How our canine companions were carefully crafted by quirky, bored aristocrats, the self-proclaimed "doggy people" from Victorian Britain—and why their story can help us understand social change.
The kind of essay that I subscribe to your Substack to read. Thanks for writing and posting it!
I have two more examples of Victorian-era arbitrary selection + lock-in, both from sports:
- the Football Association (a Victorian foundation if there ever was one) codifying the rules of an ancient grassroots sport, which has now been locked in worldwide as the most popular spectator and (I believe) participation sport; football has had some variants that have some locked-in-ness, e.g. the two Rugby variants, and 3 offspring of Rugby: American-, Canadian-, and Australian-rules football
- similarly the rules of American baseball—another more or less ancient sport, a sibling of cricket, whose rules were legendarily (allegedly) codified by Abner Doubleday, and have since been locked in for the most part
Yes, I love those examples, and indeed - the origin story of baseball is a great example (I know less about the football origin story, but sports very often exhibit these phenomena, wherein it's a small group of people in a snapshot in time that set the rules and we keep playing them more or less indefinitely). Thanks for reading, and for subscribing!
The bit about arbitrary selection and MAGA was really insightful. It reminds me of the Russian fox study where selecting for the unnatural trait of docility led over not-so-many generations to playful, pet-like animals. But concurrently the progeny also developed all sorts of colorful, unrelated adaptions familiar to us from the diversity of modern dogs. Apparently, selecting for unnatural traits brings out all sorts of weirdness.
MAGA nation seems to be selected for the opposite of docility, defiance and incivility, but getting a similarly strange set of colorful traits you don’t often see in political leadership.
PS - i also find dogs lovers to be a special breed among humans. Generalizing of course, but those of us who adore these beasts that are even more social than humans, are generally empathetic and pro-social beasts also.
absolutely delightful and insightful. But my dachshund continues to mutter "form follows function " from the spot on the bed he has burrowed into. Never, sadly, finding a badger there.
Another great article. Thanks, Brian. As I read, however, I kept hoping (though not expecting, to be hnonest) to see at least a pictoral reference to the statute of William Hogarth and his pug in Chiswick to show a change in one breed. Having lived up the street from the statue for several years, and having grown up with dogs, I always starred at the statue in amazement at the change in pugs' face and body since Hogarth's time.
Love your writing and wanted to know if you ever join meetings of people who are interested in hearing more about your work. I belong to a group called Seniors Taking Action which is an activist group of Seniors from more than 26 states in the US. We meet weekly to hear from others writing about democracy-like Robert Hubble, Judd Legum, Heather Cox Richardson and persons working on democracy issues like the States Project-to name just a few. We would love to hear you speak to our group which meets every Wednesday on zoom 11am EST. We have an opening on 1/13/24 and Wednesdays going into 2024. We were particularly moved by your piece Teh Case for Amplifying Trump's Insanity. I can be reached at hilly.jackie@gmail.com
"...with litmus tests for being a “real Republican” rather than a RINO (Republican in Name Only) tied to personal fealty to Trump (the candidate, not the Jack Russell Terrier). "
We'd be a hell of a lot better off if it were loyalty to the dog and not the orange-whatever-that-is.
Brian, this is a great piece! Now I have an idea where my two pups came from! Smeed was a throwback Boston Terrier (an American breed per se) as he was bigger and had a bigger snout a fewer breathing problems. Nobody wanted him...but he was the most empathic and expressive dog I have ever met. He had the best facial expressions. But make no mistake he was a hunter as he was bred for. My pug, Rain, was the runt of the litter. And Smeed would actually teach her her how to use the door to go out, and taught her how to hunt (would never believe it if I had not seen it). Smeed would even let her get a bit out of control when they played as Rain would draw blood...but Smeed who could have easily put her in her place (he often did) would not retaliate with full force.
They both saved my life when my first wife was dying from cancer. They would stay by her side until
She chased them out and then would stay with me wherever I was in the house. After she passed, they were with me at all times when I was home. Dare I say they were more human in their senses and affection and comfort than most people.
Cool article. Made me think about a great may things. Just to pick one, starting with this quote "in the Victorian-era, bored aristocrats blew up the number of attractors in dog breeding." my mind went to "in the post-modern era, bored people are blowing up the number of attractors in politics". I guess that is what you meant by your story on republican politics but I think it applies to the whole political spectrum, and also to just about anything that goes on in our post-modern societies. It is just ridiculously easy these days to set up your own intellectual kingdom and this leads to excessive fragmentation in my view. I was astounded to find out that there are 16000 organizations involved in the environmental sector in the UK alone (https://www.sizzle.org.uk/our-thoughts/environmentalists-bad-at-communicating). How can there be 16000 significantly different viewpoints or approaches to environmental problems in one country? I don't think the situation is that materially different in Canada or the US. Where are the attractors that would pull that in?
Yes, to an extent, I think. I’ll have to think about this more. But my instinctive response is to say that even mutts are largely the offspring of these arbitrary categories, because many of them are crosses between arbitrary selected breeds that were chosen by Victorians.
There’s not really natural selection going on for the main bit of dog breeding over short time scales because a) humans taking care of canine survival takes away a key driver of natural selection; and b) most divergences are driven by human preferences, not random mutations or environmental pressures.
The kind of essay that I subscribe to your Substack to read. Thanks for writing and posting it!
I have two more examples of Victorian-era arbitrary selection + lock-in, both from sports:
- the Football Association (a Victorian foundation if there ever was one) codifying the rules of an ancient grassroots sport, which has now been locked in worldwide as the most popular spectator and (I believe) participation sport; football has had some variants that have some locked-in-ness, e.g. the two Rugby variants, and 3 offspring of Rugby: American-, Canadian-, and Australian-rules football
- similarly the rules of American baseball—another more or less ancient sport, a sibling of cricket, whose rules were legendarily (allegedly) codified by Abner Doubleday, and have since been locked in for the most part
Yes, I love those examples, and indeed - the origin story of baseball is a great example (I know less about the football origin story, but sports very often exhibit these phenomena, wherein it's a small group of people in a snapshot in time that set the rules and we keep playing them more or less indefinitely). Thanks for reading, and for subscribing!
Interesting piece as usual, thank you!
The bit about arbitrary selection and MAGA was really insightful. It reminds me of the Russian fox study where selecting for the unnatural trait of docility led over not-so-many generations to playful, pet-like animals. But concurrently the progeny also developed all sorts of colorful, unrelated adaptions familiar to us from the diversity of modern dogs. Apparently, selecting for unnatural traits brings out all sorts of weirdness.
MAGA nation seems to be selected for the opposite of docility, defiance and incivility, but getting a similarly strange set of colorful traits you don’t often see in political leadership.
PS - i also find dogs lovers to be a special breed among humans. Generalizing of course, but those of us who adore these beasts that are even more social than humans, are generally empathetic and pro-social beasts also.
absolutely delightful and insightful. But my dachshund continues to mutter "form follows function " from the spot on the bed he has burrowed into. Never, sadly, finding a badger there.
Another great article. Thanks, Brian. As I read, however, I kept hoping (though not expecting, to be hnonest) to see at least a pictoral reference to the statute of William Hogarth and his pug in Chiswick to show a change in one breed. Having lived up the street from the statue for several years, and having grown up with dogs, I always starred at the statue in amazement at the change in pugs' face and body since Hogarth's time.
I didn’t know about that! Thanks for bringing it to my attention!
Brian
Love your writing and wanted to know if you ever join meetings of people who are interested in hearing more about your work. I belong to a group called Seniors Taking Action which is an activist group of Seniors from more than 26 states in the US. We meet weekly to hear from others writing about democracy-like Robert Hubble, Judd Legum, Heather Cox Richardson and persons working on democracy issues like the States Project-to name just a few. We would love to hear you speak to our group which meets every Wednesday on zoom 11am EST. We have an opening on 1/13/24 and Wednesdays going into 2024. We were particularly moved by your piece Teh Case for Amplifying Trump's Insanity. I can be reached at hilly.jackie@gmail.com
Thanks Jackie Hilly
"...with litmus tests for being a “real Republican” rather than a RINO (Republican in Name Only) tied to personal fealty to Trump (the candidate, not the Jack Russell Terrier). "
We'd be a hell of a lot better off if it were loyalty to the dog and not the orange-whatever-that-is.
Brian, this is a great piece! Now I have an idea where my two pups came from! Smeed was a throwback Boston Terrier (an American breed per se) as he was bigger and had a bigger snout a fewer breathing problems. Nobody wanted him...but he was the most empathic and expressive dog I have ever met. He had the best facial expressions. But make no mistake he was a hunter as he was bred for. My pug, Rain, was the runt of the litter. And Smeed would actually teach her her how to use the door to go out, and taught her how to hunt (would never believe it if I had not seen it). Smeed would even let her get a bit out of control when they played as Rain would draw blood...but Smeed who could have easily put her in her place (he often did) would not retaliate with full force.
They both saved my life when my first wife was dying from cancer. They would stay by her side until
She chased them out and then would stay with me wherever I was in the house. After she passed, they were with me at all times when I was home. Dare I say they were more human in their senses and affection and comfort than most people.
Cool article. Made me think about a great may things. Just to pick one, starting with this quote "in the Victorian-era, bored aristocrats blew up the number of attractors in dog breeding." my mind went to "in the post-modern era, bored people are blowing up the number of attractors in politics". I guess that is what you meant by your story on republican politics but I think it applies to the whole political spectrum, and also to just about anything that goes on in our post-modern societies. It is just ridiculously easy these days to set up your own intellectual kingdom and this leads to excessive fragmentation in my view. I was astounded to find out that there are 16000 organizations involved in the environmental sector in the UK alone (https://www.sizzle.org.uk/our-thoughts/environmentalists-bad-at-communicating). How can there be 16000 significantly different viewpoints or approaches to environmental problems in one country? I don't think the situation is that materially different in Canada or the US. Where are the attractors that would pull that in?
Yes, to an extent, I think. I’ll have to think about this more. But my instinctive response is to say that even mutts are largely the offspring of these arbitrary categories, because many of them are crosses between arbitrary selected breeds that were chosen by Victorians.
There’s not really natural selection going on for the main bit of dog breeding over short time scales because a) humans taking care of canine survival takes away a key driver of natural selection; and b) most divergences are driven by human preferences, not random mutations or environmental pressures.