What do you think?
Rate this book
Animals: A Novel
It is more than one hundred years in the future and the horrors of factory farming combined with the widespread abuse of antibiotics have led to mass extinctions. The majority of mammals, birds, and fish that humans have eaten for millennia no longer exists. Add to that an ever-widening gap between rich and poor and an overtaxed healthcare system. Those not fully capable - the handicapped, those with birth defects and congenital illness - are deemed undeserving of an equal share of scares medical resources. They are ultimately classified as "mongrels" and considered less than human. As paranoia about our food supplies spreads, a forceful new logic takes hold; in the blink of a millennial eye the disenfranchised have become our food.
Don LePan's powerful and compelling novel shows us a world at once eerily foreign and disturbingly familiar. It follows the Stinsons - Carrie, Zayne, and their daughter, Naomi - and the dramatic events that unfold within their family after they take in an abandoned mongrel boy. In the sharp-poignancy of the ethical questions it poses, in the striking narrative techniques it employs, and above all, in the remarkable power of the story it tells, "Animals" proves itself a transformative work of fiction.
Don LePan's powerful and compelling novel shows us a world at once eerily foreign and disturbingly familiar. It follows the Stinsons - Carrie, Zayne, and their daughter, Naomi - and the dramatic events that unfold within their family after they take in an abandoned mongrel boy. In the sharp-poignancy of the ethical questions it poses, in the striking narrative techniques it employs, and above all, in the remarkable power of the story it tells, "Animals" proves itself a transformative work of fiction.
161 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2009
25 people are currently reading
904 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 53 reviews
April 23, 2020
This short novel was one big thought experiment that instantly got my attention, when I read the synopsis. I knew I just had to read it. The focus was mostly on the problem of factory farming and the extreme cruelty that most of the farm animals are subjected to, even in so-called developed countries. To a smaller extent it was about meat-eating itself.
There were two tracks of narration. The first was basically a hostorical narrative of what happened with farming over the 21st and 22nd century - from how animals were treated, to how they died out, to how people started treating other people with mental illnesses just as they used to treat animals. The second one was the story of Sam, whose deafness was mistaken for a mental illness, and his journey from human, to mongrel, to chattel.
The style differed in these two narratives - dry language was used for the historical part and long winding sentences were used for the second. At times it made it difficult to keep focus, but it at the end of the day this choice made the novel more hard-hitting, when describing certain realities of the future in a such a matter of fact tone.
For me personally it wasn't as terriffying as many reviewers found it. I read about cruelty to animals that feel both emotions and pain in the news. I already observe the indifference to it of so many people. I see those indifferent people ridiculing those who care and do something. In the end it's also just an everyday of gritting of teeth in helpless rage of an average vegetarian passing the meat disc on the way to the soy mince. Having to look at the bloody pieces of corpses that not everyone see as food.
And anyway, the reality of the novel is not even such a long stretch from eating animals to eating humans with neourological disorders, because the same excuses can easily be applied: "if your perception of the world is different than the one subjectively established as correct, then you're inferior".
A lot of important issues of our time were mentioned, such as:
- the horrible conditions that the farm animals are kept in,
- the harm that comes from factory farming to humans in the form of antibiotic resistance and epidemics,
- how some people realize all that, but they perceive any change that cannot be implemented instantly as too painful,
- how many people will try to justify the supposed neccessity to consume flesh, even if faced with evidence that vegetarian diet has all the necessary nutrients and is simply healthier
- how people see other people as sub-human based on absurd criteria such as different skin colour, nationality or religion and how easy it is to dehumanise certain groups of people,
- interesting insight about meat-eaters' tendency to not call the more intelligent animals that they consume by their name, for example using a word "pork" in place of "pig".
It's an extremely important book. I hope that anyone reading it will at the very least consider switching to flexitarian diet, with free-range animal products only, and thus wil stop generating demand for cruelty industries.
There were two tracks of narration. The first was basically a hostorical narrative of what happened with farming over the 21st and 22nd century - from how animals were treated, to how they died out, to how people started treating other people with mental illnesses just as they used to treat animals. The second one was the story of Sam, whose deafness was mistaken for a mental illness, and his journey from human, to mongrel, to chattel.
The style differed in these two narratives - dry language was used for the historical part and long winding sentences were used for the second. At times it made it difficult to keep focus, but it at the end of the day this choice made the novel more hard-hitting, when describing certain realities of the future in a such a matter of fact tone.
For me personally it wasn't as terriffying as many reviewers found it. I read about cruelty to animals that feel both emotions and pain in the news. I already observe the indifference to it of so many people. I see those indifferent people ridiculing those who care and do something. In the end it's also just an everyday of gritting of teeth in helpless rage of an average vegetarian passing the meat disc on the way to the soy mince. Having to look at the bloody pieces of corpses that not everyone see as food.
And anyway, the reality of the novel is not even such a long stretch from eating animals to eating humans with neourological disorders, because the same excuses can easily be applied: "if your perception of the world is different than the one subjectively established as correct, then you're inferior".
A lot of important issues of our time were mentioned, such as:
- the horrible conditions that the farm animals are kept in,
- the harm that comes from factory farming to humans in the form of antibiotic resistance and epidemics,
- how some people realize all that, but they perceive any change that cannot be implemented instantly as too painful,
- how many people will try to justify the supposed neccessity to consume flesh, even if faced with evidence that vegetarian diet has all the necessary nutrients and is simply healthier
- how people see other people as sub-human based on absurd criteria such as different skin colour, nationality or religion and how easy it is to dehumanise certain groups of people,
- interesting insight about meat-eaters' tendency to not call the more intelligent animals that they consume by their name, for example using a word "pork" in place of "pig".
It's an extremely important book. I hope that anyone reading it will at the very least consider switching to flexitarian diet, with free-range animal products only, and thus wil stop generating demand for cruelty industries.
October 9, 2011
This definitely isn't for the "weak at heart". It took awhile for the book to really "slam me in the gut" but when it did, I really felt it.
On the whole, I love apocolyptic tales of the future, especially if they are rooted in the "realities" of today (well, even if they are not). This book definitely falls in that category in that it looks at the possible future and how it may be shaped by Factory Farming (and our own ability to bend our moral values at will).
Though the book doesn't match up w/ the literary classics in this genre - "Blindness", "The Road", "The Plague", "The Time Machine" (and so on), it was a powerful read nonetheless. By the end of the book, I was thoroughly disturbed and shaken. I guess much of this would have to do w/ the fact that "Animal Rights" is one of my passions and I've always been fascinated by the moral values which define our treatment of animals - allowing us to love some and treat others with the most sadistic cruelty and/or shameful indifference.
Much of what the author proposes (at first) seems somewhat far-fetched. That is, that in the midst of mass-extinctions brought on by factory-farming, we could somehow shift to using the "deformed", "retarded" and other "challenged" (or so-defined "lesser") humans as food. It seems odd and a "no way" scenario. But, when one looks at how we treated such people just 100-150 years ago and how easily we condemn many "non-human" animals with equal (or greater) intelligence than the "handicapped" to lives of torture and cruelty - all for our own "benefit" in some way - it doesn't seem horribly far-fetched at all. It begins to look more like a direct examination of our moral compass.
The reality is, I couldn't put the book down and finished it in 2-days. It's not a 5-star b/c the writing simply isn't at the caliber of the others mentioned above, nor is the book "epic" by any means. But, it is engaging, thought-provoking and eye-opening.
On the whole, I love apocolyptic tales of the future, especially if they are rooted in the "realities" of today (well, even if they are not). This book definitely falls in that category in that it looks at the possible future and how it may be shaped by Factory Farming (and our own ability to bend our moral values at will).
Though the book doesn't match up w/ the literary classics in this genre - "Blindness", "The Road", "The Plague", "The Time Machine" (and so on), it was a powerful read nonetheless. By the end of the book, I was thoroughly disturbed and shaken. I guess much of this would have to do w/ the fact that "Animal Rights" is one of my passions and I've always been fascinated by the moral values which define our treatment of animals - allowing us to love some and treat others with the most sadistic cruelty and/or shameful indifference.
Much of what the author proposes (at first) seems somewhat far-fetched. That is, that in the midst of mass-extinctions brought on by factory-farming, we could somehow shift to using the "deformed", "retarded" and other "challenged" (or so-defined "lesser") humans as food. It seems odd and a "no way" scenario. But, when one looks at how we treated such people just 100-150 years ago and how easily we condemn many "non-human" animals with equal (or greater) intelligence than the "handicapped" to lives of torture and cruelty - all for our own "benefit" in some way - it doesn't seem horribly far-fetched at all. It begins to look more like a direct examination of our moral compass.
The reality is, I couldn't put the book down and finished it in 2-days. It's not a 5-star b/c the writing simply isn't at the caliber of the others mentioned above, nor is the book "epic" by any means. But, it is engaging, thought-provoking and eye-opening.
Read
January 8, 2011There are many great reasons to be vegetarian, and Don LePan's dystopia highlights the rationale behind one of them, "I don't eat anything with a face." Animals explores what it means to be human, where we draw the line, and what/who we decide falls low enough below that line to be eaten (after being systematically tortured). It also explores how those lines are justified and how they change when resources are scarce.
In Animals, children who cannot talk well become pets and/or are eaten, although the dystopian society uses justification and insulating language to distance itself from this harsh reality.
These imaginings are horrific and frightening. Personally, I prefer imagining vegetarian utopias where there are no slaughterhouses and society aims for universal equality and elevation. Readers may find perfection dull, but I think there is room for authors to be more inventive about dramatizing worlds of utopia, transformation, and positive possible futures.
However, to call attention to facts most people would rather ignore, to sound an alert, to derail complacency, and to give voice to abandoned perspectives — there's nothing like dystopia.
Pairs well with: Ninni Holmqvist's The Unit and Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go — other dystopias where the line is drawn disturbingly close to home (this could be you!). Also, Richard Adam's The Plague Dogs and the graphic novel We3 by Grant Morrison — books that give voice to those who cannot speak and remind us of atrocities that occur daily on our behalf. And, of course, Peter Singer's Animal Liberation mentioned by LePan in the author's afterword.
Writers, read this for: an interesting structure — a shifting third person narrative as related by Naomi telling her story of her love for Sam (who society has deemed a "mongrel") and that of Broderick Clark, Sam's brother, a scientifically-minded (and uses footnotes) anti-factory farming, small-farm advocate — and voice, LePan creates the internal dialogue of Tammy, the simple-minded, impoverished mother who gives Sam up; Carrie, a harshly practical, guilt-ridden woman; Sam, an intelligent and gentle being, who is unfortunately and heartbreakingly deaf; and Naomi, a maturing girl who, via her love for Sam, questions societal norms and becomes an independent thinker.
Quotes:
"Once again many people are quite willing to admit openly that they more or less know what they are doing is hideously wrong. They just don't want to really know." — Broderick Clark
"Inside himself, he wondered simple things: Why does it hurt so much? When will she take me home?" — Sam
"If you start saying things like that, thinking things like that, pretty soon people will be saying there's no line to be drawn. They'll start saying that anything which can move and can make noises is just like a human, is just as good as a human, should have everything a human has. But do you think a thing like that can take on the responsibilities of a human? Do you?" — Carrie, yelling
"Ah ink ah cud. Ah ink ah cud do at. Es." — Sam, unheard
"...the way someone looks if they love you, love you not for you only, but just for being like anybody else. You could imagine so many things if you looked in a creature's eyes, you could never know, it was like looking into clouds, or into water, you could never know really, it was better to look away."
In Animals, children who cannot talk well become pets and/or are eaten, although the dystopian society uses justification and insulating language to distance itself from this harsh reality.
These imaginings are horrific and frightening. Personally, I prefer imagining vegetarian utopias where there are no slaughterhouses and society aims for universal equality and elevation. Readers may find perfection dull, but I think there is room for authors to be more inventive about dramatizing worlds of utopia, transformation, and positive possible futures.
However, to call attention to facts most people would rather ignore, to sound an alert, to derail complacency, and to give voice to abandoned perspectives — there's nothing like dystopia.
Pairs well with: Ninni Holmqvist's The Unit and Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go — other dystopias where the line is drawn disturbingly close to home (this could be you!). Also, Richard Adam's The Plague Dogs and the graphic novel We3 by Grant Morrison — books that give voice to those who cannot speak and remind us of atrocities that occur daily on our behalf. And, of course, Peter Singer's Animal Liberation mentioned by LePan in the author's afterword.
Writers, read this for: an interesting structure — a shifting third person narrative as related by Naomi telling her story of her love for Sam (who society has deemed a "mongrel") and that of Broderick Clark, Sam's brother, a scientifically-minded (and uses footnotes) anti-factory farming, small-farm advocate — and voice, LePan creates the internal dialogue of Tammy, the simple-minded, impoverished mother who gives Sam up; Carrie, a harshly practical, guilt-ridden woman; Sam, an intelligent and gentle being, who is unfortunately and heartbreakingly deaf; and Naomi, a maturing girl who, via her love for Sam, questions societal norms and becomes an independent thinker.
Quotes:
"Once again many people are quite willing to admit openly that they more or less know what they are doing is hideously wrong. They just don't want to really know." — Broderick Clark
"Inside himself, he wondered simple things: Why does it hurt so much? When will she take me home?" — Sam
"If you start saying things like that, thinking things like that, pretty soon people will be saying there's no line to be drawn. They'll start saying that anything which can move and can make noises is just like a human, is just as good as a human, should have everything a human has. But do you think a thing like that can take on the responsibilities of a human? Do you?" — Carrie, yelling
"Ah ink ah cud. Ah ink ah cud do at. Es." — Sam, unheard
"...the way someone looks if they love you, love you not for you only, but just for being like anybody else. You could imagine so many things if you looked in a creature's eyes, you could never know, it was like looking into clouds, or into water, you could never know really, it was better to look away."
March 29, 2019
A veces se me olvida que tengo sentimientos... luego llegan libros como éste y me recuerdan que sí tengo. Sí están ahí XD.
La historia relatada en este libro es devastadora. Es triste y cruda, pero sobre todo, es extremadamente real. No es una narrativa perfecta, pero sí es una novela que te deja pensando en muchos de sus pasajes. Es una historia con frases e imágenes que no se olvidan fácilmente y, tiene un desenlace que muy probablemente te sacará una que otra lágrima.
No es un libro para cualquiera. Como ya dije, en cuestión literaria deja bastante que desear tanto en estructura como en narrativa. Sin embargo aborda temas muy importantes, dignos de leerse. Para los interesados en la agricultura industrializada (factory farming), las diferencias sociales y las complicaciones de la vida adulta, éste es, sin duda, un libro interesante.
La historia relatada en este libro es devastadora. Es triste y cruda, pero sobre todo, es extremadamente real. No es una narrativa perfecta, pero sí es una novela que te deja pensando en muchos de sus pasajes. Es una historia con frases e imágenes que no se olvidan fácilmente y, tiene un desenlace que muy probablemente te sacará una que otra lágrima.
No es un libro para cualquiera. Como ya dije, en cuestión literaria deja bastante que desear tanto en estructura como en narrativa. Sin embargo aborda temas muy importantes, dignos de leerse. Para los interesados en la agricultura industrializada (factory farming), las diferencias sociales y las complicaciones de la vida adulta, éste es, sin duda, un libro interesante.
June 26, 2011
If you look up ham-fisted in the dictionary it’ll point you to this book. The major problem here was that the book couldn’t decide if it was a non-fiction look at factory farming or a futuristic sci-fi where mutant humans are being factory farmed. So instead of writing a story, LePan decided to write little bits of story interspersed with long expository passages where he describes the horrors of human factory farming, which just happen to be exactly the same as the factory farming of today…exactly the same.
The small amount of story, dialogue, and action that did happen was very poorly written. I honestly think there is a good story idea in this book somewhere, but to find it you’d have to start from square one. And find someone who can write fiction.
The small amount of story, dialogue, and action that did happen was very poorly written. I honestly think there is a good story idea in this book somewhere, but to find it you’d have to start from square one. And find someone who can write fiction.
May 31, 2010
This book is much more disturbing than I imagined that it would be. (That is the reason why it is taking me so long to complete a 179 page book.)
If Don LePan's intent in writing this book was to convince people of the merits of vegetarianism, than I believe that this book is a success. I know that it is definitely causing me to rethink my diet, although I have not actually converted yet.
Update on completion:
This book had a big impact on me. I have not converted to veganism yet, but this book has me seriously considering such a move. I highly recommend reading this book.
If Don LePan's intent in writing this book was to convince people of the merits of vegetarianism, than I believe that this book is a success. I know that it is definitely causing me to rethink my diet, although I have not actually converted yet.
Update on completion:
This book had a big impact on me. I have not converted to veganism yet, but this book has me seriously considering such a move. I highly recommend reading this book.
August 3, 2023
Is subtext dead? Maybe I'm the wrong audience for this considering I agree with the basic tenet that animal agriculture is barbaric, but come on. I remember when books weren't just fictional essays.
LePan's Animals presents a future where Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is taken as a rubric for meat production in the wake of animal die-offs. LePan depicts a world where neurodivergent and disabled children, so-called "mongrels," are used first as chattel (an immensely charged word choice that fails to justify the decision) to tend fields as cheap labour, before being fattened and slaughtered for human consumption.
Much of the narrative follows an abandoned deaf boy who is treated as a pet (as some mongrels are), as LePan (I think) attempts to draw a line between animals we care for and those we don't.
While the book is obviously horrific, it is light on characterization and the narrative is interrupted with historical vignettes that illustrate how the world got to this point. This vignettes basically teach the reader how factory farming works in the present day. I understand why LePan might be doing this, but I have to wonder if the need to do that perhaps illustrates the filmsy nature of the central idea.
Humanity's capacity to self-segregate and dehumanize people in out-groups is not news. Showcasing a future where humanity does that again, but to people who are already vulnerable in the present day, comes off as more ableist than it does prescient. It undermines the central message because it tries bluntly to grab the reader by the collar and say "Look how fucked up meat production is", while providing nothing in the way of advocacy for the animals this actually affects today.
The book does not render animals sympathetic because it does not depict their suffering; it only asks "Wouldn't it be bad if we did it to disabled people too?, a question that I think the most devout carnivore would answer yes to.
Of course, LePan himself admits in the afterword that he still buys "cruelty-free" dairy and eggs, so perhaps this was doomed from the start.
LePan's Animals presents a future where Swift's "A Modest Proposal" is taken as a rubric for meat production in the wake of animal die-offs. LePan depicts a world where neurodivergent and disabled children, so-called "mongrels," are used first as chattel (an immensely charged word choice that fails to justify the decision) to tend fields as cheap labour, before being fattened and slaughtered for human consumption.
Much of the narrative follows an abandoned deaf boy who is treated as a pet (as some mongrels are), as LePan (I think) attempts to draw a line between animals we care for and those we don't.
While the book is obviously horrific, it is light on characterization and the narrative is interrupted with historical vignettes that illustrate how the world got to this point. This vignettes basically teach the reader how factory farming works in the present day. I understand why LePan might be doing this, but I have to wonder if the need to do that perhaps illustrates the filmsy nature of the central idea.
Humanity's capacity to self-segregate and dehumanize people in out-groups is not news. Showcasing a future where humanity does that again, but to people who are already vulnerable in the present day, comes off as more ableist than it does prescient. It undermines the central message because it tries bluntly to grab the reader by the collar and say "Look how fucked up meat production is", while providing nothing in the way of advocacy for the animals this actually affects today.
The book does not render animals sympathetic because it does not depict their suffering; it only asks "Wouldn't it be bad if we did it to disabled people too?, a question that I think the most devout carnivore would answer yes to.
Of course, LePan himself admits in the afterword that he still buys "cruelty-free" dairy and eggs, so perhaps this was doomed from the start.
July 16, 2023
This book was basically a story about a dystopian future in which most animals who provided meat were extinct due to disease and being over fed antibiotics. So humans turn to a new meat source - other humans, which they label as mongrels or chattels. They are mostly people born with physical and/or mental disabilities. Chattels can be used as slaves and mongrels are sometimes kept as pets as well. They are mostly treated in a horrible, inhumane way. For example, there’s a scene with a very descriptive explanation of how they castrate chattels.
There are two parts to the book, the history and descriptions of chattels, and the story of a mongrel named Sam. The book touched on who we as a society view as lesser, and how insanely selfish people can be.
I did find some of the parts about the history and the chattels boring. He droned on a bit and added some unnecessary detail. The story about Sam and the family he stayed with was much more interesting. Just a warning: this book has a very sad ending.
The creepiest part about this book is that a similar situation could happen in real life someday. It does get you thinking about our future as a society if we keep treating people and animals the way we do. It helps spread awareness to how animals who are raised for meat are mistreated and the author intended to get people thinking about that. He definitely accomplished his goal.
There are two parts to the book, the history and descriptions of chattels, and the story of a mongrel named Sam. The book touched on who we as a society view as lesser, and how insanely selfish people can be.
I did find some of the parts about the history and the chattels boring. He droned on a bit and added some unnecessary detail. The story about Sam and the family he stayed with was much more interesting. Just a warning: this book has a very sad ending.
The creepiest part about this book is that a similar situation could happen in real life someday. It does get you thinking about our future as a society if we keep treating people and animals the way we do. It helps spread awareness to how animals who are raised for meat are mistreated and the author intended to get people thinking about that. He definitely accomplished his goal.
January 28, 2024
I think LePan is successful in making his point, but I think the book would've been more palatable--no pun intended--had he chose to be slightly more subtle and less hamfisted, and had he let the narrative speak for itself. As it is, the book teeters far closer to non-fiction than it does to speculative fiction. Indeed, the non-fiction-esque portions detracted from the characters and from building any sense of urgency and tension around Sam's storyline; however, the narrative portions were somewhat sloppy and the dialogue was so unrealistic that perhaps it wouldn't have helped.
All in all, I suppose I felt more bored and preached to than anything else. If LePan had focused on writing a more compelling, emotional narrative, I think I would have felt more moved by the message. But I couldn't help thinking that Agustina Bazterrica achieved a better, albeit more gory and horror-filled, outcome with Tender is the Flesh.
All in all, I suppose I felt more bored and preached to than anything else. If LePan had focused on writing a more compelling, emotional narrative, I think I would have felt more moved by the message. But I couldn't help thinking that Agustina Bazterrica achieved a better, albeit more gory and horror-filled, outcome with Tender is the Flesh.
June 10, 2019
I don't quite know how to rate this as it's such a devastating novel. It's incredibly well-written, but such a sad story. This is an excellent book to read at this time in our world as veganism and the treatment of animals are finally coming to light to the masses. I wish every meat-eater could read this and possibly understand just a fraction of what these animals endure to make it to humans' plates. It's awful, but I'm glad this book was written to shed light on these lives in a way everyone can understand.
August 22, 2010
I was actually expecting a more post-apocalypic or dystopian book, from the library description, and yet it turned out to be a rather thinly disguised version of our own world, with disabled people standing in for factory farmed animals. and with a back blurb by peter singer. and a peter singer reference in the book. not that i mind, being someone who likes dystopic fiction, and also became a vegetarian twenty years ago after reading singer's "animal liberation". just not quite what i was expecting. Unlike many covertly/overtly preachy books, this one was actually well written, and could stand alone without the agenda. And not a bad agenda, at that.
September 25, 2012
This odd little book explores the horrors of factory farming through the eyes of Sam, a deaf boy who is declared a mongrel and sent to a chattel processing facility to be processed as food. The horrors of how we process meat comes through through the sheer banality of this tale. This book is NOT for the faint of heart, and will change the way you think about food. It also raises questions about what makes us human. Thought-provoking and a must-read.
April 25, 2013
Animals by Don LePan is a futuristic society that dehumanizes physically and mentally challenged people. The book is hard to keep up with because it jumps from the past, to the future, and then to the present. Although they try to make up for whatever misconceptions that the reader makes by interrupting the action, it confuses me even more. They start off chapters like "Broderick, many years later...", and then do not explain the changes that happened between those years.
January 3, 2021
I knew this was going to be an upsetting book. I'm glad that I could read it , as a vegan, without any hidden food guilt in the back of my mind. But even though I know all about the cruelty of the meat industry, I still found this book devastating. The most upsetting part for me personally is that so many people are also upset by the situation but won't make the necessary dietary changes. My heart hurts.
December 29, 2023
Interesting story but the author struggles to fit his world building naturally into the narrative.
Read
November 8, 2019Title and Picture are included above.
MLA Citation: LePan, Don. Counterpoint LLC. Véhicule Press, 2009.
Sam is born deaf in a society that doesn’t recognize people with disabilities as people. Instead, if you are born with any kind of disability you became a mongrel (a pet if you’re lucky). If you weren’t so lucky, you’d get sold to chattel farms to work until you’re dead or beefed-up and slaughtered for food. People are having to eat mongrels because animals are essentially extinct because of over-farming. Sam is abandoned by his mother who can’t afford to take care of a mongrel son. She leaves him on the doorstep of the Stinsons, a wealthier family that could afford to take care of him. Sam (Sammy) becomes a pet for the family. However, Naomi, the daughter, begins to spend a lot of time with Sammy, which upsets her mother. Naomi’s mother thinks it’s an unhealthy relationship for a girl to spend so much time with a mongrel, even if he is treated like the family dog. Throughout the story, we get information from Broderick (Sam’s biological brother who is still with his family). Broderick tells us how society got so dependent on chattel workers and why people with disabilities are treated like crap. Naomi’s mother ends up taking Sammy to a chattel farm without Naomi or her father knowing. Zayne (the father) and Naomi eventually question her mother into confessing, but it’s too late. As Zayne and Naomi are racing to the farm, Sammy is cattle-prodded into a slaughter line and is killed. The family quits eating meat for fear they are eating Sammy.
Personal Response
This is a re-read for me. I got to read this novel in an environmental English class a few years ago. I didn’t really know what to expect, but I sure as heck didn’t expect the alternative to eating animals was eating humans. I realized the point LePan is trying to make about the meat industry and factory-farmed animals. It also bothered me that people with disabilities were the unlucky people who were chosen to replace meat. The group of people with little representation is forced by the able-bodied to give up their right to life just because they have a disability. Most disabilities aren’t that crippling! Sammy is just deaf! His family could have learned sign language and accepted him as a full member of the family and not a pet. The novel made me think deeply about the practice of eating meat and the underrepresentation people with disabilities live through. When I re-read it, I had to experience the pain, anger, and heartbreak all over again. I ended up focusing on Broderick and how he is explaining the fallout between past civilization and present society. It sounds like a far-off idea, but I really started thinking about what would happen if we did eat all the animals. I don’t think it’s crazy to imagine people demanding some kind of meat substitute and turning on those who can’t defend themselves.
Connection to Adolescence
When I read this novel the first time, I thought it would be a great book to tie into some kind of science class. If they are studying nutrition or diet, we could read “Animals” in the English classroom to help bridge the two subjects (cross-curriculum education). I could use this novel to help students start thinking about how much meat they eat and how it can influence everything from farmers and land to prices and morals. We could also discuss how people with disabilities are often thought of as “lesser” by those who see the world as “survival of the fittest.” We can talk about morality of humans, the need for representation for people with disabilities, and how we can influence global change and restoration by reducing the amount of meat we consume. I might not be able to teach this novel to the students I have now, but I think somewhere out there there might be a senior English class that would love to debate and analyze this novel.
MLA Citation: LePan, Don. Counterpoint LLC. Véhicule Press, 2009.
Sam is born deaf in a society that doesn’t recognize people with disabilities as people. Instead, if you are born with any kind of disability you became a mongrel (a pet if you’re lucky). If you weren’t so lucky, you’d get sold to chattel farms to work until you’re dead or beefed-up and slaughtered for food. People are having to eat mongrels because animals are essentially extinct because of over-farming. Sam is abandoned by his mother who can’t afford to take care of a mongrel son. She leaves him on the doorstep of the Stinsons, a wealthier family that could afford to take care of him. Sam (Sammy) becomes a pet for the family. However, Naomi, the daughter, begins to spend a lot of time with Sammy, which upsets her mother. Naomi’s mother thinks it’s an unhealthy relationship for a girl to spend so much time with a mongrel, even if he is treated like the family dog. Throughout the story, we get information from Broderick (Sam’s biological brother who is still with his family). Broderick tells us how society got so dependent on chattel workers and why people with disabilities are treated like crap. Naomi’s mother ends up taking Sammy to a chattel farm without Naomi or her father knowing. Zayne (the father) and Naomi eventually question her mother into confessing, but it’s too late. As Zayne and Naomi are racing to the farm, Sammy is cattle-prodded into a slaughter line and is killed. The family quits eating meat for fear they are eating Sammy.
Personal Response
This is a re-read for me. I got to read this novel in an environmental English class a few years ago. I didn’t really know what to expect, but I sure as heck didn’t expect the alternative to eating animals was eating humans. I realized the point LePan is trying to make about the meat industry and factory-farmed animals. It also bothered me that people with disabilities were the unlucky people who were chosen to replace meat. The group of people with little representation is forced by the able-bodied to give up their right to life just because they have a disability. Most disabilities aren’t that crippling! Sammy is just deaf! His family could have learned sign language and accepted him as a full member of the family and not a pet. The novel made me think deeply about the practice of eating meat and the underrepresentation people with disabilities live through. When I re-read it, I had to experience the pain, anger, and heartbreak all over again. I ended up focusing on Broderick and how he is explaining the fallout between past civilization and present society. It sounds like a far-off idea, but I really started thinking about what would happen if we did eat all the animals. I don’t think it’s crazy to imagine people demanding some kind of meat substitute and turning on those who can’t defend themselves.
Connection to Adolescence
When I read this novel the first time, I thought it would be a great book to tie into some kind of science class. If they are studying nutrition or diet, we could read “Animals” in the English classroom to help bridge the two subjects (cross-curriculum education). I could use this novel to help students start thinking about how much meat they eat and how it can influence everything from farmers and land to prices and morals. We could also discuss how people with disabilities are often thought of as “lesser” by those who see the world as “survival of the fittest.” We can talk about morality of humans, the need for representation for people with disabilities, and how we can influence global change and restoration by reducing the amount of meat we consume. I might not be able to teach this novel to the students I have now, but I think somewhere out there there might be a senior English class that would love to debate and analyze this novel.
December 7, 2020
This is a hard review to write. I scribble a bit and I know how hard it is to put pen to paper and get it to work out. The conceit is a good conceit. I would call this Doris Lessing's Fourth Child crossed with Swift's A Modest Proposal via PETA.
I am not going to argue the merits of vegetarianism or his approach. That is sound. When I had more cash, I had already shifted our family towards it. Now, being a part time parent, when I have the kids, I am reliant on cheap, more processed goods. So, the moral high ground and his ways into it are sound.
Nah, the problem I have is that it seems too pedantic and preachy. I know there could be a more nuanced way of writing this. I also get why you wouldn't make those other choices. I feel that the type of person that would pick up this book is already sympathetic and much like trauma porn of the AIDS era, I normally shy away from these books.
I have a few Richard Adams books on my shelf that are left unread for this reason. Maybe if Lessing and Swift hadn't been called to mind so early, this book wouldn't have suffered from the comparison. I'm just having a hard time picturing that.
There are some phrases that suggest that the author could have pulled it off. The description of family phrases and the interaction around mother and daughter were particularly good. I am wracking my mind to whom this would be a good recommendation -- sympathetics - No, meat eaters - no, litfic people - no.
Maybe I am being too harsh. I would read something by the author again, I just didn't like the choices here.
I am not going to argue the merits of vegetarianism or his approach. That is sound. When I had more cash, I had already shifted our family towards it. Now, being a part time parent, when I have the kids, I am reliant on cheap, more processed goods. So, the moral high ground and his ways into it are sound.
Nah, the problem I have is that it seems too pedantic and preachy. I know there could be a more nuanced way of writing this. I also get why you wouldn't make those other choices. I feel that the type of person that would pick up this book is already sympathetic and much like trauma porn of the AIDS era, I normally shy away from these books.
I have a few Richard Adams books on my shelf that are left unread for this reason. Maybe if Lessing and Swift hadn't been called to mind so early, this book wouldn't have suffered from the comparison. I'm just having a hard time picturing that.
There are some phrases that suggest that the author could have pulled it off. The description of family phrases and the interaction around mother and daughter were particularly good. I am wracking my mind to whom this would be a good recommendation -- sympathetics - No, meat eaters - no, litfic people - no.
Maybe I am being too harsh. I would read something by the author again, I just didn't like the choices here.
July 1, 2017
Animals by Don LePan is a heavy read and not for the faint of heart. At first, I was expecting a quick dystopian read. But like other reviewers can attest, this was a non-fiction thinly disguised as fiction. For being such a short read it sure took me a long time to get through!
This is an eye-opening read of the current state of factory farming. While I'm not planning to go vegan, this book has been a huge wake up call to be more aware of the food I choose to eat, where it comes from and the treatment it received.
This is an eye-opening read of the current state of factory farming. While I'm not planning to go vegan, this book has been a huge wake up call to be more aware of the food I choose to eat, where it comes from and the treatment it received.
May 22, 2025
I cannot in good faith recommend this book to anyone, especially if you are already sensitive to the abuse of factory-farmed animals or differently abled humans.
This book has been abused in turn. I have slammed it shut, thrown it across the room, screamed at it, and considered throwing it in the trash. It takes a very skilled author to evoke that kind of emotion out of me, so my rating is purely out of respect for the writing. Unfortunately, it will be imprinted on my thoughts for a very long time. 4-stars ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
This book has been abused in turn. I have slammed it shut, thrown it across the room, screamed at it, and considered throwing it in the trash. It takes a very skilled author to evoke that kind of emotion out of me, so my rating is purely out of respect for the writing. Unfortunately, it will be imprinted on my thoughts for a very long time. 4-stars ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
June 11, 2020
There were parts of this book I had some problems with, and pacing issues too. The first half of the book is maybe two stars. It's at the second half that it hits a stride which redeem the whole thing overall. The story does have a well meaning moral, but it is hard in some spots to stay with it (from the issues mentioned above.
November 15, 2023
It's been more than two years since I read Animals (I'm not consistent with Goodreads), but I remember finding the story sad and somehow disturbing. It's impressive how our attitudes and views would change if we didn't consider ourselves above all other animals in the world. Did it make me change my habits and lifestyle? No, it did not.
Solid book.
Solid book.
December 31, 2025
The book was definitely meant to turn you into a vegetarian, which it absolutely should because it unveils the horrors behind industrial agriculture. I am very ignorant to this truth- something I need to take deeper accountability for but alas I make excuses for myself. I am impressed at the extensive research the author put in- it felt like I was reading a nonfiction as some points.
December 18, 2018
Disturbing on so many levels… but a very, very good read! Be warned: there are two parts to this story. There’s the narrative and then there’s the historical background with lots of footnotes. Be sure to read everything.
October 1, 2020
Very grim scary view of the world that views humans with special needs as mongrels...they can end up as a family or be sent to a chattel farm to be harvested as food since all the animals have been wiped off the earth. I was very disturbed by this book. Left me feeling very unsettled.
July 16, 2021
I don’t like how disability is used to link humans to animals in this book, but sadly I’m used to it in general. This book challenged me in unexpected ways, though, and I love being put to philosophical questions.
May 23, 2023
Chills to my bones. I read the Part 1 excerpt on the author's website and was immediately struck by a compulsion to acquire the full ebook and finish.
Readers might also appreciate Peter Singers' Animal Liberation, which is referenced in this work.
Readers might also appreciate Peter Singers' Animal Liberation, which is referenced in this work.
October 31, 2023
I had to read this for my intro to Philosophy class and while I understand what it's saying the way it goes about doing so is incredibly absurd and kinda really shitty. I don't know, it's weird and kinda boring. Met the dude too so sorry if ur reading LePan.
January 3, 2020
It feels equally sacrilegious both to give this novella 5 stars and to give it anything less. I really want to talk to someone about this story and the philosophical reckoning it necessitates.
July 11, 2021
Interesting, but sometimes heavy handed, approach to dealing with food industry animal oppression. Would be interested in having a meat-eating friend read and provide a review of this book...
April 18, 2023
2.5 stars
Displaying 1 - 30 of 53 reviews