Analysis of the Argument in a Non-fiction (Analysis of Masson's Argument in The Pig Who Sang to the Moon) - Book Report/Review Example

Humans are not different from animals, and in the dawn of time, animals enjoy the full play of their feelings with domestication being the highway robbery (Masson 32). As readers, we ignore the rights and the wrongs and get an entertaining survey of the real emotional features of farmed animals and the sobering version of how such things have been ignored by farmers as well as modern technological agriculture. Most of the author’s claims are indisputable and quite fatal. No one is willing to approve what is done to the animals across the world (Masson 57).

The author loads the brains of the readers with the information they cannot sustain. He talks about the pig who dragged the mistress from a dangerous swamp with a simple command. Also, the pot bellied sow reacted to Joanne Altmann’s heart failure by bursting the cat-flap on the drive way. Also, it lay down before the first car that came following the road on the driveway. The driver was being marshaled to help her mistress and calling the ambulance with the dainty trotter. Readers consider this as anecdote gone crazy.

Most of the author’s superhuman tales are questionable, or rather show no more than apparent facts that animals have various internal feelings that control their behavior. Not once does Masson get close to proving some kind of higher intelligence (Masson 63). It appears self-evident that modern farming techniques are the negation of all that’s common and should be eliminated. It is not as obvious as he would see it, that all forms of farming are factory farming in nature. Also, the wild state is not the paradise he believes in.

The author denies the fact that there is any mutual trade-off between the beast and the man. He believes that the animal might get in tranquility and a full stomach what it losses in life. However, living in a natural state, whether chicken, sheep, or goat is quite a parlous affair. To the author, life and liberty are two main goods, yet never does he ponder to ask the nature of freedom. Also, he does not think of qualifying the absolute of life (Masson 240). The book is stirring, humorous, engaging, and sorrowful.

Masson thinks that it is wrong to raise animals for food, yet he himself is not vegan. Also, he claims that he will not help any famer with an advice on how to raise an animal. Masson points out that most of the people who have thought about it even in a deeper approach will not eat animal products like eggs despite the fact that they come from chicken and apart from the fact that such animals are having the best life ever. The author wants people to avoid the idea that the taste of such products is satisfactory and that all the animals generally can be used to satisfy the taste (Masson 275).

By not vegan, Masson reflects Irony. He advocates for good animal life and continues to consume animal products. By not being a vegetarian yet he is advising people to avoid eating animal products means that he is using such a stylistic device to create irony. This situation enhances the theme of contrast. This particular theme is magnified when the author claims that it us not good to consume animal products, yet on the other hand he is busy consuming them. This is a contradictory statement from the person who is supposed to be helping the animals from their fate (Mason 288).

Also, animation is used by the author to show a close relationship between humans and animals. By mentioning that all the animals are having