CODA193philosophical have been blind to the sheer variety and number of
poems about animals. That there are now many anthologies and web-
sites that collect poems about animals is a sign that perhaps the general
poetry-reading public (which is alive and well) is ahead of academics
in their understanding that poetry has something to say about the
meaning and presence of animals. I don’t delude myself by thinking
that my book has been a complete study of animal poems. It is a sus-
tained foray into the field, an exploratory effort, one that joins a still
nascent conversation about the question of the animal in poetry. There
are hundreds of poems I know about that I have not discussed, though
I hope that my discussion of categories of animal poems and of specific
examples can inspire others to read and study those poems as well.
There are also thousands of poems about animals that I have not read
or that I do not yet know about, though I and others will keep seeking
them out.
Most of this book consists of close readings of poems rather than
sustained theoretical thinking. I make no apologies for this. Some the-
orizing is essential; it is in any case unavoidable, since all readings
involve theoretical implications and assumptions, and it is better to
examine them than to leave them invisible. At the heart of this book is
the idea that the boundary between human and animal in the history
of human thought has been foundational and problematic. It has been
policed by culture in general and philosophy more specifically to pro-
duce valorizing conceptions of the human, generally to the detriment
of other animals and often of other humans. Claims that humans (or
certain subsets of them) are the only creatures who have language,
make art, create symbols, love music, do math, and think abstractly are
extraordinarily common because we want to define how we are special
and made in God’s image. I find myself wanting to make them too,
though I have now read enough ethology to know that these claims are
usually signs of hubris and of our often willful ignorance about the lives
of animals. At the same time, I do not want to assert that all animals are
basically alike, that the only approach to animals in their variety is one
of extending the category of the human through an unselfconscious
anthropomorphism.