Rate this book

Clear rating

1 of 5 stars 2 of 5 stars 3 of 5 stars 4 of 5 stars 5 of 5 stars

The Lives of Animals

by J.M. Coetzee, Amy Gutmann (Editor), Peter Singer (Contribution by), Wendy Doniger (Goodreads Author) (Contribution by), Barbara Smuts (Contribution by), Marjorie Garber

3.83 of 5 stars 3.83 · rating details · 762 ratings · 53 reviews

The idea of human cruelty to animals so consumes novelist Elizabeth Costello in her later years that she can no longer look another person in the eye: humans, especially meat-eating ones, seem to her to be conspirators in a crime of stupefying magnitude taking place on farms and in slaughterhouses, factories, and laboratories across the world.

Costello's son, a physics prof...more The idea of human cruelty to animals so consumes novelist Elizabeth Costello in her later years that she can no longer look another person in the eye: humans, especially meat-eating ones, seem to her to be conspirators in a crime of stupefying magnitude taking place on farms and in slaughterhouses, factories, and laboratories across the world.

Costello's son, a physics professor, admires her literary achievements, but dreads his mother's lecturing on animal rights at the college where he teaches. His colleagues resist her argument that human reason is overrated and that the inability to reason does not diminish the value of life; his wife denounces his mother's vegetarianism as a form of moral superiority.

At the dinner that follows her first lecture, the guests confront Costello with a range of sympathetic and skeptical reactions to issues of animal rights, touching on broad philosophical, anthropological, and religious perspectives. Painfully for her son, Elizabeth Costello seems offensive and flaky, but--dare he admit it?--strangely on target.

Here the internationally renowned writer J. M. Coetzee uses fiction to present a powerfully moving discussion of animal rights in all their complexity. He draws us into Elizabeth Costello's own sense of mortality, her compassion for animals, and her alienation from humans, even from her own family. In his fable, presented as a Tanner Lecture sponsored by the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University, Coetzee immerses us in a drama reflecting the real-life situation at hand: a writer delivering a lecture on an emotionally charged issue at a prestigious university. Literature, philosophy, performance, and deep human conviction--Coetzee brings all these elements into play.

As in the story of Elizabeth Costello, the Tanner Lecture is followed by responses treating the reader to a variety of perspectives, delivered by leading thinkers in different fields. Coetzee's text is accompanied by an introduction by political philosopher Amy Gutmann and responsive essays by religion scholar Wendy Doniger, primatologist Barbara Smuts, literary theorist Marjorie Garber, and moral philosopher Peter Singer, author of "Animal Liberation." Together the lecture-fable and the essays explore the palpable social consequences of uncompromising moral conflict and confrontation.(less)

Paperback, 136 pages

Published April 16th 2001 by Princeton University Press (first published 1999)

more details... edit details

Get a copy:

More…

Friend Reviews

To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.

Lists with This Book

Diary of a Dieting Madhouse by Paige Singleton

Novels for Vegans

6th out of 7 books — 12 voters

Best eco-fiction

37th out of 50 books — 30 voters

More lists with this book...

Community Reviews

(showing 1-30 of 1,287)

filter | sort: default (?) | rating details

Nov 08, 2010 TD rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: re-read, fiction

**Spoilers**

Suddenly, at the end of this short, intense book, in the final four line paragraph, tiers of argument dissolve and John Bernard consoles his distraught mother, “There, there. It will be over soon.” We are aware that John Bernard is referring to what has been a draining, arduous couple of days for his mother, Elizabeth Costello, famous Australian feminist author, invited to Appleton College “to speak on any subject she elects”. It has been a heavy few days for John too, his ageing mot...more **Spoilers**

Suddenly, at the end of this short, intense book, in the final four line paragraph, tiers of argument dissolve and John Bernard consoles his distraught mother, “There, there. It will be over soon.” We are aware that John Bernard is referring to what has been a draining, arduous couple of days for his mother, Elizabeth Costello, famous Australian feminist author, invited to Appleton College “to speak on any subject she elects”. It has been a heavy few days for John too, his ageing mother’s ardent vegetarian convictions putting a strain on both his family and on his own position in the college. However, in this final moment of consolation we are also reminded of Elizabeth Costello’s age “the smell of cold cream, old flesh”, which mirrors John’s first impression when his mother disembarked from the plane at the beginning of the story “he is shocked at how she has aged...her flesh has grown flabby”. We are thus made aware that Elizabeth Costello is approaching death and will not have to endure for much longer witness of “the crime of stupefying proportions” which has formed the basis of her recently delivered lectures: human (mis)treatment of animals. But could Coetzee’s book be trailing particles even as it launches itself out of our mortal world, these spreading and filtering back down as atmospheric traces, maybe eventually settling to enrich soil? For Elizabeth Costello seems to be (like David Lurie, the libidinous protagonist of Disgrace) something of a dinosaur within the context of academia, an artist hemmed by disciplines, so that in these final lines we could also consider whether Coetzee mightn’t be imagining the passing away of literary values. And finally we might ponder even broader implications, spurred by Elizabeth’s closing remarks in her first lecture, “we can do anything and get away with it; that there is no punishment”, and suggest that Elizabeth’s mortal ache represents a broader, shared premonition of our humanity’s extinction, prompted as it is by institutionalised hubris and anthropocentrism in the face of calamity.

In her essay (one of four following the story), Marjorie Garber rightly questions Coetzee’s chosen form. Invited to deliver a lecture on an ethical problem at Princeton University, Coetzee instead gave a reading of “The Lives of Animals”, a fiction in which the character of a celebrated author - Elizabeth Costello - is invited to speak at Appleton College on fiction, but instead delivers a lecture on the ethics (or lack thereof) of animal food production. A lecture within a lecture: a response within a response. Garber claims that by so doing Coetzee is appropriating reader/audience reactions, which is probably true. But as intellectually titillating as this frame within a frame is, it is not so hard to imagine Coetzee’s thought process approaching these Tanner Lectures, and he has strewn meta-fictional self references to this process throughout the book; “Not her metier, argumentation. She should not be here”, “...she has responded by electing to speak, not about herself and her fiction, as her sponsors would no doubt like, but about a hobbyhorse of hers, animals.” Coetzee has imagined his audience, imagined the inter-disciplinary refractions his viewpoints in his own lectures would be subjected to, and imagined, what’s more, the pig’s ear he would make of it all, and then assigned that sorry lot to a fictional character. But if the form of “The Lives of Animals” has appropriation as its function, I would disagree with Garber in concluding this as constituting “a strategy of control” – in fact I would hold it as being the opposite. By parenthesising statement in literature Coetzee has shifted the boundaries of enterprise to address the relationship between idea and enunciation, this predicating the web of very personal and political complications which charge this novella.

I am aware that so far I’ve treated the topic of animals as a rather ancillary one, a hobbyhorse in fact, and in some ways I would suggest that it is a topic which provides Coetzee the springboard he needs to adumbrate his ideas about literature (with an important qualification I will touch on below) – if this book has its better it might be “Diary of a Bad Year”, in which Coetzee presented his controversies across a broader, and therefore more disperse, spectrum. But if this is the case, Elizabeth Costello’s lectures are nevertheless intrinsic to the book, and, to grossly oversimplify, the thrust of her argument seems to be that we should expand our conception of subjecthood to include animals; rational, Cartesian understanding, which “looks to me suspiciously like the being of human thought; worse than that, like the being of one tendency in human thought”, denies being to other creatures, whereas “To be alive is to be a living soul...an embodied soul”. Furthermore, “To be a living bat is to be full of being; being fully a bat is like being fully human...”, and poetry/literature, offers “the process called poetic invention that mingles breath and sense in a way that no one has explained and no one ever will.” This does not offer us the chance to know what it is to be another species, but it does “allow us to share at times the being of another [in so far as we, as animals, can come to share an analogous state]. Sympathy has everything to do with the subject and little to do with the object...” So far, so good. But if analogy allows us to sympathise, it also heralds danger, and if we are to believe Elizabeth is a mouthpiece for Coetzee’s opinions we must wonder why she is so resoundingly trounced when her interlocutors are given their opportunities to quiz her.

There are numerous moments in which Elizabeth Costello rebuffs challenges with weak, unconvincing arguments, an example of the most damaging of these being that animals do not fear death; “...dying is, for an animal, just something that happens, something against which there may be a revolt of the organism but not a revolt of the soul.” Not unconnected to this, Abraham Stern (a poet – even more damning) calls Elizabeth to task over her contentious analogy between animal food factories and the Holocaust. Stern absents himself from the post-lecture dinner in protest against her views, and writes Elizabeth a letter the next day; “If Jews were treated like cattle, it does not follow that cattle are treated like Jews. The inversion insults the memory of the dead.” Elizabeth, on this occasion, does not respond – she cannot; her position relies on the power of literary analogy; if analogy is to be denied, she has no position to defend. And on several occasions she admits her own confusion; “John, I don’t know what I want to do. I just don’t want to sit silent.” It is significant that the second part, titled “The Poets and the Animals”, spends very little time considering the poets and their relationship to animals – Elizabeth’s interlocutors draw her, Red Peter like, towards, seemingly, the only “way out”, “...the language of Aristotle and Porphry, of Agustine and Aquinas, of Descartes and Bentham...”, besieging her retreat into undefined (and problematic) “feeling” as arbiter of morality, and the salvation of her soul as motive. And one begins to sense why Coetzee might fear giving such a lecture as he inflicts on Elizabeth Costello. For Elizabeth Costello’s debility is necessary for writing fiction; what’s more, it is literature’s pre-requisite. Coetzee seems to suggest that the sensibility and intuition of analogy and sympathy are native to literature, thus “The Lives of Animals” questions what value literature can hold, what future it can expect, in an institutionalised world departmentalised into narrow disciplines. “We understand by immersing ourselves and our intelligence in complexity.” Here, I fancy to think, we hear an authentic sliver of Coetzee’s undiluted voice, and if in “The Lives of Animals” Elizabeth Costello’s (and to what degree Coetzee’s?) views on animal rights do not contain weight of proof, we are nevertheless challenged to regard them as being of inherent, perhaps even of paramount value, by being made cognizant of the precariousness of their existence.
(less)

like 2 likes · see review

Jun 18, 2012 Sasha rated it 4 of 5 stars

This novella is actually the two-part lecture that Coetzee gave at Princeton in 1997. Here Coetzee presents the topic of human cruelty toward animals through fiction, with fiction writer Elizabeth Costello invited to give a distinguished lecture at a university, and this is her topic of choice. The controversy of her lecture is argued, discussed, and rebutted by academic characters including Costello's son and his wife. The philosophical, poetical, and literal approaches to Costello's chosen sub...more

like · see review

Dec 03, 2011 Alison rated it 5 of 5 stars

This story is ingeniously written. Coetzee, invited to give two talks as part of a university lecture series, instead delivers a fictional story in two parts about a novelist who is invited to give a series of university talks. His lecturer, Elizabeth Costello, chooses to engage with the philosophies underlying vegetarianism and humane treatment of animals, rather than speak about her own work. Meanwhile, his protagonist (her son and a junior professor at the university), must navigate the socia...more

like 1 like · see review

Mar 30, 2012 Dharushana rated it 4 of 5 stars

Surprisingly compelling, although perhaps not so suprising. Coetzee is a master story teller, even when his story is the philosophical (and poetic) contemplation of animal rights. His clever meta-lecture ruse is engaging, provokative and a smooth read. His gifts contrast all the more with the intelligent but not nearly as masterful commentaries that accompany the lecture. The commentaries i enjoyed the most were from philosopher Peter Singer and primate biologist Barbara Smuts. As a pseduo-veget...more

like · see review

Oct 26, 2012 Aaron Schroeder rated it 4 of 5 stars

As others have exhaustively noted, Coetzee's 'lectures' take the form of a two-part literary inquiry with the question of animal cruelty at its center. But the title, "The Lives of Animals" is at least a pun, for the lectures regard not only the lives of the animals we eat, but also lives of the animals we are. For the question is not merely "What are they?" that we should treat animals as we do, but "What are we?" that we should treat animals as we do. This move, which occurs at the book's outs...more As others have exhaustively noted, Coetzee's 'lectures' take the form of a two-part literary inquiry with the question of animal cruelty at its center. But the title, "The Lives of Animals" is at least a pun, for the lectures regard not only the lives of the animals we eat, but also lives of the animals we are. For the question is not merely "What are they?" that we should treat animals as we do, but "What are we?" that we should treat animals as we do. This move, which occurs at the book's outset, should remove any doubt that Coetzee has offered here a work of literature, not necessarily intended to move the philosophical debate over 'animal sentience' one way or the other, but to offer considerations in rather separate terms than the likes of Singer, et al, usually do.

This is, indeed, a clever twist on that philosophical debate, and as a meta-narrative (novelist Elizabeth Costello's Appleton College lectures are offered as part of Coetzee's own lectures at Princeton), it is completely sensitive to the fact that, as a work of literature, it is not, strictly speaking, a work of academic philosophy. But Costello's (and, I dare say, Coetzee's) contention here is over this very issue: Are the arguments offered in 'academic philosophy' so-called adequately sensitive to the range of data that the arts of literature and poetry can make available to us? This is, itself, a philosophical question, but it is also a literary one. And insofar as the book is located at the nexus between literature and philosophy, such a question seems to me entirely apt.

Therefore, I think you will miss the deeper points this text has to offer, if you read it either as an additional 'argument' in the debate over animal rights, or as an especially literary 'portrait' of what a certain level of commitment to the animal rights movement might look like. It is, rather, a novel that questions what contribution literature has to make in a debate that is, for so many of us, a fully philosophical question.(less)

like · see review

Jan 08, 2010 Lucas rated it 5 of 5 stars

this short work cleverly uses the platform of a fictive academic lecture -- which coetzee later presented, metatextually, at princeton -- to condense many familiar and unfamiliar arguments about eating and treating animals. is Costello, the impassioned novelist and lecturer in the book, a mouthpiece for Coetzee? probably not. that ambiguity is likely what allows coetzee to lay out such a morally charged and ultimately irresolvable exchange.

the impasse in which humans find themselves when it com...more

like 1 like · see review

Jul 15, 2012 Judith rated it 4 of 5 stars

Not for everyone. But for those who seriously consider what is/can be/should be the relationship between our species and other animals this is a thought-provoking book. For me this book shows the weakness of trying to apply human logic to the question of what do animals think? are they aware of their mortality? is their suffering as important as ours? For goodness sake - how can we know those things? Why should animals think like humans in order to merit compassion and respect? The format of the...more

like · see review

Dec 15, 2008 Benjaminxjackson rated it 2 of 5 stars

This is another Odyssey project reading.

The book as a whole is kind of interesting because of the essays that accompany the main story, which is a pair of lectures written as a fiction story.

That said, the main story of the novelist giving lectures about how humans should do something in regards to animals differently than they do now falls flat for me. Coetzee's apparent alter ego of Costello doesn't seem to know what she wants people to do. She is a vegetarian, but doesn't suggest that for ot...more

like · see review

Feb 11, 2013 Teniesha Kessler-Emanuel rated it 3 of 5 stars

The academic novel (in this case, novella) is an interesting, lesser-known, and supposedly underrated sub-genre, and in "The Lives of Animals, this setup explores animal cruelty using philosophy and literary analysis--an interesting vessel, though not the most engaging either, as I found the main character flat and mostly emotionless. A strong argument either way, and the four supplemental essays afterward were helpful and enjoyable, especially those by Peter Singer and Barbara Smuts. A good rea...more

like · see review

Sep 29, 2011 Jason Danely rated it 4 of 5 stars

Stands out from other books on the topic of animal-human interaction, animal-rights, vegetarianism and so forth because it is written as fiction. As a result Coetzee avoids contributing to the autodidactism of so much of the lit on these subject as well as the compulsion to give tidy answers to a very complex situation. Coetzee's characters don't have it all figured out, but why should they? Is that the point? So the book is 'good to think' as any on the subject. The commentaries attached only u...more

like · see review

Dec 30, 2011 Avery rated it 4 of 5 stars

Gosto de gente como Coetzee, porque que não dá a mínima para o leitor médio. Idem. Nesta novela da vida real - ou da vida dos animais, estes "outros" - pouco importa se o que lemos é metaficção ou metarealidade. Já não o sabemos e isso não importa mais.

Consideremos este um romance acadêmico, a propósito de imprimir um rótulo fácil e digerível. Entretanto, é acima de tudo um idílio com a imaginação e direitos que só consideramos humanos e que, definitivamente, não comoverá a maioria.

like · see review

Jan 09, 2011 Sridhar rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: nature-and-wildlife, fiction, favourites, read2011

A brilliant work by a Nobel laureate in literature and a wonderful book to start the year with. A superb form of academic novel (a novel genre, I could say, if the pun may be forgiven), this is top-notch writing on a theme of profound and enduring significance for anyone concerned with human values and connections with other animals.

J. M. Coetzee, invited to Princeton to deliver the prestigious Tanner Lectures on Human Values, presents the lectures as a fictional story with debate and dialogue c...more A brilliant work by a Nobel laureate in literature and a wonderful book to start the year with. A superb form of academic novel (a novel genre, I could say, if the pun may be forgiven), this is top-notch writing on a theme of profound and enduring significance for anyone concerned with human values and connections with other animals.

J. M. Coetzee, invited to Princeton to deliver the prestigious Tanner Lectures on Human Values, presents the lectures as a fictional story with debate and dialogue crafted into the form of this book. Within it is the story of Elizabeth Costello, herself an academic, invited to deliver lectures at a University, and the lectures she delivers and the ensuing responses. Reading it as a sort of literary dialectic, one is swept by Coetzee's tight and engaging prose into central moral, philosophical and ethical issues related to the lives of animals. The four commentaries that accompany the central work by Coetzee are excellent, too. The book's introduction by political philosopher Amy Gutmann, and accompanying essay commentaries by Wendy Doniger (religion scholar), Barbara Smuts (primatologist), Marjorie Garber (literary theorist ), and Peter Singer (moral philosopher and author of Animal Liberation) are worth reading and add great value to this book.

My first reaction to this astounding book, as a practicing wildlife scientist with a claim to be involved in animal research and conservation over the last two decades was: "Why were these profoundly important issues never a formal and thorough part of my academic training or practice?". Is it because issues of morals and ethics are considered outside the pale of training to be a scientist? Is it because they are considered wishy-washy or vague, or, devil-take-you, subjective? Or is simply because most present-day wildlife scientists actually do not have a deep understanding or appreciation of the central issues, or if they do, they prefer to keep it to themselves? But why not? We use animals in research. We make claim to efforts to understand them. We make conservation appeals, ostensibly, on their behalf. We collect, we probe, we peer, we tag, we handle, we follow, we even sometimes kill animals in the name of scientific study. Do we really do all this on the basis of a comprehensive ethical and moral foundation?

Coetzee touches on vital issues that relate to whether we perceive other animals as beings with interests or as objects for our manipulation. Cruelty, sentience, sympathy, empathy, and the morality of our actions towards other sentient beings is the undercurrent of Coetzee's words, of Costello's debate. Vegetarianism, animal intelligence and how we may perceive it, even as trained scientists, pain and suffering, animal slaughter or 'sacrifice', these are all themes seamlessly woven into a gripping narrative thread. Coetzee brings sudden and scathing clarity and depth to the work of a litany of earlier writers, scientists, and philosophers, of Thomas Aquinas and Jeremy Bentham, Franz Kafka and Tom Regan, Wolfgang Köhler and Mary Midgely, and many others.

And yet, the implications are not thrust on you as absolutes, as dogma. It comes in measured words, prompting a dawning awareness. Then, Costello's words only seem to echo the hidden voice of Coetzee: “I want to find a way of speaking to fellow human beings that will be cool rather than heated, philosophical rather than polemical, that will bring enlightenment rather than seeking to divide us into the righteous and the sinners, the saved and the damned, the sheep and the goats.”

A phenomenal work, worth reading and re-reading, even if only to be touched by Coetzee's prose, or perhaps for introspective and outwardly illumination.

(less)

like 1 like · see review

Dec 14, 2010 Paola rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: narrativa, imprescindibili

Le conferenze di Coetzee sotto forma di racconto alle Tanner Lectures presso la Princeton University:

"... si concentrano su una questione etica importante: il modo in cui gli esseri umani trattano gli animali."

Coetzee crea un romanzo con un suo personaggio, Elisabeth Costello scrittrice, invitata a tenere delle conferenze in una università.

La signora Costello é un'anziana donna, stanca e sfiduciata dell'umano essere e dei suoi comportamenti criminali.

E mentre l'aspettativa degli uditori é sent...more

like · see review

Nov 16, 2009 Izlinda rated it 3 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy, psychology, for-college

I read this book for my writing course, Our Animal Selves. Coetzee writes about a famous author, Elizabeth Costello, who is invited to give a talk at a university. Coincidentally, her son works there. While there, Costello doesn't given an expected speech about literary works, but about human-animal relations. The next day she gave a seminar about poets and animals and finished her visit with a debate with a philosophy professor.

It was kind of hard to pick apart the arguments Costello used since...more

like 1 like · see review

Aug 20, 2008 Jose rated it 5 of 5 stars Recommends it for: amantes de animais

Shelves: contemporary

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here.

like · see review

Jul 13, 2011 Nnick rated it 5 of 5 stars

Elizabeth Costello's emphatic critique on the treatment of animals in the west delves deeply into questions of western reason, academia, the holocaust, and literature. Coetzee's choice to speak through her raisers even more questions on authorship, identity, and Coetzee's actual beliefs. This short book is well worth the read to anyone interested in being a good person (I use that word purposefully!). Be sure to read the reflections, especially Barbara Smuts reflections on human-animal friendshi...more

like · see review

Feb 24, 2013 Andjela rated it 1 of 5 stars

I really disliked this book. I am a vegetarian, and I think this book could only provoke even more hate and disapproval towards vegetarians, because of poor and inconclusive arguments. Also, philosophy is not a good framework for this, because it is too abstract for something so real, so painful and so tangible, so touchable. Extremely not convincing and just plain old "doing it wrong".

like · see review

Nov 06, 2010 Chris rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: philosophy

This was the book that changed by attitude to eating meat. I could no longer evade the central question of the unnecessary cruelty invloved and our capacity to collude to denying that fact by splitting it off from our meat munching. A powerful arguemnet skillfully fictionalised. Trully a book that changes my life.

like 1 like · see review

Jan 17, 2013 Whitney added it

Cannot rate this text - I really only enjoyed the contribution by Barbara Smuts in this text. I thought Elizabeth Costello's character is in a very interesting dilemma, and Coetzee's approach is intriguing, but I found it a bit of a cop-out and am unsure about my feelings on him and the text.

like · see review

May 11, 2013 Kate rated it 4 of 5 stars

This novella certainly made me think. Like Ms. Costello though, I'm not sure I reached any concrete conclusions. Her arguments did not make me give up meat, though they did cause me to consider how disconnected the idea of meat from animal is to me.

like · see review

Jul 28, 2012 Pam rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: favorites

Amazing book; brings out the contradictions and issues in the way humans think about and treat animals. I also loved the essays at the end, each discussing the book from a very different angle.

like · see review

Apr 22, 2013 Karen rated it 1 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2013

Try as I might, I could not get into this book and it became a slog to finish. The characters seemed two dimensional and, although some interesting points were made, I lost interest fairly early on. I am not a vegetarian, nor could I ever be althoug I admire those who are, but I don't think this book did much for the vege cause.

like · see review

Jun 24, 2012 Ryan rated it 5 of 5 stars

Much food for thought. Reading some of Heidegger's Being and Time seemed to help a bit. Will need to re-read; all in due time. Also reminded me for at least the third time in life, I need to read Gulliver's Travels.

like · see review

Jan 15, 2011 Jeanne rated it 5 of 5 stars

Shelves: should-be-a-required-reading

I loved this book...it is fictional, but contains a moral argument within the storyline. Well-written and leaves the reader with a lot to think about.

like · see review

Sep 01, 2010 Nicole rated it 4 of 5 stars

Shelves: fiction

Cleverly written book which uses fiction to have a philosophical discussion regarding animal rights. I especially enjoyed Peter Singer's piece in this book.

like · see review

Mar 02, 2011 Adelaide rated it 2 of 5 stars

Shelves: 2011-winter-quarter

I didn't really connect with any of the characters in the allegorical story and finished more uneasy than anything else.

like · see review

Sep 12, 2012 Sue rated it 3 of 5 stars

read with Dana -great discussion book . also the additional papers in the back, excellent one about chimps & dogs

like · see review

Dec 12, 2010 Taylor rated it 1 of 5 stars

Coetzee, how could you? Really, a holocaust metaphor? Eating meat is not the same at that. Ugh

like · see review

Jan 27, 2009 Wes Young rated it 5 of 5 stars

Had to read this for my Environmental Issues philosophy class in college. Top notch read!

like 1 like · see review

May 09, 2012 Jennifer rated it 5 of 5 stars

Meta-theory wrapped in narrative, bookended by real theories. More animal studies.

like · see review

« previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 … 42 43 next »

new topic
Discuss This Book

There are no discussion topics on this book yet. Be the first to start one »

Recommend it | Stats | Recent status updates

combine
Other Editions (17)

More editions...

Genres

Philosophy

24 users

Animals

6 users

Novels

3 users

Writing > Essays

3 users

Academic > School

2 users

Literature

2 users

Academic > College

2 users

Literature > African Literature

2 users

See top shelves...

Readers also enjoyed similar books

About J.M. Coetzee

John Maxwell Coetzee is an author and academic from South Africa. He is now an Australian citizen and lives in South Australia.
A novelist and literary critic as well as a translator, Coetzee has won the Booker Prize twice and was awarded the 2003 Nobel Prize in Literature.

More about J.M. Coetzee...

Books by J.M. Coetzee

More…

Share This Book

Facebook Twitter Your website

Trivia About The Lives Of Animals

1 trivia question

More quizzes & trivia...

Quotes from The Lives Of Animals

“I want to find a way of speaking to fellow human beings that will be cool rather than heated, philosophical rather than polemical, that will bring enlightenment rather than seeking to divide us into the righteous and the sinners, the saved and the damned, the sheep and the goats.” — 17 people liked it

More quotes…

title link	preview: The Lives of Animals
avg rating	preview: The Lives of Animals Goodreads rating: 3.83 (762 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6197.The_Lives_of_Animals?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1347439452l/6197.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6197.The_Lives_of_Animals?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]The Lives of Animals by J.M. Coetzee[/url]

The Lives of Animals

Friend Reviews

Community Reviews

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website