Response to: Annie Dillard: “Weasel is Wild”

Annie Dillard takes a much more vivid and violent approach to essay writing in "Living Weasel is Wild". In this passage, Dillard describes a small confrontation between herself and this rodent, referring to them as "two lovers, or enemies". To begin her account, Dillard describes the preying of a weasel; how he "stalks" and kills "more bodies than he can eat warm". Although, the author contradicts this strong interpretation of a weasel by proceeding to an anecdote about Ernest Thompson Seton. Seton says that a man "shot an eagle out of the sky" and "found the dry skull of a weasel fixed by the jaws to his throat". By choosing to share this with the reader, Dillard explores the idea of the weasel as a victim. Dillard then states that these ponderings featuring weasels were inspired when she "saw one last week" "near [her] house in Virginia" by Hollis Pond. She goes on to produce a detailed description of the pond and her meeting with the "arrowhead"-like rodent. Dillard felt as though this experience were as if she had "been in that weasel's brain for sixty seconds". This experience causes the author to examine life through the eyes and mind of a rodent. She realizes the value of "mindlessness" and the "purity of living". Dillard then toys with the idea of fully embodying the creature and "live for two days in the den" and living where "the mind is single". In her final thoughts, Dillard leaves the reader to ponder the idea of "living at every moment to the perfect freedom of single necessity".

        I truly can never say I wanted to step into the mind of an animal. (I read Anamorphs as a kid, and I think they may have ruined that whole super power for me.) Although, I can say I have always felt a strong connection to animals, mostly my pet dogs. I was bullied throughout elementary school, and therefore, I did not feel as though I had many friends. This may sound sad, but that is where my dog came in: Jake. Jake was a black Labrador retriever who my parents had had since before I was born. He was my pet, my companion, and my best friend. I could talk to him about anything (no judgment); cuddle all over him, and play; all things and struggling nine-year-old needs. If I could have jumped within Jake's brain all I could hope to find was the same amount of love for my family and me as we had for him. We loved Jake as a member of our family, when I was twelve, he passed away. I can honestly say, that is the most emotional I have ever been. Losing Jake was like losing my best friend, but I knew, from the way Jake had always been, that he would have wept the same way over losing one of us, as we did over losing him.

        Once again, I find myself questioning Dillard's purpose in writing this passage. How did this experience affect her life in the future? And why did Annie feel it was so significant she felt the need to reflect back on her feelings after time had gone by? I am also curious about her use of such violent and, frankly, gross language. How was she hoping this language usage would affect the readers? Although, I personally enjoy a darker take on description, use of words and phrases such as “carcasses” and “splitting the jugular vein” could have easily turned off the more innocent reader. This change in writing style from “The Chase”, was welcomed in my mind, but could be considered shocking in others. I can hope that as we continue to read Annie Dillard’s essays, she does not sugarcoat her descriptions, although, I must ask, if these artistic choices were ever second-guessed by the author.