http://www.forwolves.org/ralph/metaphors.htm
Wolves as "killing machines." Analysis of a lame metaphor.
Essay by Ralph Maughan
3-9-2001
The story about the wolves that killed the two llamas generated much
comment, not because the story was about the first llamas to be killed by
wolves, but in the differing responses of the llama owner versus the nearby
rancher.
Bill Moran, the llama owner was reported (in the Libby newspaper) to have
said "I can't blame the wolves. They were out in the woods, and the llamas
were there too. So I have only myself to blame." Regarding possible
reimbursement of loss from Defenders of Wildlife, the llama owner
reportedly said, "It's not (Defenders') fault, it's my fault." "I choose to
live here, and while I live here the natural world ought to be able to run
its course." He also said he'd be thrilled to see his first wolf.
On the other hand, the nearby rancher who suffered no harm was quoted as
saying "Actually there's no good time or place for the species. Jim
Schneider, the McGinnis Meadows rancher who runs about 60 head of cattle
told the Libby Western, "Our grandfathers years ago got rid of those wolves
for a reason. Schneider said. "They're just a killing machine. That's all
they are." He's rankled that the endangered designation for wolves legally
bars people from harming them while they kill livestock [sic]. "Give me an
answer, what do we got to do to get them wolves out of there?"
It's obvious that people see the same events in radically different ways.
The "killing machine" metaphor-
The rancher used the metaphor "they're just a killing machine." Previous
news reports show many antiwolf people use this metaphor. The immediate
explanation is they read the same publications, talk among themselves, and
form a community of opinion, but the use of the "killing machine" metaphor
itself is interesting.
A metaphor is a way of saying that one thing has the essential
characteristics of another thing. . . "we are waging a war on drugs," "or
drug use is a spreading epidemic." The choice of a metaphor makes a big
difference in how we respond. A "war" on drugs implies a no-holds-barred
attack ("no-holds-barred" is another metaphor). Niceties like civil
liberties and protection of the innocent are not observed in a war. On the
other hand, a drug epidemic is a medical metaphor and implies containment,
quarantine, and treatment of those who have become infected. Drugs make
people victims, not the enemy.
Wolves as machines-
What about the metaphor "they're [wolves] just a killing machine"? First of
all the metaphor is not organic, it is mechanical -- "a machine." Machines
perform repetitive tasks and have no use beyond that. In this case the task
is killing. The metaphor is that absolutely all wolves do is kill things,
apparently not to eat them because machines do not eat. Wolves repetitively
kill until there is nothing left alive for them to kill. Machines are
designed to be efficient, so the metaphor also implies the wolves not only
kill and kill, but do so efficiently.
Machines have no wills of their own, no feelings, and have no moral status.
We dispose of machines when they have no further use to us. Because we did
not create the machine wolf, and because all it does is kill and kill, then
we don't have ethical qualms about eliminating it. In fact, because the
wolf must be a rogue machine (humans didn't build it), it is our duty to
eliminate it.
The llama owner, on other hand, saw the series of events as natural.
Calling something "natural" is also a powerful metaphor and the complete
opposite of the artificiality of "machine."
Some metaphors distort rather than clarify-
Not all metaphors are equally valid. We say that electricity flows in a
current. This is a useful metaphorical description that compares some
properties of electricity to that of fluids. If one said "electricity is
stationary like a rock," that would be a useless and a wrong metaphor.
What about the validity of the metaphor "wolves are just a killing machine?"
Is killing the only thing wolves do? As any observers of wolves know,
wolves spend little time killing. Do wolves kill efficiently like a
machine? Most chases of prey end in failure. The chance of success
increases when more than one wolf hunts, so giving benefit of the doubt to
the metaphor, one machine is often not enough.
Are wolves artificial creations? No one would really argue that. In fact,
the only machines we know about were created by humans. So let us turn to a
metaphor where humans are part of a human-constructed machine.
Humans as cogs in a killing machine?
If we think of the process of raising cattle, taking them to market, then
to slaughter, dismemberment, and distribution to human consumers; the
entire process seems mechanical. If a killing machine metaphor is
appropriate, it could be argued it is the rancher and others who are cogs
in the killing machine, not the wolf. Wolves would be but a minor outside
disturbance to the machine-like process of production, killing, and human
consumption.
Of course, the production of beef for consumption is the point of the
process, not the killing itself, so ranchers as a "cog" in the "killing
machine" is not really an appropriate metaphor either.
The essential point is that ranchers raise cattle for humans (and their
carnivorous pets) to eat and to render into other products. Many ranchers
tend to forget that humans consume far more flesh than all the wolves,
bears, and nondomestic cats in the world. They tend to forget that the fate
of their cattle is the slaughterhouse and finally a consumption more
thorough than that of any wolf.
The matter of prejudice-
Throughout history, some human beings have been devalued and denied moral
status by use of metaphor. People of color were described to have
animal-like characteristics. Women were believed to be "driven" by emotion
rather than "governed" by reason. Native peoples were called "savages,"
which in turn justified savage behavior against them. The Christian
Identity religion even regards Jews as the "spawn of Satan." This is doubly
negative -- Satan spawning like fish and frogs, not mammals.
Prejudice makes it so those who are its object can do nothing to prove
their worth. A classic measure of anti-Semitism includes two statements
that are contradictory -- "The trouble with Jews is that they are clannish
and only take care of their own group." On the other hand "Jews are always
pushing into places where they are not wanted." Anti-Semites agree with
both statements.
Similarly, many news stories have reported ranchers and others condemning
wolves for wasting their prey by leaving it half eaten. On the other hand,
many other stories condemn wolves for their ravenous behavior (indeed they
do consort with ravens.). For example, "You can't find my cow because the
wolves were so ravenous they even ate the hide and the bones."
In conclusion, not only is the metaphor wrong, so is its moral. Use of
dehumanizing metaphors has been used to justify any kind of cruelty to
humans. Likewise, so is denying an animal its status as a natural, feeling
being.
Wolves kill because they have to eat meat. It's part of their nature, and
that's no metaphor.
I want to thank Mark, Jackie, Salle, and David for helping me think this out.