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nibert, David (2003) ‘Humans and Other Animals: Sociology’s Moral and Intellectual Challenge’, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23 (3): 4–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nibert, David (2014) ‘Foreword’, in Anthony J. Nocella II, John Sorenson, Kim Socha and Atsuko Matsuoka (eds.) Defining Critical Animal Studies: An Intersectional Justice Approach for Liberation, New York: Peter Lang, ix–xi.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nocella II, Anthony J., John Sorenson, Kim Socha and Atsuko Matsuoka (2014) ‘The Emergence of Critical Animal Studies: The Rise of Intersectional Animal Liberations’, in Anthony J. Nocella II, John Sorenson, Kim Socha and Atsuko Matsuoka (eds.) Defining Critical Animal Studies: An Intersectional Justice Approach for Liberation, New York: Peter Lang, xix–xxxv.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noske, Barbara (1989) Humans and Other Animals: Beyond the Boundaries of Anthropology, London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nurse, Angus (2016) ‘Beyond the Property Debate: Animal Welfare as a Public Good’, Contemporary Justice Review, 19 (2): 174–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ofcom (2015) Ofcom Broadcast Bulletin, 285, London: Ofcom.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, Susan (2013) ‘Speaking Bodies, Speaking Minds: Animals, Language, History’, History and Theory, 52 (4): 91–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peggs, Kay (2013) ‘The “Animal-Advocacy Agenda”: Exploring Sociology for Non-Human Animals’, The Sociological Review, 61 (3): 591–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, Alan (2002) ‘Replicating Our Bodies, Losing Our Selves: News Media Portrayals of Human Cloning in the Wake of Dolly’, Body and Society, 8 (4): 71–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pick, Anat (2011) Creaturely Poetics: Animality and Vulnerability in Literature and Film, New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pick, Anat (2013) ‘Book Review: Popular Media and Animals’, Anthrozoös: A Multidisciplinary Journal of the Interactions of People and Animals, 26 (4): 627–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pick, Anat and Guinevere Narraway (eds., 2013) Screening Nature: Cinema Beyond the Human, New York and Oxford: Berghahn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinker, Steven and Ray Jackendoff (2005) ‘The Faculty of Language: What’s Special About It?’, Cognition, 95 (2): 201–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Premack, David (1986) Gavagai!: Or, The Future History of the Animal Language Controversy, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan, Tom (1983) The Case for Animal Rights, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritvo, Harriet (1987) The Animal Estate: The English and Other Creatures in the Victorian Age, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothfels, Nigel (2005) ‘Why Look at Elephants?’, Worldviews, 9 (2): 166–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RSPCA (2016) ‘Farm Animals’, RSPCA, http://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/farm, accessed 24 April 2016.

  • Ryder, Richard (1983) Victims of Science: The Use of Animals in Research, London: National Anti-Vivisection Society Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, Daniel (2010) ‘From Marginal Cases to Linked Oppressions: Reframing the Conflict Between the Autistic Pride and Animal Rights Movements’, Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 8 (1/2): 47–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaffner, Joan E. (2010) An Introduction to Animals and the Law, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Serpell, James and Elizabeth Paul (1994) ‘Pets and the Development of Positive Attitudes Towards Animals’, in Aubrey Manning and James Serpell (eds.) Animals and Human Society: Changing Perspectives, London: Routledge, 127–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shell, Marc (2004) ‘Animals that Talk; Or, Stutter’, Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, 15 (1): 84–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherwin, Adam (2015) ‘Dogs Might Fly: Ground-Breaking TV Experiment Will Train a Labrador to Become a Pilot’, The Independent, http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/dogs-might-fly-ground-breaking-tv-experiment-will-train-a-labrador-to-become-a-pilot-a6724871.html, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Singer, Peter (1975) Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals, London: HarperCollins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, Peter (1993) Practical Ethics, 2nd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, Peter (2004) ‘Ethics Beyond Species and Beyond Instincts: A Response to Richard Posner’, in Cass R. Sunstein and Martha C. Nussbaum (eds.) Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Speaking of Research (2015) ‘US Statistics’, Speaking of Research, https://speakingofresearch.com/facts/statistics/, accessed 20 April 2016.

  • Steel, Karl and Peggy McCracken (2011) ‘The Animal Turn: Into the Sea with the Fish-Knights of Perceforest’, Postmedieval: A Journal of Medieval Cultural Studies, 2 (1): 88–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swart, Sandra (2007) ‘“But Where’s the Bloody Horse?” Textuality and Corporeality in the “Animal Turn”’, Journal of Literary Studies, 23 (3): 271–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweeney, Mark (2015) ‘Britain’s Got Talent to be Investigated Over Stunt-Double Dog’, The Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jun/15/britains-got-talent-investigated-stunt-dog-double-simon-cowell, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Sykes, Katie (2011) ‘“Nations Like Unto Yourselves”: An Inquiry into the Status of a General Principle of International Law on Animal Welfare’, Canadian Yearbook of International Law, 49 (1): 3–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, Graeme (2009) ‘Television and the Nation: Does This Matter Any More?’, in Graeme Turner and Jenna Tay (eds.) Television Studies After TV: Understanding Television in the Post-Broadcast Era, London: Routledge, 54–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turnock, Rob (2007) Television and Consumer Culture: Britain and the Transformation of Modernity, London: IB Tauris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Twine, Richard (2012) ‘Revealing the “Animal-Industrial Complex”—A Concept and Method for Critical Animal Studies?’ Journal for Critical Animal Studies, 10 (1): 12–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uddin, Lisa (2003) ‘Canine Citizenship and the Intimate Public Sphere’, InVisible Culture: An Electronic Journal for Visual Culture, http://ivc.lib.rochester.edu/canine-citizenship-and-the-intimate-public-sphere/, accessed 1 May 2017.

  • Wade, Maurice L. (1996) ‘Sports and Speciesism’, Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, 23 (1): 10–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldau, Paul (2011) Animal Rights: What Everyone Needs to Know, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washington, Booker T. (1901/1986) Up From Slavery, New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waters, Lowenna (2013) ‘Brian’s Family Guy Death Causes 95,000 to Sign Petition’, The Telegraph, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/10478958/Brians-Family-Guy-death-causes-95000-to-sign-petition.html, accessed 4 April 2016.

  • Weil, Kari (2010) ‘A Report on the Animal Turn’, Differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, 21 (2): 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkie, Rhoda (2015) ‘Multispecies Scholarship and Encounters: Changing Assumptions at the Human-Animal Nexus’, Sociology, 49 (2): 323–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Bernard (2006) Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, David (2007) ‘Inappropriate/d Others, or, The Difficulty of Being a Dog’, TDR: The Drama Review, 51 (1): 92–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe, Cary (2008) ‘Learning from Temple Grandin, or, Animal Studies, Disability Studies, and Who Comes After the Subject’, New Formations, 64 (1): 110–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wollstonecraft, Mary (2009/1792) A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, New York: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wrenn, Corey Lee, Joanne Clark, Maddie Judge, Katherine A. Gilchrist, Melanie Woodlock, Katherine Dotson, Riva Spanos and Jonothan Wrenn (2015) ‘The Medicalization of Nonhuman Animal Rights: Frame Contestation and the Exploitation of Disability’, Disability and Society, 30 (9): 1307–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Art, Media and American Studies, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

    Brett Mills

Authors
  1. Brett Mills
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brett Mills .

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mills, B. (2017). Introduction: Dumb. In: Animals on Television. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51683-1_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation