Every Dog Has Its Day

[John Bailey]

The egg-layers never end up on the dinner plate - we've genetically
engineered two different kinds of chicken, one that produces eggs at a
truly unnatural rate (they're made to think it's spring year-round)
and one that gets so fat so quickly, it's the equivalent of a
ten-year-old who weighs 300 pounds. The ones who are put in the
wood-chipper (half of that laying population) have it relatively good.

The most mind-blowing stuff in Foer's book is actually about
industrial fishing practices, which I've never given a crap about. It
enters SF territory. My jaw was hanging for a lot of the book.

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:51 AM, rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com> wrote:
> one image that I can't unfortunately shake is the recent news report
> about millions of male chicks being discarded by being thrown alive
> into a metal grinder since only the females are raised for eggs who
> are then eventually killed for the dinner plate
>
>
>
> On 10/26/09, John Bailey <sundayjb at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Says as much about cultural attitudes towards dogs as it does the novel...
>>
>> Although maybe, in this context, the kind of dog referred to was the
>> Learned English/Henry James-reading kind.
>>
>> Off-topic: anyone read Johnathan Safran Foer's latest ("Eating Animals")?
>>
>> Got through it in a day and have been haunted by it since, perhaps
>> more than anything in the past few years. Harrowing stuff; not without
>> major flaws (of a journalistic sort) but more obscene than GR could
>> ever be labelled, if only for the non-fictional aspect of the
>> material.
>>
>> I now wish I'd never been introduced to the term "fecal mist". But I
>> also now realise it's the air we breathe.
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 10:23 PM, John Carvill <johncarvill at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >  it's  such a shame that the most recent two of P's novels have been
>>> > such dogs.
>>>
>>> I can understand some long-term Pynchonistas not being knocked out by
>>> Inherent Vice, but to not like Against the Day, to consider it a
>>> 'dog'?
>>
>>
>