Book Review
Clinton R. Sanders
Understanding Dogs: Living and Working with Canine Companions
Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1999. 201 pp.

Jennifer Wolch 1 
University of Southern California

Sanders has written a thought_provoking addition to the growing literature on human_animal relations. In this eminently readable and worthwhile book, he explores how people who work with dogs on an everyday basis understand their companion animals. Are they seen as objects to be controlled, used, and discarded or are they “thoughtful, and intentional individuals with whom we have ongoing interactions that parallel our social exchanges with fellow humans?” (p. xv). Using ethnographic methods, Sanders investigates this issue with four groups of people whose lives are intimately linked to canines: everyday dog owners, guide dog owners, guide dog trainers, and veterinarians. All are distinctive in terms of their relations with dogs, how dogs influence their daily lives, and how they interpret canine behavior. However, Sanders' rich ethnographic analysis reveals that although there is some ambivalence about dogs as minded subjects—reflecting the general ambivalence about animals that vacillates between “dominance and affection” (Tuan, 1984)—dogs mostly are seen as individuals who participate in meaningful social interactions with people. As such, they warrant inclusion in the sociological imagination, according to Sanders, and should be studied to better understand their roles in human social life, as well as to allow us to grasp the shape of their own lives as thinking, social beings.

The book has six chapters. An introductory essay provides an initial grounding on interactions between people and companion animals. Here, Sanders argues that contrary to both neo_Cartesians and animal rights advocates, he sees dogs as subjects but not slaves. Rather, he claims that dogs are part of the family. Not the romanticized family of the cultural right. Nor the vilified family intent on depriving dogs of their rightful existence in a romanticized nature. But rather the imperfect, problematic, potentially violent family of the contemporary western world that, for all its warts, typically provides a loving, supportive environment for canine members.

The next four chapters are devoted to the four groups under study. All are different in their experience of dogs and the impact of dogs on their social relationships, and such differences make for intriguing reading. But they share a view of canines as thinking, reasoning subjects – despite inconsistencies and lapses of objectification when convenient, dictated by professional norms (e.g., behaviorist trainers), or essential to emotional well being (e.g., vets). The final chapter traces the growing acknowledgment of animals as individual subjects and identifies distinctive sociological research questions and methodological approaches to understanding people and animals. The book closes with a call for ethnographies that pay special attention to the mutual gaze and mutual play between people and dogs, since “it is in these linked activities that human_animal intersubjectivity and cooperative behavior are readily apparent” (p. 113).

By bringing canines back into the sociological fold, Sanders has donned the mantle of pioneering sociologist Read Bain, who in 1928 accused his profession of an anthropocentrism resulting from “theological teleology, an instance of organic ego_centrism, a type of wishful aggrandizement and self_glorification” (Bain, 1928, pp. 545_556). Like Bain, Sanders argues for a serious “animal sociology.” But he also contributes to contemporary debates within mainstream sociology. For example, given that dogs are increasingly treated as members of the “brave new family” (Stacy, 1990), how does this influence the sociology of the family, as manifest in the organization of daily life, familial relationships, and household consumption and decision_making? Sanders also speaks to the sociology of work and professions; there are significant numbers of veterinarians and linked companion animal health professionals in the United States. The analysis provided here serves as an important point of comparison with studies of other helping professionals.

In the final analysis, Sanders sees relationships between people and dogs as mutually beneficial, despite human ambivalence and callousness. I would like to agree with this assessment, yet it is hard to square with the cold, hard facts facing canines dependent upon the kindness of people. The Los Angeles County Department of Animal Care and Control, for example, recently estimated that 45,000 stray dogs roam the streets of the county, many in packs. Not surprisingly, this has generated both a surge in dog bite incidents (an estimated 200,000 bites and 12,900 emergency visits per year), and loud demands for round_ups (Rivera, 1999).

Why are there so many abandoned dogs if they are such beloved members of the family? Economy, culture, and geography all play a role. Despite economic recovery, many Angelenos are extremely poor and live in overcrowded rental housing neighborhoods—increasing the challenges of caring for dogs in the city. The region's cultural diversity also means that attitudes towards dogs are far more heterogeneous than in the communities where Sanders conducted his work. In some Los Angeles neighborhoods, dogs may be bred to fight, bought to guard property, displayed as symbols of virile masculinity, or even eaten. This suggests the need for cross_cultural, class_specific, and geographically contextualized analyses that can illuminate how different social groups in different places understand and relate to dogs and what such social differences mean for the everyday lives and fates of the dogs living there.

That said, I heartily recommend Understanding Dogs. The book is a welcome contribution to the growing multidisciplinary literature on human_animal relations.

References

Bain, R. (1928). The culture of canines. Sociology and Social Research, July_August, 545_556.

Rivera, C. (1999, November 14). Special Report: With county's stray dog population soaring to 45,000, authorities are fighting the public health threat with such tactics as special squads for canines. Los Angeles Times, pp. B1, B10.

Stacy, J. (1990). Brave new families: Stories of domestic upheaval in late twentieth century America. New York: Basic Books.

Tuan, Yi Fu. (1984). Dominance and affection: The making of pets. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Note

1 Correspondence should be sent to Jennifer Wolch, Department of Geography, University of Southern California, University Park, Los Angeles, CA 90089.
 

For Abstracts of all issues, including the most current, click Article Abstracts

To order Society & Animals Journal, go to our secure online ordering page

You can Search the online issues of Society & Animals, as well as the entire Society & Animals Forum (formerly PSYETA) website,
for topics and keywords of your interest: