The Hierarchical Perception and Denigration of Animals in Early Modern English Drama (thesis)

Abstract

Ethical qualms concerning animals exist beyond practical questions that one faces in modernity. Our thoughts on animals seep into our culture; our rituals, our stories, and our values influence and are influenced by non-human animals, often in ways we fail to see. Many of our past influences lay the ground for how we perceive non-human animals in modernity. The early modern period in England acts as an example of this. The labels of "beasts of burden" and "wildly violent" existed four-hundred years ago similarly to the way that they do now. Shakespeare, Marlowe, Jonson, and many other iconic playwrights have added to these stereotypes, perpetuating them by creating iconic characters that mirror the worst qualities of animals. Societal perceptions of animals in the early modern period, often depicted in the culture's prominent literature, impacted the way they were treated and even led to the large-scale killing of non-human creatures; the repercussions of feeding the flame of denigration are tangible. Thus, one has an obligation to be responsible with their words. The ways that animals are described paints them to be entities unworthy of dignity. Then, to further inflict damage, individuals with prejudice describe marginalized entities with animal imagery, implying that they aren't worthy of dignity, either. As Linzey says, considering the implications of our language and adjusting the way we speak of and think about animals is the only way we can move toward dismantling denigration and instilling respect toward both non-human animals and, to a certain extent, marginalized communities of the human species. Peter Singer and Martha Nussbaum, two modern philosophers who have approached the sub-field of animal ethics, use different modes of thought to respect the animal. [From Introduction]