Richard Adams, the celebrated author of Watership Down, now turns his attention to dogs. In this story, he focuses on two unusual dogs that have endured miserable trials within a sprawling research laboratory. These dogs manage to break free from their predetermined fate and flee into the countryside, their only wish being to survive. However, the human population has different plans. After sensational media reports claim that the dogs are carrying a deadly virus, a hunt is launched.

The Plague Dogs is not just a significant contribution to humane literature. It is also a gripping adventure story in its own right. The story is filled with a great many nuanced characters, both canine and human. Adams' strong point lies in teasing apart all of the little human desires and selfishness that so often spell doom for the rest of life on Earth. Through the eyes of these two dogs, we see the harsh reality of human nature and the lengths to which people will go to protect themselves, even at the expense of innocent lives.

I have to express my disagreement with the reviewer who claims that this is not realistic. Just two years ago, I was employed in a government lab in California, and let me tell you, things have *not* changed. There are numerous organizations and welfare groups, but they have no real influence on the day-to-day operations of the labs. It is the responsibility of the researchers and workers to adhere to the rules on a daily basis, and they are always aware of when the inspections will take place.

Also, it is a fact that animal labs do use and purchase animals from shelters for experiments. Back in 2006, for sure, Ingham County Animal Control in Michigan regularly sold animals for $5 - 10 to "resellers" who then sold them to Michigan State University. Where it is legal, such practices occur. Sadly, many experiments only require an animal in general, not specifically lab stock.

Regrettably, there is no daily oversight in the labs, and animals continue to be treated in this manner. The best line is when Rolf states, "Surely some good must come of this?". Truly, animal labs are a business, and they do not want their business to disappear. This book presents all perspectives - those of the locals, the animals themselves, and the military - including the good, the bad, the risks, and the benefits. I wholeheartedly recommend it.

This book was a very tough read for me.

It presented a story that was not only challenging but also deeply impactful.

The events and emotions described within its pages left me in a state of reflection for weeks afterwards.

I found myself constantly thinking about the characters and their experiences, and how they related to my own life.

It made me realize the importance of facing difficult truths and learning from them.

Although it was a tough read, I am grateful for having come across this story.

It has taught me valuable lessons and has made me a more empathetic and understanding person.

I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is looking for a thought-provoking and life-changing read.

At times, I truly found myself completely lost within the pages of this book.

This was predominantly due to the accents of certain people and animals.

I struggled to read them accurately, which made the experience a bit challenging.

The story itself was not an easy read either, mainly because of the subject matter it delved into.

It was a rather sad story overall, filled with emotions that tugged at the heartstrings.

Despite the difficulties I faced in reading it, I still managed to gain some understanding and appreciation for the tale.

The unique accents added an interesting flavor to the narrative, although they did pose a hurdle for me at times.

Overall, it was a book that left a lasting impression, even if it was a somewhat melancholy one.

I attempted to read this approximately a year ago. However, due to other captivating titles that I was engrossed in at that time, I unfortunately lost interest in this particular one. But, I am truly glad that I decided to give it another chance. As it turns out, I was handsomely rewarded with a deeply thoughtful story and excellent writing.

There are indeed moments within the narrative where one might wonder, "where is this going?" But, to my pleasant surprise, these uncertainties are resolved relatively quickly. Another aspect that I really appreciate about this story is the utilization of multiple perspectives. It ranges from the "fugitive" dogs, to the other diverse animals, and even to the wide array of humans involved.

This book is most definitely one that I will keep safely on my bookshelf. I fully intend to go back to it for a second reading, as I believe there is still much more to discover and appreciate within its pages.

Bit of a spoiler following as I am discussing the book, itself, not just the jacket. Also, much of the book resembles the animated film, but the ending is entirely different--the film stops while the novel keeps going.

This novel chronicles medical experimentation in horrific detail. It is depressing, as many have said. What makes it depressing is that it forces the reader to face profoundly shameful things that happen, or have happened, quite frequently. These are things that we allow or have allowed to happen to various animals. In fact, much of the book is a kind of propaganda, in the truest sense of the word. Adams shows us where our cosmetics, medicines, and many other things come from. He does this most effectively with blinded bunnies who act as a kind of symbolic Godhead, "watching" all that happens. He seems to want us to be horrified and ashamed, which makes much of the book difficult to read.

Towards the end, though, he does something really interesting. The book is progressing to a logical end, and Adams steps in with a nice postmodern trick. He adopts the voice of the reader addressing him, the author. "How can you end it like this?" the reader essentially says. (Aah, Adams may well be saying, how can YOU let it end like this?) Adams then introduces a pair of environmentalists who discuss his own work, not necessarily positively, and appear poised to miraculously change the tide. He also goes back and touches on certain characters, especially one of the scientists, and fleshes them out for the first time. This shows the reader a little bit of perspective, which raises the book from propaganda into the novel form.

However, since the reader has experienced 300 pages of animal torture previous, 15 pages of well-meaning hardly displaces the shame. It is an obviously false happy turn Adams is showing us. I found this fascinating and very well-done. Readers of Watership Down (and nothing else), I would think, would be lost and very disappointed with this book. I say this because I am considering WD as a sort of advanced YA or kids fiction book. This is definitely not that. This is a very complex novel, the sort of thing I wished I'd been able to read in college instead of having to read Beowolf 4 times. (Nothing against Beowolf, it's the 4 times that got me.) I can't say that I enjoyed this book, but the ending was very well-done. So I'll let it stand and say well done to Mr. Adams.

My second encounter with Richard Adams' work has served as further affirmation, if indeed any was required, that he is an exceptionally talented writer.

His prose in this book is truly remarkable. The narrator skillfully conveys a diverse range of voices and styles of address. At times, it may seem a bit wordy, but it is without a doubt an absolute pleasure to read.

Plague Dogs excels in numerous aspects. Firstly, it flawlessly captures and articulates the experience of being a wild animal, their perception of the human world, and their endearing and humorous misunderstandings. Just like in White Fang and Watership Down, you truly believe that this is how animals would communicate if they had the ability. Secondly, the way Snitter describes his madness is astonishingly real and believable. I don't think I have ever come across such vivid and tangible depictions of delusions and hallucinations in print before.

Although there are moments when the plot takes leaps that seem highly improbable and the occasional overuse of Deus Ex Machina, the overall plotting is very strong. It never fails to engage and delight the reader. There are delightful ironic moments, similar to those in Adams' most famous work, and truly wonderful moments of narrative imagination that transform what appears to be a simple story into something far more superior. This is further enhanced by the concurrent storylines that run parallel to the dogs' story. However, once or twice the characters do descend into stereotype, and you do sometimes feel that the author's persona and ideology intrude a little too forcefully.

All in all, it is a truly outstanding read, with some brilliant dialogue that brings the characters to life, making them both sympathetic and adorable, while still remaining real and true.

N.b. Every time a Yorkshire accent is used, whether for a dog, a man, or a fox, I can't help but read it in Alan Partridge's "eee, bet he thinks I'm a right indecisive tit" voice, which only adds to my enjoyment of the book.

"It's a bad world for animals." This is the chorus and prevailing theme in The Plague Dogs. This book is truly heartbreaking and emotionally draining. I've always been a bit of a misanthrope with a heightened empathy for animals. When I see a homeless person lying under a bridge with a dog on a leash, my immediate thought is, "Oh, that poor dog." This is because animals have no voice and domesticated animals are entirely reliant on humans. The Plague Dogs gives voice to the plight of suffering and mistreated animals in a non-cartoonish Disney way. Although they did make a cartoon movie out of this book, much like Adams' other famous novel/cartoon movie Watership Down, I was traumatized by it as a child when my dad let me watch it. My sister and I were horrified throughout, and our dad, having read the book, encouraged us to stick it out because he thought there was a happy ending. But there wasn't. The movie's ending differed from the book's, and it was horrific. We cried for days, and my dad cursed under his breath. In short, don't mistake this book as being for kids just because it has talking animals. It's not. Besides the subject matter, it would be unreadable for younger readers due to cursing, violence, lyrical prose, and dialogue in thick "Geordie" accents/slang. I was almost on the verge of liking it better than Watership Down. It's more emotional and heartwrenching, but its flaw is having too many human characters who aren't as interesting. Reading this book might make you choke up, turn vegan, give your dog a big hug, or name your next puppy "Snitter". As for me, while reading it, I finally contacted my local wildlife rescue center about volunteering. I start in two weeks.

"It's a bad world for animals."

I read this book after reading Watership Down.

Truly, I derived great pleasure from this book.

I firmly believe that Richard Adams is an outstanding writer.

I am extremely glad that the dogs manage to make friends with Tod the fox.

When the dogs commence living in the forest, I really feel sorry for them as they have no clue about how to survive out there.

Undoubtedly, this is a 5-star book.

It offers a captivating story that keeps the readers engaged from start to finish.

The characters are well-developed and the plot is full of twists and turns.

The author's writing style is vivid and descriptive, making it easy for the readers to imagine the scenes and the emotions of the characters.

I would highly recommend this book to anyone who loves reading adventure stories.

Rowf, a large, shaggy, black mongrel dog, and Snitter, a black and white fox terrier, are experimental animals at the Animal Research Station--Scientific & Experimental (A.R.S.E.).

Rowf was born there, but Snitter once had a loving master and a happy home. However, his master was struck by a lorry in an accident that Snitter blames himself for. The two dogs, living in adjoining pens, have become friends and share their experiences.

Rowf is daily nearly drowned in a tank of water, while Snitter has had brain surgery that breaks down the barrier between conscious and unconscious minds, resulting in mad waking dreams. When carelessness by the animal care man gives them an opportunity, they break out of their pens and then out of the facility via the heating system.

That's when life gets really hard for them. They are not equipped to live as wild animals. They struggle along, trying to understand the unfamiliar world of the English lake district countryside, for a time with the help of a fox they call The Tod.

Meanwhile, in the human world, the scientists' initial attempts to ignore the escape of the dogs fail and make the situation worse. The dogs' sheep killing angers the farmers, and a muckraking reporter seizes on the story to create public outrage and sell newspapers. The dogs are soon fleeing active pursuit by people who believe them to be carrying bubonic plague.

Adams is sounding a warning note about the moral issues of animal experimentation. Rowf's torment seems unjustifiable, and if there is a real purpose to Snitter's brain surgery, it is not revealed. At the same time, Adams is not creating one-dimensional villains, as we see other research at A.R.S.E. preventing the release of truly dangerous products to the public.

This is a powerful case for the animals, highlighting the importance of valuing their lives and not wasting them carelessly or for trivial reasons. I was completely captivated by the dogs and deeply moved by their story.

Highly recommended.

Incredible. I don't think I've ever cried so much - for a variety of reasons. I have so much to say... I'm sorry but this is a long review, with a lot of personal aspects involved.

First, some personal context points. I listened to the audiobook. I have been vegan about a year and a half. And in the last three days I lost and found a beloved pet cat. All of this has some influence on how I took in the story.

About audiobook vs reading the book: There were some parts where I suspect things like paragraph breaks and page layout would have made things clearer. But I've also read reviews that this book has a confusing narrative. It switches perspective quickly, and there's randomly poetry commentary about what is happening. It's strange, but I enjoyed it. There are also a variety of strongly accented characters, and I wonder if it is easier to understand via audiobook or reading off the page. It was enjoyable to hear them read in what I assume is an accurate accent.

About my cat: Dolly snuck outside three days ago without us noticing, and it was not until yesterday evening that I was able to find her. There was a lot of emotion and it was hard to focus on work. I posted to about five different online systems, put up posters, delivered flyers, talked with neighbours, and searched over and over (and coordinated friends who helped). Sorry, I should get on with the book review. But all this to say, I guess, that I felt from my experience and this book that our relationships with animals are surprisingly significant - we put a lot of time and energy into them, and they can really cause a kerfuffle when things happen.

Before I get to my long vegan ramble... I wanted to reiterate my thoughts that this book is a lot about perspectives, in a cold kind of mathematical interest way. Snitter sees the natural world as unnatural (thinking humans replaced natural houses and streets with wild vegetation). They thought the butcher staff were animal experimenters because of their white coats. Snitter thought he had some superpower when they were able to steal chickens - when it was really a ridiculous coincidence that caused it. I guess the moral in a general sense is to consider the assumptions of ourselves and others, and broaden our knowledge and understanding.

Of course there's also a lot of commentary about politics and sensationalist news stories. It feels cliche but it never gets old, and I think it's a message still relevant today. What if we all had a better understanding of bias and perspectives in news and media? I'm glad I was taught about this in high school. Through these flawed systems we still need to be able to think critically and come to the truth and positive solutions.

About a vegan perspective of this book: I don't think it's a "vegan" book per-se, and I could find no evidence of Richard Adams being vegan. But he does seem to be revered by vegans and vegan organizations online as an "animal rights activist", which seems fair. Of course this book deals with experiments on animals, and it takes a critical look at this practice specifically, particularly frivolous testing. It's more about how these systems work, and it inspired me to do at least a little more research about it. It seems there is a lot of frivolous testing that is done frankly for producers to cover their asses from a legal perspective. And perhaps animal testing is still prevalent because "we've always done it this way" - it's expected and done without question, to some extent, and that is a problem. But luckily cosmetics testing on animals is being reduced (I think it was recently banned in Canada?), and I think there's increasing demand for products not tested on animals. There are a lot of materials known to be safe, so no need for additional testing, and newer technologies offering alternatives to testing on animals. Medical testing is another whole thing, and I think it also should have more transparency and critical evaluation. "The Beagle Alliance" is one organization involved with this, I would like to learn more and. But overall I must admit I'm fairly ignorant in this area and still interested in learning more about what we can do for positive change. I look for products that are not tested on animals (like from The Body Shop). But I'm sure medications I'm on were tested on animals at some point - to which I cite the "as far as practical" part of the vegan society's definition:

"Veganism is a philosophy and way of living which seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—all forms of exploitation of, and cruelty to, animals for food, clothing or any other purpose; and by extension, promotes the development and use of animal-free alternatives for the benefit of animals, humans and the environment. In dietary terms it denotes the practice of dispensing with all products derived wholly or partly from animals."

Besides animal testing, there are no vegan characters as far as I can tell, and there are brutal scenes of hunting and eating all kinds of meat. But overall there are often philosophical considerations about animal rights, and it's really refreshing to read, as someone who cares. I think most of us do care, but haven't found ways to change our lifestyles to match our beliefs. Going vegan was a majorly fulfilling thing to do, with that in mind. From my perspective, not a sacrifice, but such a relief and a joy to learn that I can live my life in a way that rejects unnecessary suffering and killing, and helps shift the world in a better direction (supply and demand).

“It’s time people started thinking of Man as one of a number of species inhabiting the planet; and if he’s the cleverest, that merely gives him more responsibility for seeing that the rest can lead proper, natural lives.”

There are a lot of great quotes... If you'll indulge me one more, this one section hit me:

Rowlf: I hate all humans, I hate them!
Snitter: Perhaps they don't really know any more than we do. Perhaps even humans have their troubles.
R: Don't be so damn silly!
S: I am silly. But they never look happy, do they? Not like, well, not like a chaffinch or a puppy. Perhaps they don't know what they're doing any more than we do. Perhaps they do bad things to each other, not just us.
R: What I'm saying is, that they run the world for themselves. They don't care what they do to us. They just make use of us for their own convenience. It's a bad - [world for animals]
S: I wish you'd stop saying that!

You can't help but agree with both of them, too some degree! The book is a great achievement of characters to be able to convey these two perspectives and have them side by side.

Spoilers for the whole rest of this review. Please stop now if you haven't read the book.

I loved, at the end, the reunion between Snitter and his master. I was totally surprised since I was only familiar with hearing about the ending in the animated film version. Of course I had my own reunion with my lost cat in mind, and I ugly cried in that moment! Around the same time in the story, pur hearts are warmed to see that Rowlf was learning to love and be loved, to see that not all humans are evil, and he learned to trust. It was all really beautiful for the Finale, and like I said, totally unexpected for what was so far an incredibly bleak read (listen).

Digby Driver really went from being a loathsome villain to a better person in the end. I think the book showed that many people are driven by their own selfish perspectives, but it is possible to redeem yourself. He was still driven by the story in the end, but there was a little more. He did seem to actually care about the dogs and Snitter's master. He said so himself. Journalism CAN be for good.

Snitter is accepted in the end as-is. He and his master are broken, but still good. They will never physically be the same, but they can go on living a great life. I love this. It makes me think about how we should work to understand and improve rights for disabled / differently-abled people. In a way it seemed that Snitter's disability was also a strength. He had those visions and was able to see the world in a different way.

The lab doctor who is fired in the end - it was so satisfying to have him save that poor monkey. You have to wonder what the benefit was to the world, to carry out that experiment. At one point in the book, I think the question is asked generally to the lab, and they have some evasive general response. But then we learn the doctor's daughter is sick with some unknown illness, and we understand why he worked there in the first place. So this is a great thing: to have a complex character. We recognize there aren't easy answers. But at the same time we feel justified that the monkey was saved. Earlier when he starts to tear up about the experiments, and we see his superior's response of feeling awkward and wanting to ignore it... I think this is a critique of the philosophy of living by logic and disregarding our emotions. I think the book is saying, to some extent, that we should listen to and consider emotions. Because they may be showing us things that logic or science alone did not consider. At least that was my understanding.

Thanks so much for reading my review. I live for appreciating and discussing books like this, and to have others read and take in perspectives as well ❤

I listened to this book and I have to say that I highly recommend it.

As you listen, you will truly get the full British experience, complete with their unique dry humor and charming accents.

The 15 hours of listening just flew by. During this time, I found myself in a rollercoaster of emotions. I was laughing out loud at some points and then, before I knew it, I was close to tears as I mourned for the animals and even some of the humans in the story.

The only things that managed to interrupt my non-stop listening were the basic necessities of life like sleeping, eating, and working.

Overall, it was an amazing listening experience that I would encourage anyone to try.