Animal Studies in Contemporary British Drama: The Divide between Stef Smith’s Non-Human and Human Animals

Year 2021, Volume: 4 Issue: 8, 329 - 346, 25.12.2021

Cenk Tan Özlem Özmen Akdoğan

https://doi.org/10.35235/uicd.1005225

Abstract

Scottish playwright Stef Smith’s Human Animals (2016) recounts the fictional story of a government exterminating all animals in London with the pragmatic pursuit of building commercial construction sites on their natural habitats. In line with recent trends of thought, dramatic texts are getting more engaged with different natures of the relationship between human animals and non-human animals. In this context, animal studies posit a focal place in the analysis of Smith’s contemporary play, Human Animals. Animal studies take into account the interconnections between humans and animals, thereby making it possible to problematise the concepts of anthropocentrism and speciesism in works of literature. This study aims to analyse Stef Smith’s Human Animals as an example by using critical animal studies perspectives with an emphasis on the essentialist human-animal divide. In a more specific context, the article reveals the impact of anthropocentrism through a case study that exemplifies humanity’s vicious plans to eradicate all non-human beings for the sake of profit and personal interest. Stef Smith presents different characters which embody disparate viewpoints and exposes the anthropocentric nature of humanity. Smith’s portrayal of a dystopian setting not only aims at criticising anthropocentric line of thought but also exposes humanity’s tendencies towards speciesism.

Keywords

Animal Studies, Stef Smith, Human Animals, Anthropocentrism, Speciesism

Çağdaş İngiliz Tiyatrosunda Hayvan Çalışmaları: Stef Smith’in İnsan Olmayan ve İnsan Hayvanları Arasındaki Fark

Abstract

İskoç oyun yazarı Stef Smith'in Human Animals (İnsan Hayvanlar) (2016) adlı oyunu, Londra'daki tüm hayvanları doğal ortamlarında ticari şantiyeler inşa etmek gibi pragmatik bir arayışla yok eden bir hükümetin kurgusal hikayesini anlatır. Son zamanlardaki düşünce eğilimleriyle uyumlu olarak, dramatik metinler, insan ve insan olmayan hayvanlar arasındaki ilişkinin farklı doğalarıyla daha fazla ilgilenmektedir. Bu doğrultuda, hayvan çalışmaları, Smith'in oyununun analizinde odak noktasını oluşturur. Hayvan çalışmaları, insanlarla hayvanlar arasındaki ve farklı statüdeki hayvanlar arasındaki bağlantıları dikkate alarak, edebiyat eserlerinde insanmerkezcilik ve türcülük kavramlarını sorunsallaştırmayı mümkün kılar. Bu çalışma, örnek bir eser olarak Stef Smith'in Human Animals oyununu geleneksel insan-hayvan ayrımına vurgu yaparak, kritik hayvan çalışmaları perspektiflerini kullanarak analiz etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Makale, bu bağlamda, insan-merkezciliğin etkisini, insanlığın kâr ve kişisel çıkar uğruna tüm insan olmayan varlıkları ortadan kaldırmaya yönelik kötü planlarını örnekleyen bir olay aracılığıyla ortaya koymaktadır. Stef Smith, farklı bakış açılarına sahip karakterler aracılığıyla insanlığın insan merkezci doğasını dışa vurmaktadır. Smith’in bu distopik kurgusu sadece insan merkezci düşünce şeklini eleştirmekle kalmayıp, insanlığın tür ayrımcılığına yönelik eğilimlerini de yansıtmaktadır.

Keywords

Hayvan Araştırmaları, Stef Smith, Human Animals, İnsan Merkezcilik, Türcülük

References

• Adamson, P., and Edwards, G. F. (2018). Animals: A History. Oxford University Press.
• Beauchamp, T. L., and Frey, R. (2011). The Oxford Handbook of Animal Ethics. Oxford University Press.
• Billington, M. (2016). Human Animals review – fur flies in chilling vision of dystopian London. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2016/may/25/human-animals-review-royal-court-theatre
• Braidotti, R. (2013). The Posthuman. Cambridge: Polity.
• Cowan, Isla. (2021). Pests and people in Stef Smith’s Human Animals. New Theatre Quarterly 37 (2), pp. 159-173.
• Gruen, L. (2011). Ethics and Animals: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
• Kalof, L. (2017). The Oxford Handbook of Animal Studies. Oxford University Press.
• Marvin, G., and McHugh, S. (2014). Routledge Handbook of Human-Animal Studies. New York: Routledge.
• Matsuoka, A., and Sorenson, J. (2018). Critical Animal Studies: Towards Trans-Species Social Justice. Rowman & Littlefield.
• McCance, D. (2013). Critical Animal Studies: An Introduction. SUNY Press.
• Nocella II, A. J., Sorenson, J., Socha, K., and Matsuoka, A. (2014a). INTRODUCTION: The Emergence of Critical Animal Studies: The Rise of Intersectional Animal Liberation. Counterpoints, 448, pp. xix–xxxvi. http://www.jstor.org/stable/42982374
• Nocella II, A. J., Sorenson, J., Socha, K., and Matsuoka, A. (2014b). Defining Critical Animal Studies: An Intersectional Social Justice Approach for Liberation. Peter Lang Gmbh, Internationaler Verlag Der Wissenschaften.
• Ohrem, D., and Bartosch, R. (2017). Beyond the Human-Animal Divide: Creaturely Lives in Literature and Culture. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Ortiz-Robles, M. (2016). Literature and Animal Studies. New York: Routledge.
• Pham, J. (2018). “The spectral and the comic animal in contemporary British theatre.” L’Atelier 10 (1), pp. 45-61.
• Smith, S. (2016). Human Animals. London: Nick Hern.
• Smith, S. (2020). Human Animals post-show discussion [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t-BA8Qoiot4
• Taylor, P. (2016). Human Animals, Royal Court London, theatre review: A very promising debut. The Independent. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/reviews/human-animals-royal-court-london-theatre-review-a-very-promising-debut-a7046636.html
• Turner, L. (2018). Edinburgh Companion to Animal Studies. Edinburgh University Press.
• The Institute for Critical Animal Studies. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.criticalanimalstudies.org/about/
• Voigts, E. and Tönnies, M. (2020). “Posthuman dystopia: Animal surrealism and permanent crisis in contemporary British theatre.” JCDE 8 (2), pp. 295-312.
• Waldau, P. (2013). Animal Studies: An Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Weil, K. (2012). Thinking Animals: Why Animal Studies Now? Columbia University Press.
• Wolfe, C. (2009). Human, all too human: “Animal studies” and the humanities. PMLA/Publications of the Modern Language Association of America, 124(2), pp. 564-575. doi:10.1632/pmla.2009.124.2.564