Roald Dahl did not fuck around. He grew up in one of those psychopathic early-20th-century British boarding schools, and then went to Africa once he graduated, and World War 2 broke out and he fought in Egypt and Greece.
He wrote children's literature because kids tend to vibe with how his brain works, but he was not playing games. Read his adult short stories sometime.
Edit: From his autobiography, from early on in his time in Africa:
Suddenly, the voice of a man yelling in Swahili exploded into the quiet of the evening ... He was yelling from somewhere behind the house. "Simba, bwana! Simba! Simba!"
Simba is Swahili for lion. All three of us leapt to our feet, and the next moment Mdisho came tearing round the corner of the house yelling at us in Swahili. "Come quick, bwana! Come quick! Come quick! A huge lion is eating the wife of the cook!"
That sounds pretty funny when you put it on paper back here in England, but to us, standing on a veranda in the middle of East Africa, it was not funny at all.
Robert Sanford flew into the house and came out again in five seconds flat holding a powerful rifle and ramming a cartridge into the breech. "Get those children indoors!" he shouted to his wife as he ran down off the veranda with me behind him.
Yeah, I've read a couple, one about a frozen leg of lamb, I remember. He was a pretty dark character, including holding some deeply offensive views.
Talented guy when he was focusing his work though - there was a great anthology TV series in the UK called Tales of the Unexpected, some episodes of which I think were based on his more adult writing (including the leg of lamb one).
Holy hell, dude... I'm looking over the list now and just reading plot synopses is getting me unsettled.
Honestly I think the two autobiographical books, "Boy" and "Going Solo" are probably better than the short stories unless you're in a pretty twisted mood. If you're in for the darker material, a random selection of short stories I liked:
"Mr. Feasey" is a very mild one that still has the Roald Dahl dark energy about it.
"Pig" is a deeply unsettling one.
"They Shall Not Grow Old" is haunting but quite good.
"Man From The South" is a fairly famous one that's also very dark and unsettling.
She was a strict vegetarian and regarded the consumption of animal flesh as not only unhealthy and disgusting, but horribly cruel. She lived upon lovely clean foods like milk, butter, eggs, cheese, vegetables, nuts, herbs, and fruit and she rejoiced in the conviction that no living creature would be slaughtered on her account, not even a shrimp. Once, when a brown hen of hers passed away in the prime of life from being eggbound, Aunt Glosspan was so distressed that she nearly gave up egg-eating altogether.
There was no specific quote, but watching Azula have a bona fide nervous breakdown after all her friends abandoned her was something else even as an adult.
One of the things most people I know like about Azula is that the show ended with her still being evil. They wrote her to be genuine with herself, and that meant no redemption.
“Animals don't behave like men,' he said. 'If they have to fight, they fight; and if they have to kill they kill. But they don't sit down and set their wits to work to devise ways of spoiling other creatures' lives and hurting them. They have dignity and animality.”
― Richard Adams, Watership Down
That book does a really good job of presenting just how shitty humans are pretty much throughout, without coming across as being preachy or sanctimonious, and I like that.
Richard Adams wrote it based on his military time. Certain features of the book are clearly informed by his experience, like how they're constantly talking about how fatigued or rested they are, based on the speed they've been traveling or working and how long they've been at it.
He said he based particular characters on particular people he knew. The seagull was a big explosives guy, Bigwig was a tough-as-hell officer that he really liked working with, and so on.
Yeah Animorphs as a kid had a darkness that Goosebumps couldn't touch. The first one for me was realizing that one of the party members was forever stuck as a fucking bird, and they had whole chapters of his perspective getting used to the fact that his former life is gone. That was unheard of at the time.
Rachel becoming a fucked up person who only knew how to live in war was also great.
Tomorrow when the war began was another childhood fave of mine.
I wouldn't say that sort of stuff was unheard of. My mum gave me some super tragic books about Polish kids during the war, there was loads of stuff with like thawing dead soldiers enough to steal boots etc. My mum's Polish so fed me a lot of grim stuff to read to help understand her parents and their experiences. Idk if you're usaian? maybe popular stuff was a bit more sanitised because of moral majority stuff?
Yeah I'm American and we had mostly Scholastic book fairs and the school library to count on for books. Animorphs, being published under them, was heavily advertised at the fairs.
Considering myself to be an "advanced" reader I'd stick to the young adult books, but mostly sci-fi (Dune) and fantasy (Dhampir). For 5th or 6th grade me, though, Animorphs was engaging enough until a new book came out and was constantly checked out at the library.
we are also probably the only species that has members that sympathise with other species above ourselves
I don't buy that for a second, and neither would you if you've ever had a beloved pet. These little furry guys treat you like their bff, I can honestly see why some humans refer to them as fur babies.
And it's not just cats, dogs, and crows. If you know where to look (shoutouts to the BigBoye subreddit, for example), you can find evidence of all sorts of animal species befriending humans or other species outside their own.
Cats: torture their prey to death as a form of play.
"Play" isn't just an idle pursuit. It's also a form of safe practice of one's life pursuit. In the case of cats, they evolved to be almost 100% carnivores, so it's natural for them to live, breath, and yes practice / play at honing their pursuit and kill skills. It is literally their fundamental job that separates them from dying off.
Dolphins: you dont want to know.
Let's not forget two things here: 1) much of the rapey stuff (as with ducks) also serves the fundamental life model of reproduction being one of the highest natural priorities, however its accomplished; 2) dolphins are hella smart, just like us, and if anything, it goes to show that smart species with idle time can devise some pretty wild pastimes.
If a person did half the stuff animals do, no one could look at them the same again.
To compare the lifestyles of a single animal species (humans) with all the others is a fool's mission. In fact, most animals live fairly predictable, innocuous lives. They have their classic interactions with the world and don't tend to bother other species-- mainly because it's not worth their time.
People do some awful things but we are also probably the only species that has members that sympathise with other species above ourselves.
Nonsense. Pretty much all higher social / tribal animals can pretty easily sympathise / empathise with other species, such as our fellow apes, dogs, cetaceans, corvids, elephants, parrots, and even domestic cats.
It’s also a form of safe practice of one’s life pursuit. In the case of cats,
much of the rapey stuff (as with ducks) also serves the fundamental life model of reproduction
That doesn't refute the poster above. Humans have evolutionary imperatives too.
They have their classic interactions with the world and don’t tend to bother other species-- mainly because it’s not worth their time.
That's not nobility as the original Watership quote implies but a simple lack of capacity to conceive and implement evil. The original quote could equally wax poetic about how rocks don't try to spoil other creatures lives.
I agree that animals can also sympathize with other species. Intelligence is a spectrum.
That doesn’t refute the poster above. Humans have evolutionary imperatives too.
It does when you put it in context, tho, that being that the poster above did not refute Adams' point in any meaningful way. Specifically-- rape isn't ordinary in terms of two-sex species, and is likely a poorer long-term survival mechanism compared to courtship species.
That’s not nobility as the original Watership quote implies but a simple lack of capacity to conceive and implement evil. The original quote could equally wax poetic about how rocks don’t try to spoil other creatures lives.
That's not correct. Higher animals certainly possess more self-awareness than rocks, and have (as you say) a spectrum of capacity for self-awareness, for reflection, and for modifying one's behavior.
The real point is this-- unlike all known animals, we collectively have the information available to us of how terribly our existence and practices are fueling one of the greatest extinction events in Earth history... on track with causing civilisation to collapse, likely causing most of humanity to soon die out, if not go entirely extinct. We have not just that info based on the science, facts & reality, but the average mental capacity to understood and take necessary action to prevent all this. Or at least, we "had." Instead we've collectively chosen to pursue our individual lives and let things sort themselves out. Well, good luck with that.
poorer long-term survival mechanism compared to courtship species.
Evolution doesn't care about ideal mechanics- only good enough. Rape was common in the ancient world. Rape happens today despite the long term survival favoring long term pairs.
Higher animals certainly possess more self-awareness than rocks
I was relating the spectrum of intelligence. That is human is to animal as animal is to rock. I didn't claim that animals have no awareness but that they are less than humans. So attributing nobility to what is really a lack of ability is like attributing nobility to a rock.
A rooster would plot and murder its neighbors if it had the intelligence and opposable thumbs to make weapons.
Evolution doesn’t care about ideal mechanics- only good enough. Rape was common in the ancient world. Rape happens today despite the long term survival favoring long term pairs.
There's certainly some facts & reality there, professor, but that still doesn't change the fundamental point which Adams' made, and I defended. It's like you're freely swinging from 'matters of proportion' to binary values in order to fit your argument.
So attributing nobility to what is really a lack of ability is like attributing nobility to a rock.
Which was a poor analogy from day one, considering the many permutations.
Also-- that's a pretty weird, tight-ass understanding of what Adams meant by "nobility."
Like, seriously...?
A rooster would plot and murder its neighbors if it had the intelligence and opposable thumbs to make weapons.
Okay, you win on that one-- I fear you're exactly right there; ala chickens being such unnecessary assholes towards each other and other creatures.
Tell you what, though-- feel free to have the last reply.
It's like you dance around a smidgen of a circuitous argument, but can never actually figure out what you're actually trying to say. (or think)
Good luck, you.
but that still doesn’t change the fundamental point
A poster pointed out that animals aren't better than humans and will do anything they can get away with just like humans. You attempted to appeal to evolution which I refuted. The refutation means Adams is wrong. Animals are like humans because humans are animals too.
It’s like you dance around a smidgen of a circuitous argument
People are not automatons that are obligated to no longer think a behavior is fucked up just because that behavior benefited these animals in terms of increasing the liklihood of them passing down their genes.
As for one species empathising with another, that is a far cry from empathising more with another species than your own or being willing to sacrifice yourself for the benefit of another species. I WAS NOT saying that no species empathises with another.
People are not automatons that are obligated to no longer think a behavior is fucked up just because that behavior benefited these animals in terms of increasing the liklihood of them passing down their genes.
Sure, that's fine. Label and condemn as you like.
My point is, that's not a relevant rebuttal to Adams' quote, as most sexually dimorphic animals do not behave that way. I.e., females generally select their partners, and are not commonly raped. Indeed, that's part of the whole long-term survival point-- that 'courtship' species have better chances for genetic diversity & fitness for their environs.
As for one species empathising with another, that is a far cry from empathising more with another species than your own or being willing to sacrifice yourself for the benefit of another species. I WAS NOT saying that no species empathises with another.
*shrug*
Okay, if you say so. It sure sounded like it, but maybe I misread.
Sure, but they don't consciously choose to do it. Fungus doesn't decide that it's going to make life miserable for the plant it's growing on, a tall shade tree doesn't decide to starve the smaller plants beneath it of sunlight. We're unique in our capacity to see a possible course of action, do an in-depth analysis of the effects that it will have, see every foreseeable shitty outcome, and decide, consciously, to do it anyway.
" I tell you Boris, that one of these days we'll look in to our microscope and find ourselves staring right into God's eyes, and the first one who blinks is going to lose his testicles. " - Dr. Harry Wolper, Creator (1985)
“It doesn't mean I don't care anymore. I don't want to let you down, honest, but... but it just doesn't hurt so bad anymore. You can understand that, can't you? Look, I can give money to the city - they can hire more cops. Let someone else take the risk, but it's different now! Please! I need it to be different now. I know I made a promise, but I didn't see this coming. I didn't count on being happy. Please! Tell me that it's okay.”
— Bruce Wayne at his parents’ grave in Mask of the Phantasm
“Think about it - a world where there's no crime, no victims, no pain.”
“And no choice. Who elected you, anyway?”
“Who elected you? The problem with democracy is, it doesn't keep you very safe.”
“It has other virtues. But you seem to have forgotten them.”
“I didn't forget! I just chose peace and security instead.”
“You grabbed power!”
“And with that power, we've made a world where no eight-year-old boy will ever lose his parents because of some punk with a gun!”
*Batman drops his batarang; it clatters to the ground*
“You win.”
— Batman loosing a debate with Alternate Universe Totalitarian Batman in the Justice League episode “A Better World”
And then, later on, as they're watching some guy get hauled off by the police to get "reeducated" after getting upset at a waiter, Batman says to Justice Lord Batman, very sarcastically:
There's so many good Mr. Rogers quotes. What a wholesome human. I'm sad I wasn't around to witness the height of his cultural relevance, but the beauty of him and his teachings were their timelessness. May his work be immortalized.
PBS had so many kind, gentle people working to remind us that there is love, kindness and hope in the world if we just take time to make room for it.
Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back of his head, behind Christopher Robin. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming downstairs, but sometimes he feels that there really is another way, if only he could stop bumping for a moment and think of it.
I think that this captures so much of the human condition.
The Cheshire cat, and much of Alice in wonderland, hit quite hard, but in a good way. Helped me see that insanity, mental health issues could be a good thing