What do you think?
Rate this book
The Hidden Life of Dogs
Have you ever wondered what the world looks like to your dog? Or what it smells like? Do dogs have dreams and, if so, what about? And are dogs really capable of emotion? THE HIDDEN LIFE OF DOGS was a sensational bestseller on first publication and is now considered a classic. In her riveting account of thirty years spent living with dogs, wolves and dingoes, Elizabeth Marshall Thomas provides a fascinating insight into a species very different from our own, yet in many respects surprisingly familiar.
148 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 1993
126 people are currently reading
2059 people want to read
About the author
Elizabeth Marshall Thomas
46 books254 followersElizabeth Marshall Thomas is the author of The Harmless People, a non fiction work about the Kung Bushmen of southwestern Africa, and of Reindeer Moon, a novel about the paleolithic hunter gatherers of Siberia, both of which were tremendous international successes. She lives in New Hampshire.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 285 reviews
August 31, 2012
This woman first let her dogs roam freely across busy streets and highways, even a freeway, watching and observing but not protecting them. She and the dogs are fortunate none were injured or killed.
Secondly, she then let them live outside with almost no human interaction or socialization and watched them devolve into a pack of wild animals. Um, yes, but is that really the hidden life of the dogs we know or just animal mentality, much like humans would do if left to fend for themselves in the wild?
Although interesting, the narrative really bothered me and much of it felt made up or exaggerated. I really don't trust that this book is in any way authentic and it certainly isn't going to tell you anything about your dog. Susan Conant once referred to Thomas as being afraid of her own dogs and I think she has a point. I do not recommend this book to anyone.
Secondly, she then let them live outside with almost no human interaction or socialization and watched them devolve into a pack of wild animals. Um, yes, but is that really the hidden life of the dogs we know or just animal mentality, much like humans would do if left to fend for themselves in the wild?
Although interesting, the narrative really bothered me and much of it felt made up or exaggerated. I really don't trust that this book is in any way authentic and it certainly isn't going to tell you anything about your dog. Susan Conant once referred to Thomas as being afraid of her own dogs and I think she has a point. I do not recommend this book to anyone.
July 2, 2013
Excited though I was about reading this book, I almost didn't finish it as I was constantly appalled at the the author's irresponsible behaviour.
Right off the bat we meet Misha, a friend's intact male husky whom the author allows to roam his self-determined 130 square mile "territory". She seems to try and defend this inexcusable behaviour by bragging about the dog's ability to avoid being struck by a car and by stating that she never observed him mating with any female dogs. There is no doubt in my mind that her little car-dodging husky made numerous attempts to populate all of Cambridge with his offspring. She mentions a St. Bernard, almost in passing, whose owners surrendered him to an animal shelter/hospital where he was used to supply blood for transfusions before being put to death. (The dog was surrendered because of his behaviour, blame for which she seems to place on the dog himself and not the people who had rasied him.) Her last comment on the dog is that his blood is being used for "dogs more fortunate that he, dogs who were wanted by their owners". She obviously does not see the irony in this statement -- Misha undoubtably fathered numerous unwanted pups, many of which may well have would up in the same animal shelter as the doomed St. Bernard. Later in the book she describes how a roaming spaniel leaped over her fence and forceably mated with another one of her dogs. (Nonmating drugs did not prevent the unwanted pregnancy; spaying her dog definitely would have.) Does the author honestly think her darling Misha was not out doing the very same thing? The author does have a chance to observe the behavior of wolves in their natural habitat and I found that to be much more interesting and responsible. I'm glad I hung in there to read those parts.
Also, I must agree that quite a lot of her conculsions involved a large amount of common sense.
Right off the bat we meet Misha, a friend's intact male husky whom the author allows to roam his self-determined 130 square mile "territory". She seems to try and defend this inexcusable behaviour by bragging about the dog's ability to avoid being struck by a car and by stating that she never observed him mating with any female dogs. There is no doubt in my mind that her little car-dodging husky made numerous attempts to populate all of Cambridge with his offspring. She mentions a St. Bernard, almost in passing, whose owners surrendered him to an animal shelter/hospital where he was used to supply blood for transfusions before being put to death. (The dog was surrendered because of his behaviour, blame for which she seems to place on the dog himself and not the people who had rasied him.) Her last comment on the dog is that his blood is being used for "dogs more fortunate that he, dogs who were wanted by their owners". She obviously does not see the irony in this statement -- Misha undoubtably fathered numerous unwanted pups, many of which may well have would up in the same animal shelter as the doomed St. Bernard. Later in the book she describes how a roaming spaniel leaped over her fence and forceably mated with another one of her dogs. (Nonmating drugs did not prevent the unwanted pregnancy; spaying her dog definitely would have.) Does the author honestly think her darling Misha was not out doing the very same thing? The author does have a chance to observe the behavior of wolves in their natural habitat and I found that to be much more interesting and responsible. I'm glad I hung in there to read those parts.
Also, I must agree that quite a lot of her conculsions involved a large amount of common sense.
March 8, 2008
Somewhere in this book I recall the author calling herself a dog anthropologist. This egotistical idiocy completely blew my circuits. Call yourself a dog lover or a dog observer or a dog whatever that makes sense, but do not lump together the study of humankind with watching dogs copulate and take walks and form packs. I am not saying that the study of humans is necessarily more important than the study of animals but they are very different, in that we can relate to the humans we study because we ARE humans, and we have no personal context with animals.
I love dogs, I completely obsess about and go ga-ga over dogs, I would form my own dog colony if I could, I have three dogs that are my babies and I want a hundred more and I would like to breed dogs and open a dog rescue and my life is all about DOGSDOGSDOGS. Therefore, I just knew I would love this book.
Unfortunately, it was more about how wonderful and humble the author was than about the dogs themselves. I honestly found myself completely uninterested in the dogs because I hated the writer.
At several points, she painted the dogs' behaviors so negatively that I didn't even like the dogs, and I felt like she was too unobtrusive in her observations. (And yes, I get that this is why she called herself an anthropologist, but zoologists out in the wild observe unobtrusively and do not compare themselves with anthropologists.) Your living room is not the wild and your pets are not wild animals; if one is sexually harassing another, separate them; if one is being isolated, make sure that you give it all the attention it needs. Pet dogs and wild dogs may have the same instincts, but they behave differently and react differently because they are in completely different environments. It is cruel to watch some behaviors and not intervene.
I love dogs, I completely obsess about and go ga-ga over dogs, I would form my own dog colony if I could, I have three dogs that are my babies and I want a hundred more and I would like to breed dogs and open a dog rescue and my life is all about DOGSDOGSDOGS. Therefore, I just knew I would love this book.
Unfortunately, it was more about how wonderful and humble the author was than about the dogs themselves. I honestly found myself completely uninterested in the dogs because I hated the writer.
At several points, she painted the dogs' behaviors so negatively that I didn't even like the dogs, and I felt like she was too unobtrusive in her observations. (And yes, I get that this is why she called herself an anthropologist, but zoologists out in the wild observe unobtrusively and do not compare themselves with anthropologists.) Your living room is not the wild and your pets are not wild animals; if one is sexually harassing another, separate them; if one is being isolated, make sure that you give it all the attention it needs. Pet dogs and wild dogs may have the same instincts, but they behave differently and react differently because they are in completely different environments. It is cruel to watch some behaviors and not intervene.
January 31, 2008
I couldn't get all the way through this. The author states that it's okay to anthropomorphize dogs, since they do the same with us. I'm fine with that. What I couldn't get past was the fact that the author apparently doesn't understand the physiology of dogs.
For instance, she speaks about a male dog meeting his mate after she has had a litter of puppies. The male dog, not being able to see the puppies (who are under their mom's thigh), still seems to know that the puppies are there. The author says (paraphrasing), The puppies aren't making any noise, so he can't hear them. I can't smell them, so it's not that he smells them. How does he know that the puppies are there?
Dogs have much better smell than humans. I thought that was pretty common knowledge. Also, they have way better hearing than we do. And if the puppies were on the mom's teat, then you better believe they were making little sucking noises. Argh. After reading that, I just couldn't read any more.
Plus, I find the idea of letting a non-neutered male dog roam around free in Cambridge to be irresponsible in the extreme. We have enough puppies out there thanks.
For instance, she speaks about a male dog meeting his mate after she has had a litter of puppies. The male dog, not being able to see the puppies (who are under their mom's thigh), still seems to know that the puppies are there. The author says (paraphrasing), The puppies aren't making any noise, so he can't hear them. I can't smell them, so it's not that he smells them. How does he know that the puppies are there?
Dogs have much better smell than humans. I thought that was pretty common knowledge. Also, they have way better hearing than we do. And if the puppies were on the mom's teat, then you better believe they were making little sucking noises. Argh. After reading that, I just couldn't read any more.
Plus, I find the idea of letting a non-neutered male dog roam around free in Cambridge to be irresponsible in the extreme. We have enough puppies out there thanks.
February 15, 2008
I added this book to my list just so I could state, for the record, that I hate this book and the author is the devil.
February 6, 2017
As a longtime dog owner I find this book facinating. I have had dogs for more than thirty years now, most of my life so far, and I know very well that they have private lives, but I don't think I have always understood, or perhaps more to the point, I have often misunderstood, what was going on in their lives. This book doesn't explain it completely, but goes some way towards clearing part of it up. The author, Elizabeth Marshall Thomas let her dogs loose to a certain point to try to see what drives them, what they want, and reaches an interesting, but perhaps not an unsurprising conclusion.
What this is not, is a training book. In fact the author does nothing to get them to do what she wants, quite the opposite in fact. If she had she wouldn't have seen as clearly what it is they actually want. That is her way to understand them, and I think she gets interesting results. I think one can take this understanding into account when training ones dog. I think it is good to keep the conclusions of this book in mind when listening to them, and trying to get them to listen to you.
Elizabeth Marshall Thomas has written another book on dogs, a sequel to this one I think, and I'm going to read that one too. The Hidden Life of Dogs is that interesting. I think I can wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone that is interested in dogs.
What this is not, is a training book. In fact the author does nothing to get them to do what she wants, quite the opposite in fact. If she had she wouldn't have seen as clearly what it is they actually want. That is her way to understand them, and I think she gets interesting results. I think one can take this understanding into account when training ones dog. I think it is good to keep the conclusions of this book in mind when listening to them, and trying to get them to listen to you.
Elizabeth Marshall Thomas has written another book on dogs, a sequel to this one I think, and I'm going to read that one too. The Hidden Life of Dogs is that interesting. I think I can wholeheartedly recommend this book to anyone that is interested in dogs.
November 14, 2010
Although I found some of this book interesting (being a dog lover) most of it had me horrified and pissed off.
She let her dogs run loose through busy streets and highways, let them breed indiscriminately (including letting one of her dogs kill another dogs puppies) and threw them all in a outdoor pen when they became inconvenient to her lifestyle.
I don't agree with most of the ways she treated and raised her dogs either.
I don't recommend this book.
She let her dogs run loose through busy streets and highways, let them breed indiscriminately (including letting one of her dogs kill another dogs puppies) and threw them all in a outdoor pen when they became inconvenient to her lifestyle.
I don't agree with most of the ways she treated and raised her dogs either.
I don't recommend this book.
May 9, 2012
In this book, Thomas chronicles a few years spent watching her dogs while minimizing her interaction with them. This included allowing them to roam loose in urban areas, breed pretty freely, and harass each other and other neighborhood animals. While there's something to be said for watching dogs and observing their behavior in detail, responsible dog owners will grind their teeth.
Thomas' stated goal is to find out what really matters to dogs by removing humans from the equation. The problem with that is that humans and dogs are pretty tightly linked. We are their survival strategy. Selection both natural and artificial has honed dogs into highly skilled manipulators of humans. They thrive on our attention, acceptance, and interaction, because that's literally been their bread and butter for thousands of years. The author's final observation is of her group of dogs, most raised from puppies in her home, choosing to live exclusively outside and building a "den" together (a strange development given that wolves and feral dogs are known only to den when pups are coming). She concludes from this that dogs simply do not need people, and revert to wolf-like behaviors when left to themselves.
I would argue that the dogs raised by the author were profoundly different from the dogs the rest of us live with. Given her whole "no human interference" approach, I doubt she put much time into socializing her puppies to humans. If you take a peek at Scott and Fuller's landmark study, you'll see what a huge effect that has on the sociability of the animal! Unsocialized pups (especially those with Dingo ancestry, like some of the author's dogs) will of course avoid human contact. They find humans weird and frightening.
Perhaps I'm wrong, and the author did interact with her dogs in a fairly normal way and socialize her puppies. But this side of things is not described in great detail. The author merely suggests that she left the dogs to their own devices, and leaves it at that.
In short, I wouldn't recommend this one to the average dog-lover. There's not much interesting/trustworthy information, and the self--righteous passages about how the author declined to train or contain her animals will just make you angry.
Thomas' stated goal is to find out what really matters to dogs by removing humans from the equation. The problem with that is that humans and dogs are pretty tightly linked. We are their survival strategy. Selection both natural and artificial has honed dogs into highly skilled manipulators of humans. They thrive on our attention, acceptance, and interaction, because that's literally been their bread and butter for thousands of years. The author's final observation is of her group of dogs, most raised from puppies in her home, choosing to live exclusively outside and building a "den" together (a strange development given that wolves and feral dogs are known only to den when pups are coming). She concludes from this that dogs simply do not need people, and revert to wolf-like behaviors when left to themselves.
I would argue that the dogs raised by the author were profoundly different from the dogs the rest of us live with. Given her whole "no human interference" approach, I doubt she put much time into socializing her puppies to humans. If you take a peek at Scott and Fuller's landmark study, you'll see what a huge effect that has on the sociability of the animal! Unsocialized pups (especially those with Dingo ancestry, like some of the author's dogs) will of course avoid human contact. They find humans weird and frightening.
Perhaps I'm wrong, and the author did interact with her dogs in a fairly normal way and socialize her puppies. But this side of things is not described in great detail. The author merely suggests that she left the dogs to their own devices, and leaves it at that.
In short, I wouldn't recommend this one to the average dog-lover. There's not much interesting/trustworthy information, and the self--righteous passages about how the author declined to train or contain her animals will just make you angry.
September 16, 2009
This was an extremely quick, but extremely absorbing, read. Elizabeth Thomas asks the question that we should be appalled more science-minded people don't ask: What do dogs do when they're not with their people? She answers the question by following a husky, Misha, as he roamed around the city. (This did bother me a bit, but she assures us that he was very canny about cars. However, that doesn't help the fact that leashless dogs alarm some people, violate most laws and ordinances, and can turn people against dogs and dogowners). She later adopts a female husky and has a whole pack of dogs. She leaves them to themselves and observe as they slowly become less human-oriented and more like wolves. It's a fascinating story, and one that helps people cut through the nonsense and puffy anthropomorphism of many dog stories, straight through to the heart of what makes a dog a dog.
February 9, 2012
Some parts of this book are fascinating, others are a little bizarre. On the one hand, the author has some interesting insights on animal cognition as a lay person. Her stories about her dogs and their lives, loves, and emotional connections give some powerful credence to the current arguments in the scientific community that mammals have a greater capacity for cognition and emotional complexity than what previous generations were willing to admit. And her lovely descriptions of her dogs made me read the book with interest, and they are the bulk of the book so it is worth reading.
On the other hand; she must be a real handful as a neighbor, since she flouts leash laws and actually believes that any attempts to train or reign in her dogs is "slavery".
In my opinion; even though I agree with many of her arguments in favor of animal cognition, her peculiar ideas about raising pets and her lack of understanding that leash laws protect both the humans and the animals in her neighborhood (including her own!) sadly undercuts her stance on animal cognition.
Animals need an apologist, but she's not the one. Read Temple Grandin or Marc Bekoff instead.
On the other hand; she must be a real handful as a neighbor, since she flouts leash laws and actually believes that any attempts to train or reign in her dogs is "slavery".
In my opinion; even though I agree with many of her arguments in favor of animal cognition, her peculiar ideas about raising pets and her lack of understanding that leash laws protect both the humans and the animals in her neighborhood (including her own!) sadly undercuts her stance on animal cognition.
Animals need an apologist, but she's not the one. Read Temple Grandin or Marc Bekoff instead.
February 21, 2018
Short, but somewhat dated, and controversial. Recommended only if you've already loved The Genius of Dogs: How Dogs Are Smarter than You Think and want more.
The 'free-range' issue is interesting. I'm not comfortable with it, but I won't condemn Thomas either.
She knows science & the scientific method, but is not at all hung up on it. There's a lot to be said for the power of an accumulation of anecdotes, and for long-term careful observation.
The take-away? Dogs want a pack/ family of their own. Humans can be substitutes, but if at all possible, host 2 or more dogs so they spend their time with someone who 'gets' them.
Bookdarts:
Did you know that sometimes unadopted shelter dogs provide blood for transfusions before they are executed? I count that as a silver lining.
Did you know that when the wind blows across an area where there is nothing to resist it, it is soundless? I almost want to visit the tundra to experience this for myself.
The 'free-range' issue is interesting. I'm not comfortable with it, but I won't condemn Thomas either.
She knows science & the scientific method, but is not at all hung up on it. There's a lot to be said for the power of an accumulation of anecdotes, and for long-term careful observation.
The take-away? Dogs want a pack/ family of their own. Humans can be substitutes, but if at all possible, host 2 or more dogs so they spend their time with someone who 'gets' them.
Bookdarts:
Did you know that sometimes unadopted shelter dogs provide blood for transfusions before they are executed? I count that as a silver lining.
Did you know that when the wind blows across an area where there is nothing to resist it, it is soundless? I almost want to visit the tundra to experience this for myself.
December 19, 2010
Somehow - and I thought it was impossible - this book made me love dogs even more. Thomas really gets to the heart of so much dog behavior without over-anthropomorphizing.
She lived with a bajillion dogs. And for a while she lived in the snow and observed (and sorta lived with) a bunch of wolves in Northern Canada. And she explains the "whys" of so much of what dogs do - their relationships with each other and their relationships with humans. She love dogs even more than me and it feels like she gets them in a way that I hope to someday even come close to.
I don't even know what to say about this book except: love dogs? read this book! (I feel like Reading Rainbow).
[tl;dr: doggies, doggies, doggies, wolves, doggies.]
She lived with a bajillion dogs. And for a while she lived in the snow and observed (and sorta lived with) a bunch of wolves in Northern Canada. And she explains the "whys" of so much of what dogs do - their relationships with each other and their relationships with humans. She love dogs even more than me and it feels like she gets them in a way that I hope to someday even come close to.
I don't even know what to say about this book except: love dogs? read this book! (I feel like Reading Rainbow).
[tl;dr: doggies, doggies, doggies, wolves, doggies.]
November 25, 2009
I liked it for the way it helped my thinking pivot in relationship to dogs. That insight alone - that dogs are worthy of respect in and of themselves, that we can be still and listen to them - that merits 4 stars. I think this book had an artful editor; it could have easily been over the top in one way or another and instead it is measured, while being engaging and proposing by the very process that we look at the world from a dog's point of view.
Given to me by Susan Cooper and passed on to my brother Jim.
Given to me by Susan Cooper and passed on to my brother Jim.
May 9, 2012
This book is the antithesis of the Cesar Milan philosophy; Thomas documents the lives of her pack of dogs as an observer and not "pack leader" or owner. Her observations are heartwarming and heartbreaking, and so very interesting. It was the first book I picked up when I knew that I always wanted to have dogs in my life.
May 17, 2024
This is a beautiful book. Thomas writes gracefully and forthrightly and, clearly, judging by the many negative reviews of this book, her writing is not for the faint of heart. This is what I'd call "thick" ethnography; thick in the sense that she writes from a place that is in the thick of things.
Thomas has wonderful empathy and insight into dogs' minds. She rightly challenges the all-too-human ban on "anthropomorphism." She's way nicer about about challenging that ban that I am. Thomas points out that humans are animals and, like all animals, we share common ancestors, have long sequences of genetic material in common, and have similar brain structures. So why wouldn't we have similar emotions and cognitive abilities? To assume that humans are somehow unique is, in my view, precisely the hubris that has allowed us to dominate the planet--and to destroy it. While I wouldn't care that we are destroying the planet if it were only a matter of humans dying out, the fact of the matter is we are taking all life forms down with us.
In "The Hidden Life" Thomas wanted to answer a relatively simple and straightforward question: what do dogs want? Again, humans tend to think they know everything and to know what is best for everyone (though in fact we haven't a clue). Trained as an anthropologist, Thomas used the participant-observer method to find out what her dogs wanted. This entailed letting them, so to speak, run wild. She tracked the extent of their ranging by the calls she got from the people upon whose doorsteps the dogs ended up. (They're smart: the travel far, but then let a human call home so they can get a ride.)
A lot of reviewers are really upset about this, stating (as if they know best) that Thomas doesn't deserve pets. They're correct: in Thomas's view, pet "ownership" is a sort of slavery. That's why it's called ownership!
But I doubt the people who left angry reviews actually read the whole book. If they had, they'd have been left in a puddle of tears: the last half of this short book is very moving, tender-hearted, and full of insights about dogs' minds and hearts.
I think if you can read this book understanding that it is nothing to do with being a "pet" "owner" and everything to do with being inquisitive and empathetic, you will, as I did, learn a lot about your best friends.
Thomas has wonderful empathy and insight into dogs' minds. She rightly challenges the all-too-human ban on "anthropomorphism." She's way nicer about about challenging that ban that I am. Thomas points out that humans are animals and, like all animals, we share common ancestors, have long sequences of genetic material in common, and have similar brain structures. So why wouldn't we have similar emotions and cognitive abilities? To assume that humans are somehow unique is, in my view, precisely the hubris that has allowed us to dominate the planet--and to destroy it. While I wouldn't care that we are destroying the planet if it were only a matter of humans dying out, the fact of the matter is we are taking all life forms down with us.
In "The Hidden Life" Thomas wanted to answer a relatively simple and straightforward question: what do dogs want? Again, humans tend to think they know everything and to know what is best for everyone (though in fact we haven't a clue). Trained as an anthropologist, Thomas used the participant-observer method to find out what her dogs wanted. This entailed letting them, so to speak, run wild. She tracked the extent of their ranging by the calls she got from the people upon whose doorsteps the dogs ended up. (They're smart: the travel far, but then let a human call home so they can get a ride.)
A lot of reviewers are really upset about this, stating (as if they know best) that Thomas doesn't deserve pets. They're correct: in Thomas's view, pet "ownership" is a sort of slavery. That's why it's called ownership!
But I doubt the people who left angry reviews actually read the whole book. If they had, they'd have been left in a puddle of tears: the last half of this short book is very moving, tender-hearted, and full of insights about dogs' minds and hearts.
I think if you can read this book understanding that it is nothing to do with being a "pet" "owner" and everything to do with being inquisitive and empathetic, you will, as I did, learn a lot about your best friends.
August 10, 2015
I don't even know where to start with this one. Many of the comments on other reviews of this book were spot on.
The author is one of the most irresponsible pet owners I've ever seen. She talks of letting her dog Misha roam where he wants while she follows and records his movements. She lets him cross busy highways, even.
Often she writes of the dogs very anthropomorphically. She speaks of dogs who are "married" because they mated and of their love. She even describes two dogs sexual encounter almost like a sexy human love scene - even of them "kissing" afterward.
I wouldn't mind the anthropomorphic style if it were consistent and a cute little story about the dogs, but it switches between trying to sound scientific and logical to sounding "cutesy".
I couldn't even quite finish the book. I got so fed up with her irresponsible pet ownership behavior that I had to put it down.
The author is one of the most irresponsible pet owners I've ever seen. She talks of letting her dog Misha roam where he wants while she follows and records his movements. She lets him cross busy highways, even.
Often she writes of the dogs very anthropomorphically. She speaks of dogs who are "married" because they mated and of their love. She even describes two dogs sexual encounter almost like a sexy human love scene - even of them "kissing" afterward.
I wouldn't mind the anthropomorphic style if it were consistent and a cute little story about the dogs, but it switches between trying to sound scientific and logical to sounding "cutesy".
I couldn't even quite finish the book. I got so fed up with her irresponsible pet ownership behavior that I had to put it down.
August 21, 2012
I really liked this book, but at the same time I can understand why this book has generated a lot of unfavorable reviews. The author has some very unconventional ways of being with her dogs which upset people. Following the Husky named Misha for hours around Cambridge, Mass., as he braved traffic and other hazards is a biggie. But still, I found this book fascinating and very moving as she recounts the lives of numerous dogs in her family. Her love and deep respect for them is indisputable. Bethany and Roberta, I think you both would enjoy this book!
January 29, 2011
This was the first book I read of hers since meeting her in person last year and finding her a ferocious force of nature (as expected), but maybe less...warm than I expected. (She's very 'New England-y'.) It did color my perception of the book, but only just a bit. (Like when she mentions the nasty neighbors in Cambridge who complained about the dogs, I shuddered a little. For the nasty neighbors. Who had more balls than brains and are hopefully all okay--her I would not mess with.)
The book tells of her early days with dogs; the wandering husky she took care of for friends who ended up siring a whole houseful of sled dogs, her two pugs, and the wolves she observed on Baffin Island. I've long been an admirer (and done my best to practice) Ms. Thomas' philosopy of 'letting dogs be dogs', and her quiet observations as the dogs and wolves go about their daily lives are a fascinating look at a world few of us will ever experience. Hers is a passion and devotion that awes me, and I still want to be like her when I grow up. (Only a bit less scary, maybe.)
Favorite quote:
"My view of death is quite pragmatic; as I see it, when the spirit and life are gone, not much good comes from concerning oneself about the body"
The book tells of her early days with dogs; the wandering husky she took care of for friends who ended up siring a whole houseful of sled dogs, her two pugs, and the wolves she observed on Baffin Island. I've long been an admirer (and done my best to practice) Ms. Thomas' philosopy of 'letting dogs be dogs', and her quiet observations as the dogs and wolves go about their daily lives are a fascinating look at a world few of us will ever experience. Hers is a passion and devotion that awes me, and I still want to be like her when I grow up. (Only a bit less scary, maybe.)
Favorite quote:
"My view of death is quite pragmatic; as I see it, when the spirit and life are gone, not much good comes from concerning oneself about the body"
January 5, 2009
The author never managed to find a consistent tone. She observed her dogs for a while, and wrote what amounts to a journal and how she saw their behavior. This wouldn't be a problem, but she keeps touting her approach as having some scientific bearing, when there's no strong methodology.
It does have some interesting information on behavior, particularly of pack dynamics, but there are probably better ways to get the same information.
It does have some interesting information on behavior, particularly of pack dynamics, but there are probably better ways to get the same information.
April 22, 2010
I am not a dog-person (not that I don't like them, I just would choose a cat over a dog) but I did enjoy the little perceived knowledge that the author shared. The real kicker, for me, is that the illustrator was my sister's old roommate. My personal beef is that I am a shelter-animal advocate and didn't like how many litters the author's many dogs kept having: neuter or spay please! Also, it is laughable that she thinks she is not being anthropomorphic.
June 10, 2017
Thomas, an anthropologist, shares fun and insightful observations of our companion animals. I've enjoyed reading this out loud with my family, and taking it slowly, a chapter at a time, with long gaps (my style, I'm afraid.)
And after a few years, I returned and finished last chapters... the farewell to her dogs, of course. Ready for more from Thomas.
And after a few years, I returned and finished last chapters... the farewell to her dogs, of course. Ready for more from Thomas.
February 14, 2022
This is merely a detailed book of animal neglect of a woman who sees her poor dog keeping, and allowing her intact animals to roam and breed indiscriminately as "research". The sheer amount of litters, roaming, behavior issues, and lack of socializing shows that some people shouldn't have dogs.
October 20, 2020
I truly enjoyed parts of this book, such as the variety of dogs and some things that give insight into a dog's mind. They were personified or anthropomorphized in this book which makes one see an animal differently.
This is a short (148 pages), quick read. If you love animals, especially dogs, it's likely you'll like parts of this book. I didn't really super connect with the dogs like I normally would, and perhaps that's because they were (in my opinion) studied too much and not really made a part of the family. Most dog owners will tell you they are family but I didn't get that feel.
This is a short (148 pages), quick read. If you love animals, especially dogs, it's likely you'll like parts of this book. I didn't really super connect with the dogs like I normally would, and perhaps that's because they were (in my opinion) studied too much and not really made a part of the family. Most dog owners will tell you they are family but I didn't get that feel.
April 12, 2012
Because I'm the kind of person who can't contemplating adopting a dog without reading a ton of books about them. Overthinkers r us.
This seemed very slight to me -- I suppose I thought it would be more like her Tribe of Tiger, about cats and why they are the way they are (because yes, I overthink my kitties too!). Hidden Life of Dogs is more Thomas just watching her own dogs. And she's rather disingenuous about it -- "Oh, I just wanted to see what they did if they got to choose for themselves without humans interfering," she claims (or words to that effect, it's not a direct quote). But she feeds the dogs, has some of them trained as sled dogs, and breeds one of the bitches. Mostly her hands-off policy leads to some of what I would consider irresponsible dog ownership: she lets one dog run through her suburban Cambridge neighborhood to see what he does, even though this infuriates her neighbors and violates local laws, and she allows far too many puppies to be produced (and some are killed by the other dogs) before spaying the females. That said, her dogs seem pretty happy overall, receive good food and medical care, and do develop interesting relationships with each other (since she doesn't offer them the emotional intimacy most pet dogs receive from their owners). I can't say that she does badly by the dogs, although she violates a lot of the current norms about how to handle them.
Her writing style is terribly stilted and twee; she constantly refers to one dog that had a rough start in an Alaskan village as having been born a slave, describes a pair of huskies who bond strongly as "married," and in general the pose seems to be straining for a kind of simple poetry but not getting there. Her conclusion is that what dogs want is to have complex relationships with each other and almost nothing to do with humans, given the choice; but in most households with multiple dogs in my experience, this doesn't seem to be true. If she had not been so withdrawn from the dogs, perhaps they would have wanted a stronger relationship with her?
This seemed very slight to me -- I suppose I thought it would be more like her Tribe of Tiger, about cats and why they are the way they are (because yes, I overthink my kitties too!). Hidden Life of Dogs is more Thomas just watching her own dogs. And she's rather disingenuous about it -- "Oh, I just wanted to see what they did if they got to choose for themselves without humans interfering," she claims (or words to that effect, it's not a direct quote). But she feeds the dogs, has some of them trained as sled dogs, and breeds one of the bitches. Mostly her hands-off policy leads to some of what I would consider irresponsible dog ownership: she lets one dog run through her suburban Cambridge neighborhood to see what he does, even though this infuriates her neighbors and violates local laws, and she allows far too many puppies to be produced (and some are killed by the other dogs) before spaying the females. That said, her dogs seem pretty happy overall, receive good food and medical care, and do develop interesting relationships with each other (since she doesn't offer them the emotional intimacy most pet dogs receive from their owners). I can't say that she does badly by the dogs, although she violates a lot of the current norms about how to handle them.
Her writing style is terribly stilted and twee; she constantly refers to one dog that had a rough start in an Alaskan village as having been born a slave, describes a pair of huskies who bond strongly as "married," and in general the pose seems to be straining for a kind of simple poetry but not getting there. Her conclusion is that what dogs want is to have complex relationships with each other and almost nothing to do with humans, given the choice; but in most households with multiple dogs in my experience, this doesn't seem to be true. If she had not been so withdrawn from the dogs, perhaps they would have wanted a stronger relationship with her?
March 4, 2011
I think my expectations of this book were that it would be a tad bit more scientific, perhaps with some reference materials accessed, some explanation (or deeper theories) of dog behavior. Alas, it was all anecdotes about the author's experiences with her own rather wild dogs, much of which bordered on the anthropomorphic. Still, the read (well, the listen, since I was listening to an audio version) was somewhat entertaining, and each time a dog passed, I felt sad. (Note: I listened to an abridged version. Perhaps the unabridged book is more scientific.)
April 7, 2016
4.5 stars
Always a delight to read, this memoir of her 'research' through her own dogs is well worth reading for anyone who loves dogs. I learned a lot and met some wonderful canine characters. I wanted to take poor Vera home.
Always a delight to read, this memoir of her 'research' through her own dogs is well worth reading for anyone who loves dogs. I learned a lot and met some wonderful canine characters. I wanted to take poor Vera home.
Read
August 17, 2024In The Hidden Life of Dogs, novelist and anthropologist Elizabeth Marshall Thomas tells what she learned from simply observing the ten or so dogs she lived among as an adult. The dogs were not trained in any formal way but rather allowed to teach and socialize each other. They arranged themselves according to their own hierarchical notions and lived according to their instincts. Thomas was careful not to anthropomorphize the knowledge gleaned from her dogs and tried to see the world through their senses instead of her own: “Like most people who hunger to know more about the lives of animals, I have always wanted to enter the consciousness of a nonhuman creature. I would like to know what the world looks like to a dog, for instance, or sounds like, or smells like. I would like to visit a dog’s mind, to know what he’s thinking or feeling, to have another dog look at me and not see something different but something the same.” To the extent that Thomas achieves this, it is necessarily an exercise in conjecture, but for me, the beauty of her study is the rich results and insights gained from any practice of thoughtful observation and reflection.
August 2, 2020
Un approccio che non mi dà più di quello che ho già
July 26, 2011
This is an older book (1993) and with the prevalence of documentaries about dogs on cable television these days, it was not that revelatory to me (though of course at the time, it probably was. I think it is now regarded as a classic)Her body of work has no doubt been influential on many of the dog expert shows that train owners how to behave with dogs.
I own two dogs and enjoy the personal observations and accounts the author related about her pack. Her tone and writing was a bit stiff or odd to me. It sounds like the animals (hers as well as her neighbors) were at risk from roaming or lack of more training and control. She observed, but did not train the dogs. She allowed the dogs to learn from the examples of the other pack members. This is great for insight into the nature of dogs and packs, but it does not replicate the average situation for pet owners (who for liability and home owner regulation reasons) may be expected to keep dogs more constrained. I agree with the other reviewers that the actions of the author put the reputation of dogs and dog owners at risk. She observes the neighbors frustration with the roaming dog problem with indifference. More disturbingly she describes an incident in which one of her dogs got loose and nearly attacked a Yorkshire terrier. The terrier went into a state of submission and was not injured, but this is some one's pet. She writes as if she has no empathy whatsoever for the horror and shock the other owner went through. Her sense of detachment (at least in the way she described it)in the incident seems callous. This is not survival of the fittest for animals in the wild. The other dog was the beloved member of someone's family. I also question the setting (the city) for this kind of experiment. And not intervening to prevent harm is unethical.
The highlight of the book for me was the account of Misha and Maria, an intriguing canine couple. The author's admiration for the dogs is evident.
I own two dogs and enjoy the personal observations and accounts the author related about her pack. Her tone and writing was a bit stiff or odd to me. It sounds like the animals (hers as well as her neighbors) were at risk from roaming or lack of more training and control. She observed, but did not train the dogs. She allowed the dogs to learn from the examples of the other pack members. This is great for insight into the nature of dogs and packs, but it does not replicate the average situation for pet owners (who for liability and home owner regulation reasons) may be expected to keep dogs more constrained. I agree with the other reviewers that the actions of the author put the reputation of dogs and dog owners at risk. She observes the neighbors frustration with the roaming dog problem with indifference. More disturbingly she describes an incident in which one of her dogs got loose and nearly attacked a Yorkshire terrier. The terrier went into a state of submission and was not injured, but this is some one's pet. She writes as if she has no empathy whatsoever for the horror and shock the other owner went through. Her sense of detachment (at least in the way she described it)in the incident seems callous. This is not survival of the fittest for animals in the wild. The other dog was the beloved member of someone's family. I also question the setting (the city) for this kind of experiment. And not intervening to prevent harm is unethical.
The highlight of the book for me was the account of Misha and Maria, an intriguing canine couple. The author's admiration for the dogs is evident.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 285 reviews