The Modern Hunter Gatherer Pollan Analysis

In his article The Modern Hunter-Gatherer, Michael Pollan recounts the events that took place during his first hunting trip. Both during and after the hunt, Pollan struggles with an array of emotions that he conveys directly with his audience. From this struggle, a moral complication is formed regarding the direct relationship of death between humans and animals. By not giving a direct answer regarding the question he introduces of whether animals and humans experience death in the same way, Pollan leaves his text open to interpretation which ultimately forces his audience to view hunting through a more challenging, introspective lens.

From the very beginning, Pollan makes it clear that this is his very first experience hunting, and it is

evident in the first couple of paragraphs that he is extremely skeptical of the “hunter’s instinct” (1). that he has read about from Hemingway and Ortega y Gasset. An example of Pollan’s skepticism toward Hemingway and Orega y Gasset’s views is found near the very beginning of his article. “I never could stomach the straight-faced reveling in primitivism, the barely concealed bloodlust, the whole macho conceit that the most authentic encounter with nature is the one that comes through the sight of a gun and ends with a large mammal dead on the ground- a killing that we are given to believe constitutes a gesture of respect” (1). However, all such doubts disappear once he lines up that first wild boar in the sights of his rifle. Up until this point he has his audience convinced that his attitude toward hunting must be on the verge of changing, but after killing the beast, he shifts the light of his article from a narrative to a reflection.

He begins his reflection by attempting to answer his reason for feeling so disgusted by the dead pig hanging from the tree.

“Exactly why we would strive so hard to distance ourselves ` from our animality is a large question, but surely the human fear of death figures in the answer” (6). From this quote, Pollan conveys the idea that we as humans believe we are superior to animals in all aspects of our lives and deaths. Humans are not only the top of the food chain in most cases, but when it comes time to experience death, we jump to an unprovable conclusion that we experience death in a different and unique way. However, as humans we must justify the superiority of human death, otherwise the death of an animal by human hands would make that individual hunter a murderer. Pollan references the quote anticipating that most of his audience feels the same way, but he also references it because it is unlikely that a majority of his readers have actually given a deeper consideration to this thought. By highlighting this uncertainty it leaves his audience no choice, for a moment, to face this reality that mankind has formed. In his article Pollan guides his readers down the path of uncertainty by allowing his readers a glimpse into his personal convictions. For example, the comparison he forms between “stumbling upon some strangers pornography” (6) and the “trophy portrait”(6) of him posing in front of the slaughtered boar shows the disgust he felt after having time to reflect. The

following quote is perhaps the most important for understanding Pollens conflicting views regarding hunting. “What is most offensive about hunting- to some, disgusting: that it encourages, or allows, us not only to kill but also to take a certain pleasure in killing” (6). By making such a controversial claim, Pollan leaves his reader with no other option than to face the harsh realities behind the practices of modern hunting.

Furthermore, it is interesting that Pollan turns to Paul Rozin, a cultural psychologist at the University of Pennsylvania, to better understand where his disgust is coming from…. “Rozin suggests, because they confront us with the reality of our own animal nature. So much of the human project is concerned with distinguishing ourselves from beasts that we seem strenuously to avoid things that remind us that we are beasts too..” (5). He uses this outside source to bring credibility to his argument, but he also does it to give himself some peace of mind which is somewhat hypocritical. His uneasiness to hunting is revealed in the following quote, “The fact that you cannot come out of hinting feeling unambiguously good about it is perhaps what should commend the practice to us. You certainty don't come come out of it eager to protect your innocence” (6). You get a sense from the quote that Pollan writes about the disgust he feels from killing the pig to make his audience uncomfortable with the act of killing another living creature so that they may later change their attitude. Because it is is first time hunting, he is able to experience every raw detail of his experience. As a clear outsider to the world of hunting, it allows him to share these feelings without experiencing scrutiny from this group of individuals he is wiring to while also making it easier for him to navigate his emotions.

Near the end of his reflection, Pollan makes an attempt to sum up the entirety of his feelings.

“In this was one of the signal virtues of hunting: it puts the large questions about who we and the animals are, and the nature of our respective deaths, squarely before the hunter, and while I’m sure there are many hunters who manage to avoid their gaze, that must take some doing” (6). This quote is ultimately Pollan’s conclusion after his reflection on disgust and death. Specifically, the phrase “large questions” is hard to read without wanting to further investigate. The audience is left wondering that if there are such large questions, why Pollan would not attempt to go about answering them, but instead continue with the remainder of his story. After such a temporary reflection, the rest of his hunting narrative loses most of its excitement because of the magnitude of his claim. He does attempt to reflect on the issue, but the brief way he does is also extremely similar to the way many hunters briefly think of the complications of killing an animal, and continue about their hunting outing without giving such ideas a second thought. If Pollan’s goal of this article was to engage his audience with this then he definitely succeeds, but if his goal was to frustrate his audience than he succeeds at that as well. By leaving the argument he presents up to interpretation he leaves a lasting impression on his audience. The frustrating and confusing issue that results from this

argument are the fact that the audience experiences inconsistencies which makes Pollan seem slightly less credible along with the audience being confused as to how seriously he takes the controversy he reflects on. If somebody really were passionate about could they really leave their audience with no concrete answer? The answer is yes. Pollan’s strategy of not spoon feeding answers, as frustrating as it may be, is the most effective for eliciting a deeper analysis of the text from his intended audience.

Word count: 1193

Pollan, Michael. "The Modern Hunter-Gatherer." The New York Times. N.p., 26 Mar. 2006. Web. 2 Oct. 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/26/magazine/carnivore.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0>.