Analysis of The Butcher by Thomas Hood

In his poem The Butcher, Thomas Hood s syntax and emphasis on word his showcase
a strong piece of protest poetry that effectively succors the vegetarianism movement.
The sentence structure of the poem offers a unique approach that allows the reader to
reach Hoods intended conclusion. Towards the last stanza of the poem, Hood depicted the
physical features of the butcher in brief sentences, such as How bright his cheek, how rubicund
his nose is! (Hood, 31). Followed by an exclamation point, his description emphasizes a
sarcastic tone, which in the context of the poem illustrates his unamusement. He then concludes
the poem with the exclamation that the Butcher is already half a Bull, forcing the reader to
imagine the similarity between the man and animal and how easily the roles could be reversed
(Hood, 34). At first, the short sentences do not give much detail or explicitly say who or what
Hood is describing, but because his is typically used to describe a person, the reader assumes the
the writer is referring to man.. However, in the end, they can see that these traits are actually
shared with many animals that people see as a mere source of food. Hoods syntax thus allows
the reader to come to the conclusion that man and animal are not so different.
Hood's stress on the word his allows the audience to evidently see the mistreatment of
animals as well. From lines 9-12, Hood not only repeated the word his, but he also italicized it.
This brings emphasis to the butcher. Hood implies that the butcher falsely believes that the
animal's body parts belong to him; they are "his fat, his suet, his kidneys" (Hood, 9). These
thoughts of the meat vendor show that he, along with others who consume meat, objectify
animals, treating them like material possession rather than the intelligent living organisms. The
reader is then able to recognize the vegetarianism ideal of treating animals properly, which
begins with respecting the value of their life.

However, despite resounding revelation made in Hoods poem, the use of a poem does
not dissipate to the entire intended audience. Unlike mediums like radio commercials or political
cartoons, the viewer has to make the effort to read the poem in its entirety to understand Hoods
perspective; it isnt subliminal. Because of this, many people may be dissuaded by the amount of
work needed to spend on an activity that does not particularly interest them.
Overall, even though this work was written for earlier forms of vegetarianism protests,
Hoods poem supports its basic ideals and is still relevant in its modern day arguments.

Analysis of Vegetarianism Protest Performances

On a walk around a mall or park, the last thing anyone would expect to witness is a
person voluntarily hanged. In her protest against the poaching of sharks, Alice Newsteads
performance delivers a shock value and extreme sense of discomfort that causes people to think
twice about the animal agriculture business.
A British performance artist, Newstead decided to launch her Anti-Shark-Finning
campaign by hanging herself in the air with hooks that pierced her skin; she would represent the
shark, and the hooks would represent the longline fishing hooks used to catch sharks. The
graphic illustration leaves many people feeling queasy; Newsteads skin is stretched disturbingly
thin by the metal as blood seeps through the wounds. Onlookers will surely give her performance
another glance. This state of awe brings the attention needed to spread awareness about animal
rights protests; it trenches into the taboo subject of the mistreatment of animals to satiate human
demand, forcing people to acknowledge the topic. Because many often neglect the fact that
animals can feel suffering, the grotesque visual enables the audience to immediately empathize
the amount of pain she is in, imagining the same suffering on themselves. Newsteads success is
derived from this moment. By making the connection between her performance and the cruel
condition in animal agriculture, people can understand and realize the gravity in the unfair
treatment of animals.
The location of the event also heightened the delivery of the performance. By holding the
showing at Lush Cosmetics, a global corporation recognized for their animal cruelty free
products, the overall presentation is further enhanced. Rather than performing at a random public
area, the Lush site offers the audience a brief background of Newsteads protest, ensuring a clear
understanding of her purpose. However, despite the seemingly perfect setting for the

performance, Newstead failed to address a large portion of the human population, specifically
those who do not shop at Lush. Because the company cater towards the needs of middle to upper
class women, generally speaking, most men and lower class citizens most likely did not witness
her protest. To expand her audience, Newstead should have executed her protest in a social hub
that was frequently visited by all men and women, such as in a park or in a food court.
All in all, Alice Newsteads performance against the cruelty of animals proved to be a
successful method of vegetarianism protest by inciting discomfort and awe to her audience,
forcing them to acknowledge the topic. But, due to the secluded nature of her performances
location, Newstead failed to project her message to the majority of the public.

Analysis of Vegetarianism Protest Cartoons

The use of cartoons has catalyzed many movements and revolutions, including the
American Revolution. As a tool to efficiently inform the public, cartoons are incorporated into
protests to rile the viewers emotions in comical fashion. In his caricatures, Mark Parisi ridicules
the fallacy that many meat consumers abide by, offering a subtle form of vegetarianism protest.
The central claim of the cartoons revolves around the inconsistency in many meat
consumers logic. In Gross Flesh Eating Bacteria, a pedestrian man represents the common
westernized individual; while eating a drumstick, he criticizes the act of another organism eating
meat. Many westerners believe that the consumption of certain animals, such as chickens and
cows, is justified, but when another culture consumes other creatures, such as insects or horses, it
is outright repulsive and unjust. However, in reality, all non-vegetarians essentially partake in the
same action: ending a living organisms life.
Similarly, in Evolution for Cows, Parisi illustrates the ideal that in western societies,
especially America, it is okay to eat an animal that citizens do not have a close attachment to. In
the illustration, Parisi infers that the only chance for the cows survival is if it becomes cute,
which is gathered from habits of many Americans. For instance, rumors of another cultures
consumption dogs or bunnies are immoral. This is heavily based off the premicise that these
animals are seen as domestic to Americans; they care about these animals. Likewise, Parisis
cartoon demonstrates the barrier that many westerners place between the pets and the food,
which allows the viewer to not only acknowledge this reasoning as irrational, but to agree with
Parisis point.

Though Parisis cartoons represent the fundamental aspects of the vegetarianism

movement, the extent of their influence is hindered by the lack of publicity. His creations are
only published on selective websites, and are therefore unviewable to the majority of the public.
Furthermore, the brevity of his illustration only instigates a fleeting emotion among the few that
see the cartoon. Rather than inciting a sense of change, the viewer is most likely remain
uninfluenced by Parisis satirical art.
The humoristic approach to protest presents a civil method of raising awareness and
actively supporting an argument. Rather than blatantly criticizing the hypocrisy, the artists
justifies his view in a fashion that sets the stage for the controversy of the animal agriculture
business. However, the ephemerality of his cartoons and his lack of publicity pose as the main
factors limiting his success in persuading the audience to actively protest vegetarianism.