⭐️ ⭐️ 2.5 stars, sadly.
I wanted to like this book more than I actually did, and I feel that was in part because I expected an anthology of hunting stories. And to the book's credit, it was in aspects; but not entirely in the way I anticipated.
There was a surprising few of actual stories from the perspective of hunters that I expected- detailing the memories of hunts gone by, hunts to come, hunts that changed the authors' trajectories in life and pursuit of game. I was prepared for more stories like David Petersen's 'A Hunter's Heart', and others in this book like 'I Like to Talk About Animals' and 'A Childhood Outdoors'. These narratives captured the emotions around hunting while discussing the complexity proposed in the very beginning: WHY do we hunt? These few stories were heartfelt and entertaining while still educating the perhaps non-hunter who may be reading this book on topics like morality, mortality, and ethics.
The other 85% of the book, however, struck me as a case for the pursuit against hunting. Now while this approach in and of itself is not WRONG, I was not expecting to read so many more stories about how authors have grown apart from their sporting heritage, and the reasons to why others should too- or implying the reasoning to do so- while also ingesting more rhetoric than I care to admit about biologies, sciences, and overdone investigations of the like. I was taken off guard by the number of stories about hunting in the arctic, and the references to Thoreau, and what read as general distaste for hunting as a whole...particularly about hunting lions or bears with dogs, hunting birds on private preserves, and baiting.
Edward Abbey's story especially put a bad taste in my mouth, as the way he spoke about hunting being unnecessary post 'boyhood' and how as days modernize it should be expected and normalized that hunting dissipates as well just made it out to be that anyone who still takes up hunting in any fashion is comparative to a neanderthal.
I don't know, there were a few stories I enjoyed and felt connection to, and I was ready to read many perspectives about the hunt and sporting lifestyle as David Petersen noted in his introduction of the book, but by its end I was left to wonder if this collection of 'stories' were really intended to teach anything? Perhaps the contents are too abstract and complex for me, as it is a topic of such nature in general, but I finished this read feeling generally uncomfortable- like I just got done being scolded for having had enjoyment in something considered taboo.
Most of the stories were hard to follow, too oversaturated in details or words, had a lot of run-on sentences, and were generally just challenging reads out of sheer lack of enjoyment or connection on I, the reader's, part. I understand that a collection like this will have inconsistent qualities among its writers/contributors...but I question whether everyone that DID contribute to the collection had the same motives of teaching.