|
July 31, 2006
Entertaining heroism
Pit bulls are incredibly strong dogs, as anyone who's ever owned one can attest. Coco's ability to leap into the air is a constant source of amazement to me; if a tantalizing object is dangled before her, she can jump from a standing position to a height of over six feet. When I play fetch with her, she can catch the stick or frisbee before it hits the ground -- as far as I can throw it. Nothing particularly heroic about any of it, although I don't doubt that under the right circumstances, Coco would display what we'd anthropomorphically call heroism. That's because the strength of these dogs is matched only by their utter devotion and determination. If you are a good person and have raised a good dog, knowing that you have a dog that would not hesitate to lay down its life for you is very touching. Humbling, even. The problem, of course, is that bad people raise bad dogs, and the dogs don't realize they're bad, as they're just doing what dogs do based on centuries of tailoring their survival to living with man. If you're a dog, your identity is generally tied to that of your owner. Which is why it so horrifies me to see an otherwise good dog in the wrong hands. It's more irritating than reading about "gun violence," because in the case of a bad guy misusing a gun, the gun is not a victim, whereas a misused animal is. Frankly, if we consider the number of pit bulls owned by lowlife scum, what amazes me is that there are as few incidents as there are. Quite ironically, the fact that there are so few attacks on people is an unintentional but logical byproduct of the dogs' historic background of being pitted against bulls, bears, and other dogs for sport. While the medieval brutes who bred these canine gladiators were anything but kind, they could not tolerate any dog with the slightest inclination to attack humans, for otherwise how could they have pitted them? Under the rules which evolved in dogfighting, the dogs had to be handled routinely, picked up, separated, then faced off to determine whether a dog was a coward, or whether it would walk across the "scratch" line to take hold of the other animal. Dogs that turned away, or tried to jump the pit were considered defective, as were dogs which displayed any tendency to turn and bite humans -- even in the heat of combat. The result over the centuries was a dog that was downright amiable, even clownish -- in many cases almost ridiculously so. Now, this is not just my opinion -- many, many students of the breed have noticed this over and over again. (A fascinating New Yorker piece explores the phenomenon in detail.) It seems like a paradox to people, but it isn't. I've always suspected that the "natural born entertainers" were more likely to survive the sadism and cruelty which inhered to these blood sports -- perhaps out of pity, perhaps simply because people enjoy being entertained. Like it or not, the cruel spectacles were also circus performances, and people like circuses, and shows. (Shades of WWF, perhaps?) There's a famous account of a huge pit bull with rippling muscles which was being judged in a dog show, and which had patiently stood at attention and put up with the usual poking, probing and gawking. This he bore with unflappable patience and dignity until suddenly a small and yappy Chihuahua (probably suffering from an inferiority complex) broke loose from somewhere and attacked the pit bull in a total frenzy. People were afraid the little dog would be killed with one bite, but the pit bull's owner/handler ordered him to be still. The Chihuahua was really aggressive, though, and although the bites weren't having any physical effect, the onslaught of this tyrannically impotent rage was nonetheless ruffling the pit bull's sense of pride, and he kept looking reproachfully at his master, as if pleading with him to do something. This was many years ago, when people still thought this sort of thing was great entertainment, and as neither dog was being hurt, the crowd was laughing uproariously (at both dogs' expense). Finally the pit bull could take no more, and he devised a plan to put an end to the suffering. Firmly but gently, he took hold of the Chihuahua by the scruff of the neck, lifted him off the ground and quite deliberately, walked over to the nearest trash can, got up on his rear legs, and carefully placed the Chihuahua in the trash! Something like that requires what we humans would call premeditation and deliberation. While putting a Chihuahua in a trashcan might not be what most of us would call heroism, I think this pit bull confrontation with a bear would be: An Ontario man who killed a 200-pound black bear with a hunting knife says his faithful dog saved his life -- twice.I'd like to hope I'd summon the courage to behave that way if a bear got hold of Coco, but I guess you never know what you'll do until it happens. I was delighted to read a good pit bull story for a change, although knowing what I know about these dogs, I can't say I was surprised. There's more here about the dog's recovery: WATERLOO - Since the swell of national attention highlighted the heroism of Tom Tilley and his dog Sam, offers have flooded in to pay for the dog's medical treatment.An amazing, ironic phenomenon. These remarkable dogs still provide mass entertainment, even though we call it "news." posted by Eric on 07.31.06 at 10:06 AM
Comments
Yes it is bad writing and it's puzzling. But here's another account: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060725.BEAR25/TPStory/TPNational/Ontario/ He said the bear disappeared into the forest but re-emerged on the trail, cutting off his escape. As Mr. Tilley unsheathed his Buck hunting knife, the dog sprang in front of his master, turned sideways and stood its ground. The bear lunged forward, plunging its fangs into the pit bull's white hide. Eric Scheie · August 1, 2006 12:02 AM I just that that was some guy doing a Brock Samson imitation. Still, dogs are pack animals. They defend the pack. Eric Blair · August 1, 2006 08:17 AM
"As Mr. Tilley unsheathed his Buck hunting knife, the dog sprang in front of his master, turned sideways and stood its ground." No effing way, lol. The guy doesn't want his dog to get in trouble for attacking a bear. The cops or a park ranger probably told him to lie about this so socialists wouldn't try to kill his dog for attacking Yogi. :) Good for them! Harkonnendog · August 2, 2006 05:17 PM Better keep this quiet! (I won't tell if you don't...) Eric Scheie · August 2, 2006 05:29 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
That dog is so heroic it turned his owner into a hero!
Having said that, this:
"At that point, his dog Sam placed himself perpendicular to the bear, across the path. The bear dug its teeth into the dog's back, and Tilley said he became enraged."
is nonsensical... Does the writer mean a pitbull lied down perpendicular to a bear to be attacked? I can't imagine that. Are we supposed to actually believe that? If not, wtf DOES that mean?
Horrible writing.
If the dog DID do that the act should be the focus of the piece, as it is just insane.
It makes me think the dog owner was hunting or something.