MARGINAL COMMENT
By HAROLD N1COLSON
FOREIGNERS deride us for being sentimental about animals. If they were to examine the matter more closely they would discover that it is not so much sentiment that distinguishes our attitude as an almost total absence of logic. We accept a certain set of assumptions and take no pains at all to relate these assumptions to each other. The anti-vivisection- ists, I suppose, are logical in their own manner, although the passion that they throw into their propaganda suggests to me sometimes that their feelings are more potent than their thoughts. It may be unfair to assert that people who become extravagantly emotional about a cause are assailed by unconscious doubts as to its intellectual validity : after all, nobody, except crazy numerologists, becomes excited about arithmetic. I am not an anti-vivisectionist. since I am satisfied that, in this country at least, the practice is properly controlled. It is certainly cruel to inject ten white mice with sleeping-sickness, but if thereby you save the lives of ten thousand Africans the cruelty, to my disordered mind, appears to be justified. But I admit that the attitude adopted towards animals by the anti-vivisec- tionists is, if not entirely logical, at least consistent: I view them with disagreement but respect. The other animal-lovers often irritate me. I do not understand how a person who is sincerely devoted to animals can reconcile his devotion with the habit of killing these animals in elaborate ways. I do not want to become a bore on this subject and am well aware that I have mentioned it before. But when a tame stag is put in a van and deposited in the country in order to be chased by dogs, and when that stag takes refuge in my own woods, crashing through the bracken with slavering lips and frightened eyes, I find myself wondering sadly whether British sportsmanship does, in fact, comprise the high ethical qualities that are often claimed.
* * * * I am not suggesting for a moment that the British are hypo- critical in asserting their love of animals. Hypocrisy is a defect arising from a desire to deceive others ; our own muddle-headed- ness in this matter arises from a desire to deceive ourselves. Two loves we have, namely the love of animals and the love of sport ; if the latter at moments becomes more compelling than the former, we turn deaf ears and blind eyes to the contradiction entailed. To say that the fox actually enjoys being torn to pieces by hounds may not be a deeply intelligent statement: but it is incorrect to ascribe to hypocrisy our infinite capacity for not allowing our right hand to know what the left is doing. My complaint against my compatriots is not so much that they kill the thing they love as that they do not really understand or respect the objects of their affection: One can argue, I sup- pose, that a fox-hound is a more attractive animal than a fox, and that the pain caused to the latter is fully compensated by the pleasure that the former enjoys. But that is not an argument that I have heard very frequently advanced. What I mind much more than blood-sports are circuses. I am not con- sidering whether the training of animals involves physical cruelty: I am assured that, in this country at least, no great cruelty is applied. What I object to is that decent people should pay money to see animals exposed to humiliation. I am revolted by the cachinnations of those zanies who derive amuse- ment from seeing an elephant wearing a Victorian bonnet or a bear dressed as a curate. Animals possess greater dignity than human beings ; they are just as sensitive to ridicule ; it enrages me to see them turned into figures of fun.
* * * On the television last week I viewed ,,the exposition of some of the prize-winners in Cruft's dog-show. The owners of these rare animals paraded them up and down in front of the camera on a lead. From time to time they gave a small jerk to the kad in order to encourage their pets to display greater agility or grace. I was conscious that this jerky gesture stirred some sleepy carp in the muddied waters of my memory. As the kaleidoscope of recollection turned, a pattern formed suddenly and I was presented with a vivid picture from the past. I was walking again by the shore-road of the Bosphorus, observing with distaste a Kurd leading a small performing bear on a rope. The rope was attached to a ring in the animal's nose, and from time to time the Kurd would jerk the rope and the bear would rise unsteadily upon its hind-legs and perform a few weary dance-like movements waving its fore-paws pitifully. I do not suppose that the Kurd inflicted upon his bear any very atrocious cruelty ; he may, for all I know, have been devoted to his bear and have addressed to him, when they retired to rest, the most lavish Kurdish endearments. But it is not fitting that bears should be trained to imitate the movements of a matron dancing a quadrille ; it places the poor animals in an entirely false position and renders them objects of inane laughter Evidently the dogs that are paraded at Cruft's dog-show are exposed to no form of cruelty ; on the contrary they are pam- pered as no decent dog ought to be pampered. What I object to is that they are treated, not as dogs, but as prize blooms, similar to those vast chrysanthemums that the Japanese force and preen and fiddle with, until they cease to be like flowers at all.
There was a Pomeranian. for instance—a loathsome little animal—having a mean little snout and bearing the name, if I mistake not. of Wilmcote Wee Colonel. The owner of this creature began to powder the Colonel back and front ; she then produced a large bottle of scent or disinfectant and proceeded to spray him upon the head and tail. The Colonel was evidently accustomed to these ministrations and only sneezed slightly once or twice. Some Pekingese were then paraded, and as they faced the camera they shot out huge tongues wetting their eyes and noses with quick darting gestures like those of a chameleon. It was a revolting sight. There followed a French poodle, to whose toilette. we were informed, many hours had been devoted. I can well believe it. Immense concentration must have been needed to clip and titivate this animal until it ceased to bear any resemblance at all to a live dog and took on the appearance of a large frilled basket such as, in the days of the Austrian Court Balls, was used to distribute cotillon favours. Until now I have had a weakness for poodles, and was glad to see how happy was Mr. Churchill's friend to welcome him back from Marakkesh. But-never. after this horrible mannequin paraded. shall I feel quite the same about poodles again. A bull-terrier, justifiably embarrassed by all this publicity, then appeared upon the lighted scene. He also seemed to have forgotten all about his long line of sturdy ancestors, and stood there like some figure in Copenhagen-ware, blinking with ruby eyes. But the final disaster was the wire-haired terrier ; bearded he was like an ' Elizabethan Privy Councillor. These terriers arc the most charming of all companions ; but who would wish to walk in the woods accompanied by the Sheikh-ul-Islam ?
My contention is that it is an error of taste to treat animals as if they were something else. What we require from our dogs is gay companionship ; we do not in the very least want to be accompanied by florists' blooms. It is difficult to believe that these exotic growths can possess either the delightful exuberance or the charming modesty of ordinary healthy animals. What we need is a friend, as dumb as can be, possessed of high spirits and zest: we do not need a hetaira or a geisha for our country walks. I hope that the Cruft family and the winners of these eminent prizes will not be hurt by my remarks. I am prepared to believe that these dog-shows, in some manner, serve a valuable purpose. But never again shall I watch these epicene animals preened for the ring.
Previous page
