Animals more effective than people

During Wednesday’s discussion we considered the idea of blindspots in response to Red Hands. I thought the excerpt was quite ironic actually and I liked that Vollman put the two short stories together. After finishing the reading I realized that I was disturbed by what Vollman had written. But rather than being upset about the loss of human life in the department store bombing, I felt sad for the mouse, the animal. I began to wonder, why is the thought of torturing or cruelty to animals so much more effective than the same action toward humans? Someone even mentioned in class they felt the same. There is something powerfully disturbing about harming an innocent creature. Some emotions are brought to the forefront more clearly through animals rather than people. This is important to keep in mind for the project– that animals as well as people can be incorporated to evoke emotion and mood.

One Response to Animals more effective than people

  1. kate118 says:

    I thought your blog was very fascinating and relatable to me. I love animals. My family has adopted several dogs from the humane society. So when Vollmann used mice and cats are characters in his work I cringed. I felt bad for the mice. They are creatures that although many people don’t like you still have to feel bad for them when they are being destroyed by the cats. Also, when you related it to the real life scenario Vollmann was trying to portray it made the cats and mice seem relevant. The mice being Jews and the cats being the Nazis made me think about how this situation was true. The cats were preying on the mice just like the Nazis were preying on the Jews.

Leave a comment