[Earthlings Review] The dilemma of raising an issue

The dilemma of raising an issue--how we should approach it

Imagine that one day you come home for dinner and find out that every single dish was full of a vegetable named pathos. For some people, that might be exactly what they have dreamed of. But for the majority they would be heading towards the kitchen to look for some meat, or in this case, logos. The documentary, “Earthlings” was similar to this in my case. In five different sections of pets, food, clothing, entertainment, and scientific research, the film shows repelling scenes of animal abuse. Some critiques praise the documentary film as a portrayal of reality that people don’t want to see. Many reviews of this film accuse such enterprises that participate in animal abuse and the government that is overlooking the reality. On the other hand, there are people who accuse the director of “Earthlings” for selectively editing scenes and omitting any explanation that could defend these “slaughterhouses”. For either side of the debate, however, the director harmed the value of the documentary by focusing too much on the value of pathos and neglecting logos in the process.

The people who accuse this film as being propaganda point out the fact that many of the scenes would be understood differently if one was aware of the whole situation. The director however, pieced together the worst shots of the worst places in our society. For instance, taking street animals into captivity and killing them in a perhaps, violent way happens in the first place because of the irresponsible people who abandon their pets. These animals living in the streets become agents that spread diseases over the city. Furthermore, these animals themselves suffer from starvation and inhospitable environments. Thus, taking them into captivity is inevitable to protect the public health and also protects the animals as well. The violent murder of these animals, however, does happen in reality because of the lack of financial support for anesthesia. Whether the public health is worth the suffering of these animals is a reasonable topic to debate on. The main problem of “Earthlings” is that it leaves no room for such debates from the beginning.

The last part of the story which discusses animal experimentation is also based on ignorance of the purpose and value of animal vivisection. Unlike what the documentary argues, animal testing does have scientific value in medical testing. History has proven the effectiveness of vivisection compared to testing on cells cultivated in labs. Although the actual effects of a certain treatment may differ from humans and animals, the purpose of vivisection—to minimize danger for human beings—has been fulfilled. Also the film mentions that such experiments have to be redone on human beings. This apparently shows that they agree on vivisection itself but denies the use of animals in the process. Along with the selective editing of shots taken from the few labs that don’t follow the universal doctrine for animal vivisection, such problematic ideas presented in the documentary destructs its own credibility because it relies too heavily on dramatic scenes and music to emphasize it.

The film begins with stating that we are all inhibitors of Earth and thus “Earthlings.” Through selective portrayal of the worst, the film attempts to reject the idea of “speciesism” as a whole. However, from an evolutionary point of view, it is only natural to strive to preserve one’s own species. Furthermore, even between animals themselves speciesism exists. Each and every species strive to preserve their group. Who are we to say that this distinction that has existed even before the human race is wrong? Unless the director of this film is simply a misanthrope, he should also be preventing animals from violently killing each other.

The analogy between speciesism and racism or sexism is also somewhat problematic. The standard for “sentient” beings that the film is discussing about is contradictory in itself since people could also argue that plants or other microorganisms should be treated equally. If animals should be saved from unnatural death, then why not plants? What about bacteria? In this sense, the title of the film is also problematic for it covers only “Animals” instead of  “Earthlings”.

The purpose of the documentary is also questionable. All it does is making us feel bad. Of course, at times presenting a problem that the public is unaware of is helpful for the development of our race. However, the documentary focuses on emotional influence too heavily that it neglects the importance of logical explanation and introduction of the other side of the table. This is why the people who come up with so-called “solutions” after watching this film become vegetarians. Such individual refusal of participation does not improve the situation. Rather, it is merely an excuse for individuals to feel happy about themselves as if their approach will solve the fundamental problem. Thus the sole effect that this documentary has brought upon our society is financial loss for corporations that follow the moral and proper methods in producing products.

The film “Earthlings”, however, does present an important issue to our society. Even though I have defended speciesism, I am against extensive killing of animals for commercial purposes. These animals or “sentient” beings should also be respected. But the presentation of this idea in “Earthlings” has gone astray and lost its value. The selective editing to increase pathos, or emotional response, is the main issue. Another is the ignorance of the necessity for animal vivisection or anesthesia. The universal doctrine that works to minimize the suffering of these animals shows that not all of us are corrupted like the ones’ that appear on the film. Just because there are companies that do not follow the rule one shouldn’t debunk the whole industry and accuse them for what they never did. With a balanced presentation using pathos and logos, the director could have presented a work that is, perhaps less convincing, but much more valuable to us, “Earthlings”.