Wild Souls

Freedom and Flourishing in the Non-Human World

By: Emma Marris

Narrated by: Amy Landon

Length: 10 hrs and 39 mins

Publisher's Summary

From an acclaimed environmental writer, a groundbreaking and provocative new vision for our relationships with - and responsibilities toward - the planet's wild animals.

Protecting wild animals and preserving the environment are two ideals so seemingly compatible as to be almost inseparable. But in fact, between animal welfare and conservation science there exists a space of underexamined and unresolved tension: wildness itself. When is it right to capture or feed wild animals for the good of their species? How do we balance the rights of introduced species with those already established within an ecosystem? Can hunting be ecological? Are any animals truly wild on a planet that humans have so thoroughly changed? No clear guidelines yet exist to help us resolve such questions.

Transporting listeners into the field with scientists tackling these profound challenges, Emma Marris tells the affecting and inspiring stories of animals around the globe - from Peruvian monkeys to Australian bilbies, rare Hawai'ian birds to majestic Oregon wolves. And she offers a companionable tour of the philosophical ideas that may steer our search for sustainability and justice in the non-human world. Revealing just how intertwined animal life and human life really are, Wild Souls will change the way we think about nature-and our place within it.

©2021 Emma Marris (P)2021 Tantor

We’ll written and worth reading, albeit full of holes

I enjoy Emma Marris’ writing because she usually writes clearly and analytically while thinking outside the box. She is generally not afraid to think about a concept from all angles, even if her thoughts upset the status quo. This book is full of wonderful examples of that. However, she also seems afraid not to toe every line, and needs to back up some of her unexpected, yet well-analyzed thoughts by saying completely contradictory and perfectly status-quo things in the following sentences. It’s like she wants to have important conversations, which necessarily must challenge the status quo. However, she wants the reader (or publisher, or perhaps herself?) to know that she is willing to fall in line if anyone powerful or trendy enough wishes to question her narrative. That part of the book highlights an ignorance disappointing enough that it became challenging to get through the whole book.

For one example of the author’s willingness to say something that will render popularity instead of accuracy, she writes that human fear of snakes began with Christianity. It is not a defense of Christianity to know this is remarkably far from the truth. It seems she needs to make statements like this to prove that, while she does challenge the status quo in brilliant ways, don’t worry, she is always ready to turn off her questioning mind if there is enough societal pressure to do so. This disappointment resurfaces many times throughout the book. However it is still worth reading.

food for thought

I did disagree with author on several points and I do think she could benefit from a better ecological education, but overall, I thought the book did a good job at dissecting some pretty difficult philosophical concepts. Most pertinent, in my opinion, was the discussion about the merits of individual suffering versus species loss. This is something I've given a lot of thought to but have yet to come up with a satisfying answer.

More please

I loved the thought provoking arguments in this book. I would like more please Ms. Marris!

Were scientists consulted for this book?

While Emma Marris provides lots of good information that is important for the general public to ponder, it is obvious to me (as a conservationist) that she did not consult many scientists while writing this book. She uses many scientific words incorrectly and discusses well-debated concepts as if scientists have not considered them whatsoever. Furthermore, she makes many assertions, some of which are true and proven by science, but without offering a valid argument. She claims that this is an environmental ethics book, yet fails to provide true philosophical reasoning for many of her conclusions. While this book is a good jumping off point for many difficult questions in the field of conservation, I wouldn’t trust most of the “facts” that are presented in this book.

Hybrid look at life on earth

Marris is a solid critical thinker who draws from multiple fact and opinion sources. It is refreshing to follow her mental exercises that ultimately shape her current views.

Well written, but not very useful in the midst of ecocide.

A well-constructed, if often-stated-elsewhere in other popular books, summary of the Anthropocene. While spelling out the human-caused destruction of so much biodiversity, she gradually forms a weak apology for humanity’s actions in that regard. Then, with flimsy reasoning and a strange lack of humility, she summarizes with biased lists of “good” and “not”. Finally, she proposes a path forward in the form of a generic decision-making model, as if Homo sapiens will, after consideration, “choose the least morally wrong option”, when we have shown no propensity to do so since the dawn of civilization.

Well written, but not very useful in the midst of ecocide.