Lauren recommended this book to me, and she was spot on in assuming I'd love it. So much interesting stuff here! It basically just describes a whole bunch of cool ways that animal brains work, with a healthy bit of info on how normal and autistic human brains work, too. Full of illustrative stories and experiments. As I was reading this book, I couldn't stop rambling on about everything in it to M. If you are interested in How Brains Work (and you have to know by now that I'm OBSESSED with the topic), I seriously recommend that you read this book. Now.

Quick warning: It does contain quite a lot of stories about slaughterhouses, which was difficult for me to read at times. I much preferred when she talked about animal behavior that wasn't related to feed lots, etc. But despite that, I still loved this book and want to share all the facts from it with everyone I know. I wish I'd taken notes. Yes, I'm a nerd.

This book was an absolute delight to read. I wholeheartedly recommend it to everyone everywhere but especially to people who have an affinity for animals. You learn a great deal about animals in these pages but by way of contrast and compare you also learn a whole lot about human beings. Using scientific studies of animals, her own experiences as an autistic person, and her experiences working with commercial enterprises to improve the welfare of animals, the author hypothesizes that the way autistic people perceive the world may be similar to the way animals perceive the world.

Quite a few of the statements in this book begin with the phrase 'I think' or something similar so the author does acknowledge she is speculating. However, it is not unfounded speculation. Her method for discovering some unidentified factor in the farm environment that is scaring or harming the animals and then suggesting changes involves seeing things not from the perspective of a human but that of an animal. The reason she is so successful at this is because autistic people (based on her own experience and many other studies) perceive the world differently than most humans do. People see one unified thing: a landscape, a building, a statue. Autistic people see a collection of details. A fence made of weathered cedar posts, a length of rusty chain, a bright yellow rain coat, etc. When it comes to identifying what is spooking an animal, the devil, as they say, is in the details. So who better to note that than someone who sees discrete objects as collections of details? People focus in on the things they want or expect to see and all of the other details fade into the background (the 'Gorillas In Our Midst' psychology experiment is a well known example of this). Autistic people are less prone to doing that. The reason for this, according to the author, is because autistic people think with pictures instead of words (ie. they think in concrete terms and see details whereas people who think with words think in abstract terms and see objects). Mammals and to a lesser degree, autistic people, have a less developed frontal cortex. One of the roles of the frontal cortex is to serve as an associative system. It takes a whole bunch of seemingly unrelated details and associates them into one integrated whole. There is an expression: big picture thinking. The neocortex is responsible for big picture thinking. We invent or discover a sort of overarching structure that binds all of the disparate details of existence into one coherent whole (which of the two we believe we are doing is obviously going to be based to some degree on the subjective epistemology of the individual him/herself and is a debate outside the considerations of the book). In terms of personal history, these overarching structures are known as schemas/schemata, in terms of human history they are called meta-narratives. Basically, your neocortex looks at the details and tells you a story about what life is about. It takes all of those details and turns them into one cohesive thing. This may be a good thing but like all good things, there is a trade-off. The author explains:

'The price human beings pay for having such big, fat frontal lobes is that normal people become oblivious in a way animals and autistic people aren't. Normal people stop seeing the details that make up the big picture and see only the big picture instead. That's what your frontal lobes do for you: they give you the big picture. Animals see all the tiny little details that go into the picture.'

I am going into all of this detail because it sets the stage for the topics covered in this book and compares how a neurotypical human experiences it, how an autistic person experiences it, and how it is believed (based on things like observation and fMRI scans) an animal may be experiencing it. The TLDR: the author is using the autistic perspective to translate the intellect, emotions, and perceptions of animals into terms a non-autistic human can understand. Thus the title 'Animals In Translation.'

There is a lot of fascinating information about animals in this book, divided up into the following chapters:

How Animals Perceive The World
Animal Feelings
Animal Aggression
Pain and Suffering
How Animals Think
Animal Genius: Extreme Talents

This is bookended by a short autobiographical account and a behaviour and training troubleshooting guide.

I am always amazed when I read accounts of animal intelligence. Alex the african gray parrot is one of the more famous examples. He became so adept at spelling he was able to spell out new sounds associated with objects without being trained to spell that particular word; demonstrating he wasn't merely parroting phrases, he had some grasp of the concept of phonics. Alex would also ask questions unprompted (for example, asking what colour he was when catching sight of himself in a mirror.)

Another interesting area is research into the relationship between music and language. As humans, we tend to think of language merely as the content of a word or string of words. If I direct a statement at you, you understand what it is I am saying. While that is true, it is equally true that if I say something to you in a gruff manner, I have communicated something different than I would have if I had made the same statement in a well modulated tone. Likewise if my voice rises at the end of a statement, it turns that statement into a question. How something is said is as much a part of communication as what is being said. Tone matters. There is some research into whether some animals employ a sort of tonal proto-language. There is once again an autism connection here that the author unfolds. The author also considers the experiences of people who never learned any sort of verbal or sign language until they were fully grown adults. That was a fascinating read also. The story of Ildefonso, A Man Without Words, makes it clear that people can understand abstract concepts without the benefit of words.

Tool manufacturing was another topic the author covered; crows bending wires into makeshift hooks was one example among a number the author gives. The current scientific controversy is whether animals are capable of true cognition, defined not as instinctual hard wired behaviour or learning a simple rule of thumb but instead solving a problem under novel conditions. Crows noting that cars stop at red traffic lights and go at green traffic lights, placing nuts in front of the front wheels when the light is red and then swooping down to eat the innards of the now broken nut after the light has turned green, the traffic has moved on, and the coast is clear might be an example of this.

I have read before that it is the animals with the most complex brains that exhibit a greater potential for empathy. This book speculates about another, far less benign similarity between humans and animals with more complex brains:

'.....when I read through the research literature I'm struck by the fact that the animals with the most complex brains are also the ones that engage in some of the nastiest behaviour. I suspect people and animals probably pay a price for having a complex brain. For one thing, in a complex brain there may be more opportunities for wiring mistakes that lead to vicious behavior. Another possibility is that since a more complex brain provides greater flexibility of behavior, animals with complex brains become free to develop new behaviors that will be good, bad, or in between. Human beings are capable of great love and sacrifice, but they are also capable of profound cruelty. Maybe animals are, too.'

It was at this point that my own neocortex did that thing it does and made an association. Something I had read in the book Mere Christianity: that the more intelligent an entity is, the more potential it has for great good when it goes right but the more potential it has for great evil when it goes wrong. Of course, C. S. Lewis was looking upwards to celestial beings, this book is looking downwards to animals.

There was so much intriguing material covered in this book I could go on at length. Suffice it to say, we've come a long way since Rene Descartes arbitrarily assigned animals to the category of automatons with no inner life. The author writes near the end of the book:

'It's time to start thinking of animals as capable and communicative beings. It's also time to stop making assumptions. Animal researchers take a lot for granted: “animals don't have language,” “animals don't have psychological self-awareness” - you find blanket statements like this sprinkled throughout the research literature. But the truth is, we don't know what animals can't do better than we know what they can do. It's hard to prove a negative, and proving negatives shouldn't be the focus.

tIf we're interested in animals, then we need to study animals for their own sake, and on their own terms, to the extent that it's possible. What are they doing? What are they feeling? What are they thinking? What are they saying?

tWho are they?

tAnd: what do we need to do to treat animals fairly, responsibly, and with kindness?

tThose are the real questions.'

Sigh. Now I want an african gray parrot so we can, you know, discuss the reality of platonic objects and stuff. But perhaps that is a job for The Philosopher's Dog?

DNF read half, was an interesting read for sure with a unique perspective. Some dated and questionable views

I usually don’t read non-fiction books, books about autism…or books about animals, though I love animals. Usually animal books have passages with very upsetting parts, and the happy ending, if there is one, is ruined for me by these “bad spots.” But as my husband gave this book to me, I was guilted into reading it, thought I was able to put it off for 8 years. To my surprise, I enjoyed this book very much.

Among its provocative ideas, the book:
•targues that language is not a requirement for consciousness--and that animals do have consciousness
This I can agree with from my own experience with animals of 30+ years.
•tapplies the autism theory of "hyper-specificity" to animals, showing that animals and autistic people are so sensitive to detail that they "can't see the forest for the trees"--a talent as well as a "deficit"
•texplores the "interpreter" in the normal human brain that filters out detail, leaving people blind to much of the reality that surrounds them--a reality animals and autistic people see, sometimes all too clearly
These two ideas were demonstrated very well in the book.

•texplains how animals have "superhuman" skills: animals have animal genius
•tcompares animals to autistic savants, declaring that animals may in fact be autistic savants, with special forms of genius that normal people do not possess and sometimes cannot even see
This was also explained, though not as well as the previous points.
•texamines how humans and animals use their emotions to think, to decide, and even to predict the future
•treveals the remarkable abilities of handicapped people and animals
•tmaintains that the single worst thing you can do to an animal is to make it feel afraid
These concepts were also fairly well explained, with the last being a truth I agree with completely. The pain of a shot is much easier to deal with than pain which hurts less but you have no warning about, like a bee sting.


Specific parts of the book I found riveting, such as the following:

1.tPure while or light colored animals with blue eyes and pink noses tend to have neurological problems, because they have less melanin. I see this in my own experience with cats, having owned several with light colored skin/eyes that were very neurotic.
2.tBreeding animals for specific traits almost always results in neurosis and aggression sooner or later. Purebreed dogs are responsible for most of the dog attacks, because breeders have inbred lines to make the animals adhere to AKC specs (pp82-83). Pigs bred for leaner meat are much more nervous and less prolific in breeding than pigs bred for soundness (p101). Roosters bred to be fast growing and more muscular became rapists, because the breeding screwed up their ability to do courtship displays, leading to the hens not submitting to advances (pp69-72). There were many other examples given, too.
3.tMammals aren’t the only ones with feelings or social lives. Reptiles have them too, like snakes (p88).
4.tAnimals also have sexual deviations and preferences. At least Bhraman bulls do (p103)
5.tHigher intelligence usually results in “evil” social behaviors such as infanticide, rape, and murder. I’ll never look at Shamu the same way, after reading about killer whales who really like to kill(pp 150-152).
6.tA shock collar is good for training. I personally agree with this, from my own use with them for my dogs to curb behaviors on walks in the countryside, but I didn’t expect Temple to agree. Mind you that the idea of this kind of collar is not to shock dogs repeatedly, but to correct bad behavior, so electronic beeps as “warnings” can be used to let a dog know when its wandered too far, should keep up or not range far ahead, should not bolt, etc. A shock is used as last resort. A collar is not a substitute for obedience training, it’s an aid in training.
7.tA checklist that is 10 items long is much better for a slaughter plant to protect animal safety than a 100 item one. This seems wrong, but Temple makes a terrific argument for this idea. Moreover, she is right that simple is better, because you can see better what needs to be improved. I have seen this myself in the overly complicated OSHA code for NYS and USA. Focusing on details instead of the whole picture is an easy trap to fall into.

My only gripes about this book were:
1.tTemple advocates against leash laws, citing they lead to dogs that are unsocialized, a theory I am in opposition to. It’s an owner’s responsibility to socialize their dog, something I see all too seldom.
2.tShe is clearly against specific breeds, saying they are prone to aggression and that mutts usually are non-agressive. Having owned German Shepherds my whole life, I am opposed to this, and it also smacks of the same kind of thinking that led to breed bans in several cities, with a lot of good dogs left homeless at best and destroyed at worst.
3.tMuch of the writing is very easy to read, but it’s not well-written and a lot of specific conclusions do not have facts to back them up, just anecdotes from the author’s life. This is not bad, but it does affect how much weight to give insight and advice found in the book, especially on the training/troubleshooting sections.

Overall opinion: Worth reading, just so you can discuss with someone.


Parents: Okay for a teen, but likely would not be of interest to someone younger.
Language: no swearing
Adult Content: none, save maybe the passage on collecting semen from bulls and their deviances.
Violence: some passages on animal murder.

This book is, to me, most interesting for offering a different perspective. I'm amazed at all the non-autistic people taking umbrage at how an autistic woman decides to describe herself. If anyone should be allowed, surely it is someone with actual autism?

Grandin is not the only autistic person who I have seen favorably make a comparison between autistic people's minds and animals. I think it's kind of telling that other people automatically read this as a kind of insult.

I take a star off because of the book's inaccuracies such as the ones noted by other readers. However, if you are looking for a different perspective, the inaccuracies actually add to the charm a bit; here is the mind of someone else who doesn't match the image of what a 'normal put together' person should be like or sound like. Someone who is not naturally gifted with vocabulary, yet still made contributions to the world when no one thought she would be able to.

People write they refuse to read because of her contributions to making more humane meat packing plants. I find that astounding. Even if you are against meat packing plants, they aren't about to disappear tomorrow (probably not until synthesized meat becomes widespread, which could take several decades or more), so why should cows suffer more in the meantime? That's just taking political correctness to the point that it punishes the ones you aim to help. There's a strong argument to be made that one of the worst things you can do to an animal is make it afraid, and Grandin makes a decent case for this.

Perfection.
This is probably the first non fiction book to make me cry.
Animals are just the best.
I loved learning how much smarter animals are than we typically think.
I love all the things Temple Grandin has done for the farming and meat industries.
I am a veterinary nurse that has a brother with Asperger's, so I feel like this book was very geared toward me.
I think that reading this book would give everyone such a better understanding of animals and people on the Autism spectrum.
Its inspirational and important and I think everyone should read it. I will definitely be reading more of her books.

Animals in Translation is an amazing book. This book states that by looking at human autism, we can better under animals, the way they think, the way they behave, and how they see the world. The author is an animal scientist who works primarily with slaughter houses. She is also autistic.

Before reading this book, I had very little comprehension about the way that autistic people see the world. I simply had no idea that seeing the world in a visual way was that much different than the way that I think. I now see that this different way of thinking has a lot of really interesting benefits, particularly when it comes to understanding other visual thinkers like the animals around us. As I read this book, I started to comprehend how much detail in life we normally ignore. So much of what we need to understand animals is simply looking at life from their perspective, both literally and figuratively speaking.

This book is fascinating on so many levels. It makes neuroscience accessible and gives us insight into the autistic mind in the way a non-autistic author never could. I'm a vegetarian and thought I might hate that she works for slaughterhouses, but I know that people are not going to give up meat and anything that makes it more humane is commendable.

I really enjoy Temple Grandin's insights into animal behavior, and I am still thinking about points she made in this book regarding the differences and similarities between animal and human ways of thinking. She cites research to back up her conclusions, but I find her personal experiences with autism and working with animals to be the most compelling evidence of her theories. Reading about how humans use (or don't use) the different parts of their brain under various circumstances has mad me think more about my own thought processes and how my view of the world and relationships with people and animals has developed and changed over time. I have a better understanding of why animals do what they do, and how they can be "dumb animals" and absolutely brilliant (as judged by human standards) both at the same time. If you have any contact with animals you will learn a lot from her writing, and this book is a great place to start.

Although the writing is sometimes dry and I really didn't required the itemized list of things that can distract cattle while in a chute I loved this book. Love it so much that I quote it, talk about it with everyone, brought it up in therapy and developed relationship code to use with my girlfriend (as in "I need some squeezebox time.") As a pet owner it made me think about the signals I send my animals - am I alpha enough? I like to think so, but there's always something to work on. As a reader I felt like I had been taken to places I never would have visited on my own. Even if you can;t make time to read one of Temple Grandin's book try and listen to an interview with her on public radio. She's fascinating and her ability to articulate her own autism and teach non-autistic people to see the world through her eyes and the eyes of the animals she works with is is devastatingly effective. You wont see the world the same way again.

Here's a Fresh Air interview: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/st...

A los animales hay que entenderlos observándolos y a sabiendas que su comunicación y manera de pensar es diferente, ayuda salirse de la humanidad para entender la animalidad. Es difícil salirse del contexto al que pertenecemos pero es más fácil teniendo a alguien que nos guía, en este caso Temple Grandin es valiosa por eso.
Ser autista es parte de quien es y de como entiende el mundo y ella misma dice que no es una "encantadora de animales" sino que piensa en imágenes y esto le hace imaginar como es que los animales pueden pensar y sentir. Creo que este es un buen libro para tener más empatía animal, que es importante sobre todo si trabajas con animales pero también para acabar con las ideas antropocéntricas de la vida. Los animales son tanto y somos parte de ellos. No evolucionamos a homo sapiens solos y como dice Temple Grandin "los animales nos hacen humanos".

Found this book really interesting and easy to follow. The explanations of concepts that everyone can grasp and imagine as possibilities meant that the author’s reasoning for her opinions made sense. It gave insight to how autistic people think but also some of the difficulties that they may struggle with because of the comparisons between them and animal minds. Originally picked this book up for the references to Panksepp’s work and I’m glad I did, because it was enjoyable to read.