Domestic cats live shared lives with (their) human companions. They grow up together and influence each other commensally. Unlike other tamed animals, such as dogs, horses, and cattle, cats are not useful and loyal to humans. Thus, the time when cats were truly kept by humans as pets were late, compared to others. Nevertheless, the conjoined relations between cats and humans are different from other domestications. “Humans have domesticated the dog, but it is the cat who has domesticated humans.” (Mauss & Allen 2007) Cat lovers are fond of cats’ charming temper and difficult characteristics. However, cats were not born to be the perfect indoor pets. Pet cats nowadays are already shaped by their histories of contamination with humans before they begin to live with (their) human companions. Despite domestic cats having changed less under the human influence than other domestic animals, the personalities and behavior of cats are still changed little by little through histories of encounters. On the other hand, cats are not the only species that are profoundly polluted by these interspecific interactions. It is an outcome of the collaboration between cats and human beings. Hence, cats and humans are all transformed through encounters with each other. To pursue a better way that how human beings and (their) feline companions live together in a mutually contaminated partnership, it is necessary to understand their conjoined histories, perspectives of human-feline relations from experts in different fields, and also scientific research in cat etiology from the past decades.
It’s undeniable that every species is highly contaminated by past histories of encounters with others. To survive, every species has to collaborate interspecifically, and so do humans and cats. Through these collaborations, which result in contamination, the world and species themselves survive and live more diversely. “Purity is not an option.” (Tsing 2015) We always have to team up with others, human and nonhuman. This also applies to the owner-pet relationship. For instance, in the early modern time, cats were kept as ratcatchers, and humans provided them food to eat and a place to live in return. It was the first time that humans kept cats around in the Western world. (Rogers 2006) This collaboration between human beings and cats was beneficial to both; at the same time, they were all influenced by the existence of the other. They were polluted under this collaboration, which also has an impact on current and future human-feline relations. Through histories of encounters, everyone has already changed by their past before engaging in any new collaboration. Human-feline relations have developed and transformed gradually by feline domestication histories. Cat personalities have been shaped by humans since they were tamed. Many researchers and scholars have begun looking at the “socialization” of cats when they were young. It is proven that cats are capable of building an emotional attachment to an individual person through intimate interactions, which makes them more socialized. (Turner 2017) This collaboration with contamination not only brings benefits but also has its harm to domestic cats, which is related to the problems of human care. During the contradiction between bird protectors and cat lovers in Imperial Germany, bird protectors shaped feline domestication as a scheme of “pet-making” to save songbirds’ lives. (Zelinger 2017) From this example, despite cats changing little under human influence, their ways of living are still changed little by little according to human expectations. However, it’s merely one of the examples in the contaminated histories of human beings and (their) feline companions. No matter how much humans want to deny their influence on domestic cats, it has happened and will happen everywhere.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Cats’ contaminated histories with humans can be traced back to ancient Egypt. Since then, cats have entangled with humans not only in real life but also as symbols and metaphors in art and literature, which are also important in the feline domestication histories. Even before cats were truly domesticated by humans. In ancient Egypt, cats were commonly associated with goddesses and were highly respected by Egyptians. They were fond of cats’ charming characteristics and grace movement and considered them as symbols of feminine allure, fertility, maternity, and the home. These images of animal deities are easily to find in wall paintings, sculptures, and other forms of art from that time. During this period, Egyptians kept cats around not only to kill rodents but also to cherish them as family members due to the sacred symbol behind them. (Rogers 2006) When time-shifted to early modern times in the Western world, cats were easily related to devils and witches; as the result, people burned them to death or tortured them to expel evil from the community. Especially black cats were considered the helpers of witches or devils. In the short story “Black Cat” by Edgar Allen Poe, the main character claims himself as a victim of an agent of Satan, which is the black cat that belonged to him. (Poe 1976) The story is a study of the psychology of guilt and evil that cats were commonly suspected of complicity with at that time. This story presents human’s imagination of cats’ personalities, habits, and evilness. However, these are not true cats' behavior, in reality, it still has an impact on how humans treat cats around them. Unlike the West, Japanese society holds a different perspective on domestic cats. In the satirical novel “I Am a Cat” by Soseki Natsume, the author creates a nameless tomcat as the narrator to describe the mid-class lives in Japanese society during the Meiji period (1868-1912); especially, the conflicting mix of Western culture and Japanese traditions. (Natsume 1971) The book is a commentary on humankind delivered by a supercilious feline narrator, who criticizes his master and friends’ nonchalant and indolent attitude and calls them “hermits in a peaceful reign.” What Natsume creates is not just a normal house cat, but as well as a bystander in Japanese society. The author perceives and mocks the ridiculous human world through the cat’s eyes and mouth. From the abovementioned examples, cats are all portrayed as symbols or metaphors of something created by the human world. Each cat was rarely seen and discussed as a singular individual during that period. They have been considered as a group since then, even nowadays. How humans saw cats from that period was always human-centered and rarely took cats’ perceptions into the partnership, which should be mutual and commensal for both sides.
How humans had seen cats before has shaped modern humans’ way of looking at cats. Since human beings are in the dominant position of the relationship with (their) feline companions, the abnormal way humans look at cats and other animals is worth to be discussed. Nowadays many people see animals as human puppets in houses and theatre props in zoos. Pet cats in the house become realistic animal toys to children who associate these cats with the stuffed toys owned by them and funny cartoon characters on television. Stuffed animal toys, puppet-like pets, and animals in cages influence how children treat and see animals, and shape their perspective on animals when they grow up. (Berger 1980) Humans’ thoughts about cats have been distorted since they were young and ignorant, which is an issue leading to several common problems in feline domestication. In the scientific world, the research topic in cat etiology changes from predatory behavior to the welfare of cats in the last three decades. This means that the way humans see cats has shifted, and they begin to care for and be interested in these solitary species. (Turner 2017) On the other hand, the outdated realist-Cartesian ways of research, which shape most western practices in ethology, consider observed cats as machine and experiment units in the lab and overlook the singularity of each cat’s behavior and habits. When an observed cat performs anomalously, realist-Cartesian scientists are incapable of perceiving its unusual and individual abilities. They consider it damaging the machinic model that is easy to be expected. Moreover, they never take surroundings and observers into account, all the experiments are done in the lab by professional researchers’ hands. (Lestel et al 2014) However, to create a better entry point in each individual cat’s study, where it lives and who is with it are essential factors that shape the singularity of each cat. Only if everyone, including children and scientists, who joins the partnership with cats sees and treats each cat as an equal and individual being, then a better way of interaction between cats and humans can be discussed and developed.
In recent years, the purpose of ethological research and another academic discussion on cats have been shifting from utilization to the quality of life, also researchers and experts start to take the singularity of each cat into account. The French philosopher, Jacques Derrida, once questioned surrounding the ontology of nonhuman animals and criticizes that the other animals in other Western philosophers’ discourses have already been theoretical and philosophical in the ten-hour address on the subject of “the autobiographical animal” at the 1997 Cerisy Conference. Moreover, in the speech, Derrida shared his own experience of being seen naked in front of his pussycat, and he was ashamed of being ashamed. The pussy cat depicted by Derrida is a real cat living in his bedroom or bathroom, not a symbol or metaphor, and it is an irreplaceable living being to him. Most Western philosophers denied and misunderstood their past experiences of seeing animals. If they interpret animals without “the experience of being seen by it and being seen by it,” then the animals in their discourse are fictitious. (Derrida & Wills 2002) The perspective provided by Derrida is related to the bi-constructivist methodology in animal life and behavior, which may create a better entry point in each individual animal’s study. This method which combines with phenomenological interpretation observes the singularity of animals and also takes the human observer and the surroundings into account. Rather than thinking of these research subjects and their observers as machines, the bi-constructivist approach observes not only behavior but also the perspective of animals who are observed and human observers. Chili-eating cats in a New York apartment are one of the examples observed under the phenomenological approach. The research is conducted on this singular cat group in New York and discards the outdated habits of thinking of animals as a whole to pursue the singularity of animals. In addition, the unexpected behaviors of chili-eating cats in New York apartments are proof of animal “contamination” by humans, and their capacity to open the fridge is also learned from (they're) human companions. The taste of spicy chilies was only enjoyed by humans in the past. However, the cats in New York apartments are polluted by humans, and develop the habits of searching for and eating chilies joyfully and repeatedly. (Lestel et al 2014) These anomalous behaviors are what Derrida and bi-constructivism pay attention to. Every cat from the abovementioned examples is real-existed and is valued by its individuality, which is different from the past point of view. Hence, this way of thinking should replace the rigid, human-centered observation, which has been long developed in the past, to strengthen the human-feline partnership.
If human develops a relationship with feline companions under commensal communication, their relationship will become much more stable than ever. To reach commensal communication, the radical difference between humans and animals from early modern times should be blurred. Human is no longer the special species on earth anymore. The animal is no longer the machinery creature that humans used to think, of but a presence that owns its specificity. (Lestel & Buchanan 2014) The abovementioned example of chili-eating cats challenges human exceptionalism. By living with humans, the cats in the New York apartments develop to enjoy the stimulating flavor of chili, which was human-exclusive. (Lestel et al 2014) In addition, when it comes to “communication” with cats, it is inevitable to ask “Can the animal respond to humans?” (Derrida & Wills 2002) In the partnership with the animal, there is another question that is important “How can human response to the animal?” or more precisely “How can the human and the animal enter into a relationship in which responses play a central role?” (Lestel 2014) Under these questions, humans should no longer put themselves in the main position in the mutually contaminated partnership with cats. Derrida addresses the question in an original way. He says” I can develop such a relationship if I am (following) the animal [je suis l’animal].” (Derrida & Wills 2002) Humans should be after the animal or be alongside the animal in the sphere of the intimate. If following the animal, the relationship of seeing and seeing will transform into the sphere of intimate communication. And the animal becomes intimate and cultural with humans, not a natural animal. To build a profound partnership with commensal communication, the human should cooperate with the animal, develop their common experience and anecdotes, and make the relationship autobiographical. (Lestel 2014)
“A shared life is more precisely a shared existence – a life that is always lived together from the perspective of the first-person point of view, and with the implied second-person point of view for all living beings.” Which suggests that one should become oneself while being others. (Lestel & Hollis 2013) Humans and cats have shared lives with each other. Under the contents of these contaminated relations, humans have had an impact on cats, but the fact that cats have shaped humans is more important. “The human needs the animal.” (Lestel 2014) To survive, it is inevitable to consume other existences by contaminating them and oneself, which is how this social partnership develops. Furthermore, humans are not just profoundly affected by animals like cats, but they are “fully animals”. (Lestel & Hollis 2013) Although Western thinkers used to deny the animality in humans and build ruptures and abysses in-between humans’ relations with animals. It will create a better entry of commensal communication with other beings by considering humans as part of animals. In this conjoined feline domestication, the human being is the cat, and the cat is the human being. The question here is no longer “Who domesticated whom?” The concept of “domestication” itself is confusing. It is necessary to rethink the conjoined relations. Domestication was all based on utilization before. While the purpose of domestication has been shifting, the already contaminated partnership between humans and (their) feline companions alters. Through the histories of encounters, domesticated cats may lose their animality, but at the same time living with humans may stimulate their potential as well. (Lestel 2014) However, most feline domestication today does not work under commensal communication, and most of the “owners” never think and act from the perspective of cats. It is never easy to make feline domestication conjoined and reciprocal, but it is significant to think and act in the texture of the animality of humans and animals, not the limits of humans.
On the other hand, interferences in cats’ lives by humans should also be faced and reconsidered. In the past few decades, humans have taken action into the problems caused by free-roaming cats in life and medical. Because of the increasing human need for cats, the overpopulation problems, which lead to wildlife being hunted by cats, and diseases carried by cats become issues in many communities. To address these issues, many places change policies towards cats, such as vaccine and TNR programs applied to indoor and community cats. (Slater 2017) These are ways of improving cats’ quality of life from a human perspective, which is efficient and effective, but also ethically controversial. Each domestic cat has its own singularity and it is shaped and contaminated by its human companion and the surroundings in life. A single approach can never solve problems that happened everywhere. The better way to deal with the problems caused by cats is to apply different sorts of approaches that face the problem specifically and come up with a comprehensive solution. Furthermore, if humans truly care about the welfare of cats, the fundamental problems which the unequal relations between humans and cats should be faced and addressed. Pet cats are no longer realistic animal toys, puppet-like pets, or any symbols from literature. They are real animals, like the chili-eating cats in the New York apartment and Derrida’s pussycat. They are familiar and social animals living alongside humans.
Humans and cats share their everyday lives with each other, which develops into relations of emotionally supporter-supported. An adult cat doesn’t need a sense of security and safety from others, but it doesn’t mean that they are not emotionally attached to (their) human companions. (Turner 2017) Modern people living in a city are isolated and even alienated from society. Many people choose to keep a pet cat around as a companion and share their lives, happiness, and anxieties with (their) feline companions. Kittens who have spent their sensitive phase with positive experiences trust humans and feel more secure with humans when they grow up. Furthermore, humans can build relationships with cats through intimate interaction and routine. Spending time with one’s own cat brings benefits to humans by easing negative moods, such as depression, anxiety, and anger. (Turner 2017) EPIK HIGH, a South Korean alternative hip-hop group, recently released “Lullaby for a cat” in their latest album. Tablo, the songwriter, imagines being alone late at night and suffering from insomnia, but there is a cat next to him. This work depicts how modern people get along with their feline companions and seek emotional support from them. (EPIK HIGH 2019) All the abovementioned situations happened from anecdotes and experiences in one’s everyday life with a feline companion. The human develops special and personal intimacy and relations with the cat, which only belongs to them. They are conjoined by the time that they spent together. There is never a correct mode, which can apply to all situations, to live with domestic cats. The human should respect the cat’s singularity and interact with it as an equal. Only if humans can interpret the perception of the cat, their mutually contaminated partnership will become profound and empirical.
In conclusion, to create better conditions for feline domestication, humans should respect each cat’s singularity equally and admit that they are mutually contaminated by their shared anecdotes, interactions, and communication, which these experiences only belonged to them. Through the history of encounters, current feline domestication has transformed from the past one. Without the past histories, the situation will not form the current relations. Everything is entangled together. Humans and cats cannot live without the contaminated past. In this partnership the cat presents as itself not a cohort; thus, humans should no longer see any cat as systematic machinery, unalive puppet toys, and symbolic metaphor. Moreover, it is important to blur the radical opposition between humans and cats by reaching commensal communication, which happens when humans think and act in cats’ perceptions. Simultaneously, it is essential that the cats perform and interpret on their own. Under this condition, humans are fully animals, and cats are intimate and social animals. Their everyday lives are conjoined together personally and every feline domestication becomes vivid and autobiographical.
Stuck on your essay?
