Animals In Translation: Using The Mysteries Of Autism To Decode Animal Behavior (2006) - Plot & Excerpts
I usually don’t read non-fiction books, books about autism…or books about animals, though I love animals. Usually animal books have passages with very upsetting parts, and the happy ending, if there is one, is ruined for me by these “bad spots.” But as my husband gave this book to me, I was guilted into reading it, thought I was able to put it off for 8 years. To my surprise, I enjoyed this book very much.Among its provocative ideas, the book:•targues that language is not a requirement for consciousness--and that animals do have consciousnessThis I can agree with from my own experience with animals of 30+ years.•tapplies the autism theory of "hyper-specificity" to animals, showing that animals and autistic people are so sensitive to detail that they "can't see the forest for the trees"--a talent as well as a "deficit"•texplores the "interpreter" in the normal human brain that filters out detail, leaving people blind to much of the reality that surrounds them--a reality animals and autistic people see, sometimes all too clearlyThese two ideas were demonstrated very well in the book.•texplains how animals have "superhuman" skills: animals have animal genius•tcompares animals to autistic savants, declaring that animals may in fact be autistic savants, with special forms of genius that normal people do not possess and sometimes cannot even seeThis was also explained, though not as well as the previous points.•texamines how humans and animals use their emotions to think, to decide, and even to predict the future •treveals the remarkable abilities of handicapped people and animals •tmaintains that the single worst thing you can do to an animal is to make it feel afraidThese concepts were also fairly well explained, with the last being a truth I agree with completely. The pain of a shot is much easier to deal with than pain which hurts less but you have no warning about, like a bee sting.Specific parts of the book I found riveting, such as the following:1.tPure while or light colored animals with blue eyes and pink noses tend to have neurological problems, because they have less melanin. I see this in my own experience with cats, having owned several with light colored skin/eyes that were very neurotic.2.tBreeding animals for specific traits almost always results in neurosis and aggression sooner or later. Purebreed dogs are responsible for most of the dog attacks, because breeders have inbred lines to make the animals adhere to AKC specs (pp82-83). Pigs bred for leaner meat are much more nervous and less prolific in breeding than pigs bred for soundness (p101). Roosters bred to be fast growing and more muscular became rapists, because the breeding screwed up their ability to do courtship displays, leading to the hens not submitting to advances (pp69-72). There were many other examples given, too.3.tMammals aren’t the only ones with feelings or social lives. Reptiles have them too, like snakes (p88). 4.tAnimals also have sexual deviations and preferences. At least Bhraman bulls do (p103)5.tHigher intelligence usually results in “evil” social behaviors such as infanticide, rape, and murder. I’ll never look at Shamu the same way, after reading about killer whales who really like to kill(pp 150-152).6.tA shock collar is good for training. I personally agree with this, from my own use with them for my dogs to curb behaviors on walks in the countryside, but I didn’t expect Temple to agree. Mind you that the idea of this kind of collar is not to shock dogs repeatedly, but to correct bad behavior, so electronic beeps as “warnings” can be used to let a dog know when its wandered too far, should keep up or not range far ahead, should not bolt, etc. A shock is used as last resort. A collar is not a substitute for obedience training, it’s an aid in training.7.tA checklist that is 10 items long is much better for a slaughter plant to protect animal safety than a 100 item one. This seems wrong, but Temple makes a terrific argument for this idea. Moreover, she is right that simple is better, because you can see better what needs to be improved. I have seen this myself in the overly complicated OSHA code for NYS and USA. Focusing on details instead of the whole picture is an easy trap to fall into.My only gripes about this book were:1.tTemple advocates against leash laws, citing they lead to dogs that are unsocialized, a theory I am in opposition to. It’s an owner’s responsibility to socialize their dog, something I see all too seldom.2.tShe is clearly against specific breeds, saying they are prone to aggression and that mutts usually are non-agressive. Having owned German Shepherds my whole life, I am opposed to this, and it also smacks of the same kind of thinking that led to breed bans in several cities, with a lot of good dogs left homeless at best and destroyed at worst.3.tMuch of the writing is very easy to read, but it’s not well-written and a lot of specific conclusions do not have facts to back them up, just anecdotes from the author’s life. This is not bad, but it does affect how much weight to give insight and advice found in the book, especially on the training/troubleshooting sections.Overall opinion: Worth reading, just so you can discuss with someone. Parents: Okay for a teen, but likely would not be of interest to someone younger.Language: no swearingAdult Content: none, save maybe the passage on collecting semen from bulls and their deviances.Violence: some passages on animal murder.
A unique and fascinating book. Grandin makes a thesis that autistic people have a lot in common with animals in their way of processing information, thinking and experiencing pain and emotions. Well developed frontal lobes are characteristic of a normal human brain. They are also responsible for a global and coherent image of the world, and a generalized way of thinking. The outcome of healthy frontal lobes is more verbal expression and controlled behaviour (e.g. people have much more control over their emotions and fears than animals; they can filter them out, and animals can’t) Grandin claims that since both autistic people and animals have smaller or underdeveloped frontal lobes, they share characteristics connected to this fact. They perceive the world in a series of sensory strings : sounds and images which record an amazing number of details, but do not get immediately interconnected into a meaningful whole. They have a lot of problems generalizing information (e.g. when an autistic child learns to butter a toast, we cannot take it for granted that he or she has learned how to spread peanut butter on it as well) and filtering unnecessary details or distractions. They also have a big problem coping with fears and negative emotions.Grandin also makes some revolutionary statements. She argues that animals have consciousness, and the fact that they don’t have the language to express it does not preclude that. She herself does not think in words. She also says that animals show certain behaviours that have been so far attributed to humans only. Animals, she says, can kill for a pleasure of killing and gives examples of violent male gangs of adolescent dolphins, killer whales and chimpanzees.Animals can communicate and manipulate verbal language too, and the prairie dogs’ language is thought to be most advanced and is most comprehensively described.On the whole, Grandin tries to argue, convincingly in my opinion, that animals are very close to humans in many ways. She herself is an avid advocate of animal rights, and is a consultant on safe and humanitarian slaughter houses for cattle.Very impressive and recommended.
What do You think about Animals In Translation: Using The Mysteries Of Autism To Decode Animal Behavior (2006)?
I have mixed feelings about this book. On the one hand, it's almost worth the purchase price for the explanation of the difference between negative reinforcement and punishment, a distinction that escapes far too many pet owners, not to mention parents. And there is a ton of useful information in it for people who are learning about how animals think.However, there are a few spots in it that give me cause for pause. Grandin has some unique ways of looking at things, and once she has a hypothesis, she is going to prove it come hell or high water. One fairly benign example is that she seems to be under the impression that only autistic humans think in pictures. Of course, many humans who aren't autistic but are visually oriented think in pictures at least as much as in words, and in many cases more so.More worrisome is her hypothesis that animals are mentally ill in direct proportion to the amount of white skin they have. She contends that paint horses are crazier than solid-colored ones, and the more white they have, the crazier they are. As anyone who has worked with very many examples of both knows, paints on average tend to be mellower than many other breeds which are solid-colored, and the amount of white skin has nothing to do with it. The most reactive paint I ever worked with had only a small splash of white on his belly and white stockings, while one of the most levelheaded ones was an overo with only a minimal amount of color other than white. This kind of pants-seat hypothesizing worries me, because readers who don't know better may take it as gospel.So this book it worth reading, IMO, but if something in it sounds off to you, check it out with a knowledgeable friend.
—Kspeare
I liked this book and found many of the author's insights fascinating. It is interesting in reading reviews that many people gave it five stars but an almost equal number gave it a one star. I think there was one reviewer that said she'd have given it less than the one if that option was available. My main complaint with the book was that there were too many (though captivating) details and not enough generalizations. But, that is what makes this book interesting. Temple Grandin admits that this is what autism is about and I think makes clear with her writing. I'll definitely be thinking about this book and reviewing some of the notes I took. By the way I don't normally mark passages but I was afraid I couldn't find them again because they were scattered about so much (like the nuts that squirrels hide for themselves) I was afraid I couldn't find them again.I found a wonderful interview with Temple at: http://conversations.psu.edu/episodes...It was so interesting to hear her speak after reading the book.
—Janice
This was one of the Branigan BookClub selections for April 2008. The other was Sara Gruen's mesmerizing WATER FOR ELEPHANTS.For the purists out there, yes I know that it is gramatically incor-rect, but I'll write it anyways. ANIMALS IN TRANSLATION is one of the most enjoyable and fascinating books that I have read in many years. A felicitous constellation of characteristics combine to make this so. First, the subject matter; here the subtitle says it all--'using the mysteries of autism to decode animal behavior.' Already she has me hooked. Just look at the words. "Mysteries," that is nearly irresis-tible for anyone with an active curiosity! "Autism," I am fascinated by the wide variety of human conditions and behavior. "Decode," appeals to my voracious curiosity and suggests hidden knowledge revealed. "Animal behavior," I am an unabashed animal lover and the idea of understanding their behavioris immensely appealing.So, before I even opened the book, I was primed, pumped, pulled in and prepared for a treat!Well, I got one! And on a number of levels. First there is the autobiographical element. Grandin doesn't sensationalizes or sugar coats the moments when her autism appears; it is simply there as part of the story. No "...look what I overcame;aren't I great because of it?" dramatics or "...Oh, woe is poor little me!" self pity; just a matter of fact narrative of her experience. Then there is what I call the 'review of the literature' component. Throughout the book, she is constantly citing studies from a wide range of scientific disciplines that bear upon a specific point or ilustration she has just made. For me that is fascinating. And, she does it so clearly. Then, she talks so knowledgably and convincingly of animals and their behavior that it is a joy to read. Grandin obviously knows her subject and is passionate about it. To top it all off,there is her writing style. The adjectives "lim-pid," "crisp," "uncluttered," "reasonable," and others of the same ilk come to mind in this context. Grandin's prose, the solid rational basis for her arguments and her disarming candor remind me of other authors I enjoy: John McPhee, Mary Roach, Simon Winchester, Jake Page, and Marion Roach. If you are at all curious about animals, their relationship to people and vice versa, autism and the world around you , my guess is you would enjoy this book.--Markhttp://chile.las-cruces.org/search?/t...-
—TBML
