« The Southwest Monsoon | Main | Arrival Bangkok »
July 1, 2006
A Dog's Life
LOCATION: Samut Songkhram, Thailand
SEE WHERE WE ARE!
Longitude: N: 13.15252°
Latitude: E: 099.84879°
Miles from Singapore: 1420
Something that has struck me as a little strange is how, as Buddhists, the Thais treat different animals with differing levels of respect. I passed an anthill earlier today that had a little shelter built around it, presumably to protect it from the elements (probably sets the delicate micoclimate inside into a spin not having sufficient water and sun exposure!). It even had a red and white ribbon around it - for what purpose I have no idea. But it all looked 5-star super delux Hilton standard for the ant family at Ant Hill Corner.
By contrast the dogs, which to my mind must rate higher on the evolutionary ladder than ants, at least in terms of brain size and intelligence, are the most decrepid bunch of four-foots I've seen of all the countries visited by the expedition so far (and I've seen some pretty mangy mutts in Central America and Indonesia). But aren't Buddhists supposed to be compassionate and kind to all living creatures?
Perhaps this lack of attention explains why they are also the most aggressive. Out of the front yard of every 4th or 5th house I can expect a blur of snarling teeth and raised hackles to come barreling out after the bike. It got so bad a few days ago in the small villages that I gave up riding on the small coast road altogether and took the busier, but less dog-infested, main highway up to Bangkok.
Tonight finds me in the town of Samut Songkhram, just 65kms west of Bangkok. It's a pretty barren satellite town with not much to offer, except one interesting piece of history. This is the birthplace of Chang and Eng, two local Thai males who were born fused at the breastbone by an 8cm length of ligament (otherwise having separate organs). They were 'discovered' by an American in 1814 and shipped off to tour the world as 'The Monster' in freakshows mainly in America and Europe. It was their origin here in Thailand, then called Siam, that prompted the term 'Siamese Twins' first being coined. 'Lil bit of trivia for ya!
And on the subject of dogs, anthills and Buddhism, I'm sure it's just my position as an inquisitive but ignorant outsider with very little grasp on the culture that is the real explanation.
jason
Posted on July 1, 2006 1:41 PM
Comments
Thanks Carl,
True, true, the inconsistencies of cultures. And on balance the Thais are still quite rooted in the old ways as compared to the west. Although this is changing rapidly of course. Also there seems on the surface to be significantly less cynism here which is nice thing being an outsider, but I fear leads to people swallowing whatever the political leaders throw out there without questioning it.
Posted by: jason x360 ![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.expedition360.com/journal/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 8, 2006 5:37 AM
On one hand, dogs and cats are scavengers in addition to being predators. They eat refuse and rotten flesh off dead animals. I think that's one reason they are not embraced in Thailand - they are seen as unclean. Also, try getting near one. They are not domesticated and are definitely wild animals. Nobody owns them and certainly nobody pets them, for fear of rabies or other dog bite infection.
Also, we have a lot of inconsistencies in our own cultuires. We are both from mainly Christian countries, and yet our countries' governments don't seem to follow a shred of what Christ taught. Neither do many of the people here. Inconsistency is everywhere and always more visible when we step outside our own yards.
Posted by: Carl Weaver at July 7, 2006 9:52 PM
I have long thought that an outsider can actually "see" a culture, and thus "understand" it, better than the locals. Also believe that "culture" has been overrated, overvalued, as a very high percent of culture reflect "traditions", that do not stand up well, do not serve well, need to be examined, reconsidered, rather than blindly followed and almost worshiped. The dog is a good example of the hipocracy that defines most "culture" in all parts of the world. I am currently viewing "culture" as a very powerfull and very negative force. R
Posted by: ROBERT at July 5, 2006 8:20 AM