If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
My L A Times had an interesting perspective on the "Marley and Me"
phenomenon today: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...,2884877.story |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
Wingnut wrote:
My L A Times had an interesting perspective on the "Marley and Me" phenomenon today: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...,2884877.story Excellent. I'm glad that this POV is being put forward to JQP. Thanks for posting the link! Dianne |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
"(null)" wrote in message ... Wingnut wrote: My L A Times had an interesting perspective on the "Marley and Me" phenomenon today: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...,2884877.story Excellent. I'm glad that this POV is being put forward to JQP. Thanks for posting the link! Perhaps the movie glorified the outrageous behavior in an effort to make it funny, but reading the book convinced me that John Grogan and his wife tried very hard to deal with a very difficult dog who was probably mentally defective. It is typical of "dog trainer" types to believe that any dog can be trained to be impeccably well behaved. In actuality, John apparently was able to achieve a passing degree of obedience after a massive effort, but most of the destructive behavior was due to severe separation anxiety and fear of thunderstorms, that seemed to get worse as Marley aged. Maybe his deafness and other problems contributed to that. It is important that the average person try to train their dogs and get professional help doing so, but most dogs are much more compliant than Marley. Even Muttley has been far easier to live with and train than Marley, and I might be deserving of criticism for not doing more to advance his training. But he is totally reliable, non-destructive, and capable of good behavior in public, so there is not so much of an urgent need to make improvements. Muttley and Me |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
"Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in
: "(null)" wrote in message ... Wingnut wrote: My L A Times had an interesting perspective on the "Marley and Me" phenomenon today: http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...l7-2009jan07,0 ,2884877.story Excellent. I'm glad that this POV is being put forward to JQP. Thanks for posting the link! Perhaps the movie glorified the outrageous behavior in an effort to make it funny, but reading the book convinced me that John Grogan and his wife tried very hard to deal with a very difficult dog who was probably mentally defective. It is typical of "dog trainer" types to believe that any dog can be trained to be impeccably well behaved. In actuality, John apparently was able to achieve a passing degree of obedience after a massive effort, but most of the destructive behavior was due to severe separation anxiety and fear of thunderstorms, that seemed to get worse as Marley aged. Maybe his deafness and other problems contributed to that. It is important that the average person try to train their dogs and get professional help doing so, but most dogs are much more compliant than Marley. Even Muttley has been far easier to live with and train than Marley, and I might be deserving of criticism for not doing more to advance his training. But he is totally reliable, non-destructive, and capable of good behavior in public, so there is not so much of an urgent need to make improvements. Muttley and Me If Muttley were that destructive, he would have been crated, tethered, kenneled, or something. And not just left to his destructive devices. Instead of hand sitting and accepting and laughing about his damage, surely you would have taken measures to stop the wreckage. Grogans did NOTHING. In fact they did EVERYTHING that would worsen the behaviors that they found so annoying. And you got Muttley as a mature dog instead of the destructive puppy. Puppies "do that". And Grogans encouraged by their own behaviors and lack of intervention, to allow those behaviors to set in stone. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
(following up diddy's post since I have Paul KF'd)
diddy none wrote: "Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in It is typical of "dog trainer" types to believe that any dog can be trained to be impeccably well behaved. In actuality, John apparently was able to achieve a passing degree of obedience after a massive effort Paul, you keep insisting that there's some huge population of "problem dogs" out there that we dog trainers know nothing about. Where are they, pray tell? I did rescue for 10 years. In most cases, there was no pre-screening of the dogs involved; I'd get a call and go pick the dog up. There was only one case in which I had a problem with a dog (I'll get to that in a minute). Generally the dogs were unruly teenagers that had had no prior training or effort put into them, yet having them around wasn't even a significant amount of extra work. I'd just bring them home, plunk them down in the middle of my pack and start teaching them the house rules. Dog wasn't housebroken? Easily fixed. Dog was destructive? Easily fixed. Dog had resource guarding issues? Easily fixed. Dog had no manners? Fixed in the course of the ordinary daily routine. In all those years there *was* one dog that I had euth'ed because she had severe human-aggression issues. While I could've addressed them through training it was my group's policy for liability issues not to place such dogs. I also taught obedience classes for 4 years. Funny, at the end of eight weeks every single one of my students that came to class REGULARLY, ON-TIME, and DID THEIR HOMEWORK had dogs that were well-mannered, pleasant companions - no matter how much of a monster the owner had thought the dog was at the beginning of the session. I passed out a detailed questionnaire about the dog on the first night of class to be returned the second week, and from those it was obvious that the majority of the owners truly believed that their dogs were completely-out-of-control hopeless nutcases when they were just in fact ordinary dogs that hadn't had any previous training. So where is this mysterious, secret population of problem dogs that only you seem to know about, Paul? Seems to me that there's a REASON that you seem hopeless cases everywhere whereas we dog trainers just see normal dogs with clueless owners... Dianne |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
"(null)" wrote in message ... (following up diddy's post since I have Paul KF'd) diddy none wrote: "Paul E. Schoen" spoke these words of wisdom in It is typical of "dog trainer" types to believe that any dog can be trained to be impeccably well behaved. In actuality, John apparently was able to achieve a passing degree of obedience after a massive effort Paul, you keep insisting that there's some huge population of "problem dogs" out there that we dog trainers know nothing about. Where are they, pray tell? I did rescue for 10 years. In most cases, there was no pre-screening of the dogs involved; I'd get a call and go pick the dog up. There was only one case in which I had a problem with a dog (I'll get to that in a minute). Generally the dogs were unruly teenagers that had had no prior training or effort put into them, yet having them around wasn't even a significant amount of extra work. I'd just bring them home, plunk them down in the middle of my pack and start teaching them the house rules. Dog wasn't housebroken? Easily fixed. Dog was destructive? Easily fixed. Dog had resource guarding issues? Easily fixed. Dog had no manners? Fixed in the course of the ordinary daily routine. In all those years there *was* one dog that I had euth'ed because she had severe human-aggression issues. While I could've addressed them through training it was my group's policy for liability issues not to place such dogs. I also taught obedience classes for 4 years. Funny, at the end of eight weeks every single one of my students that came to class REGULARLY, ON-TIME, and DID THEIR HOMEWORK had dogs that were well-mannered, pleasant companions - no matter how much of a monster the owner had thought the dog was at the beginning of the session. I passed out a detailed questionnaire about the dog on the first night of class to be returned the second week, and from those it was obvious that the majority of the owners truly believed that their dogs were completely-out-of-control hopeless nutcases when they were just in fact ordinary dogs that hadn't had any previous training. So where is this mysterious, secret population of problem dogs that only you seem to know about, Paul? Seems to me that there's a REASON that you seem hopeless cases everywhere whereas we dog trainers just see normal dogs with clueless owners... I don't know if it is even worth replying, since you have been so gracious as to have me killfiled, but perhaps you are a gifted trainer, and perhaps you were able to do a good job with the dogs you encountered. But, remember, I did not bring Muttley into training because he was such a monster. By the time I took him into class, he could be left alone in the house, and he was not aggressive toward people or other dogs. He did have cat aggression and he pulled on the leash when walking. But no problem with thunderstorms, no resource guarding, no destructive behavior. Just a goofy, headstrong, independent dog and a minimally motivated foster caretaker who did not have formal obedience training. The only reason I submitted to the offer was that I wanted to rehome him, and Janet and others contended he would be much more adoptable if he had the classes. I will admit that I made some mistakes during those classes. I did not do as much homework as I should have, although I did some, and I practiced some things I was taught wrong. By that I mean that the instructor had told me an incorrect way to force Muttley into a "down". And I only did the "sit on it" exercise a couple of times, because Muttley would ace that everytime. He is not an attention-seeker and playful dog. He was perfectly happy to sit there or lay in the sun while I read a book and sipped on my coffee. Yet Janet stressed that as one of the most important exercises. What I needed was to get my dog's attention, and that was never taught, except that I should get a prong collar and yank on it until I had him under control when he wanted to do something else. And I also admit to arriving late. I had reasons, or "excuses" if you insist, but that was not the reason we failed the course. It was redirected aggression, which may have been due to insufficient socialization (which was not really discussed), but most likely it was because I did not know how to get his attention and have him want to do what I asked of him, in the midst of a highly distracting group of dogs and people. And the bottom line is that Janet was not really paying much attention to me and Muttley when we struggled to keep up with the others, and attempted a technique which she says that she does not teach, but it was shown to me by one of her assistant instructors. On that final, fateful day, nobody was paying any attention to me and Muttley when he broke loose and attacked the other dog. It took a while for Janet and the others to trot over to the scene of the attack and attempt to break it up, and it was only stopped because I was able to grab the leash off the ground and pull Muttley away. You may be a gifted trainer who could have made the classes enjoyable and productive for me and my dog, which may have inspired me to make an extra effort to arrive early. Maybe you would have stressed the importance of socialization and calming exercises in the presence of distractions. Perhaps you would have recognized Muttley's first outburst a week earlier as a sign of a problem that needed special work. And I would hope that you would have been vigilent and not gloated and turned your back on a "naughty" student who came to class late and could not control his dog except by extreme physical force. But of course, you will not read this if you have me filtered. Probably some kind person will extract only those parts that suit their purposes of discrediting me, and you will be able to read them and judge me on their interpretation of what they want you to read. Or you could remove your filter and read exactly what I have to say, but obviously you do not want to do that. The truth is sometimes hard to deal with when it counters your preconceived notions and prejudices, so you have chosen to shut your eyes to anything except what you would like to see, and which has been conveniently processed and censored for you. Diddy quoted all of my post, but you are taking offense at only one part of what I said, and not about her comments. She had some good points about the Grogans, but she seems not to have remembered that they tried using crates and tethers to control his behavior, but he managed to chew through his tethers and destroy his crate because of his extreme anxiety about the frequent thunderstorms that caused most of his destructive behavior. She contends the Grogans did nothing to help, and did *everything* wrong to reinforce the bad behavior, yet they did try to take obedience classes and they followed much of the advice that was made available to them. Maybe they did not avail themselves of a behaviorist, and perhaps they should have found a better trainer than their first one, a "dominatrix" who was unable to control the dog and did not give them any good advice. And, of course, the book (and movie) glorified the worst parts of their experiences with their dog, and I doubt that anything short of extremely competent training and meticulous management would have helped. And overall, the dog was a beloved member of the family, and was very good with the children, and proved to be very protective and mostly fun to be with. I think I have done a good job with Muttley, and also he is innately a "good dog". He had, and still has, some rough edges, but his personality and behavior work well for me, and he earns praise from many that meet him. And my experiences with Lucky were also very positive. I have also had very little problems with other dogs I have encountered, so my experience is similar to yours, and lends credence to the assertion that there are "No Bad Dogs". True, most bad behavior is due to bad owners. But even good owners have had problems with dogs that have required them to resort to rather extreme measures for management. And they have also had bad experiences, according to their posts here, and some have admitted that they have not published some of their more embarassing misadventures. So, I still believe the Grogans did a pretty good job with Marley, and they do not deserve the criticism that has been directed at them by the judgmental dog trainer types who feel self-righteous enough to dismiss their efforts as being totally wrong, and contend that they would have done a much better job. Paul and Muttley |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
On Jan 9, 1:37*am, "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
But, remember, I did not bring Muttley into training because he was such a monster. By the time I took him into class, he could be left alone in the house, and he was not aggressive toward people or other dogs. Its amazing how much the story has changed over the last three years. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
wrote in message ... On Jan 9, 1:37 am, "Paul E. Schoen" wrote: But, remember, I did not bring Muttley into training because he was such a monster. By the time I took him into class, he could be left alone in the house, and he was not aggressive toward people or other dogs. Its amazing how much the story has changed over the last three years. It has been not quite three years since I first got Muttley, and he was totally non-aggressive, even while I kept him tethered outside most of the time. OK, he was cat-aggressive, but that is prey drive and not the same as human or dog aggression. My friend visited me and Muttley with her dog Molly in May of 2006, and they got along well enough. In June, I took Muttley on a hike with some people from the Sierra Club, and the main problem was his incessant leash pulling. On the hike, we encountered other people and dogs, and only once did I notice any snarkiness, and that may have been started by the other dog, and there were no actual bites exchanged. In July of 2006, AFAIR, my friend George had been working on my house, banging loose nails on the siding, while Muttley was tethered in the back near where I was also doing some work. Muttley had been barking and lunging for a while, but I had no idea that he might pose a problem, because when I first introduced him to George, he cowered in fear, and I even remarked that he was a "wimpy dog". I was clueless and wrong. When George walked by, ignoring Muttley completely, he went after him and nipped him in the butt. That was the first, only, and last incident of human aggression. It was as much my fault as anyone else's, or my dog, who was highly agitated and probably felt justified in biting this noisy intruder. When Muttley and I met Janet at the SPCA in July or August, he probably interacted with other dogs, and he certainly did so again when we had our first lesson in mid-September. I don't recall any dog aggression on his part at that time, but I do remember another dog that had to be restrained and kept away from other dogs. It was probably during week #4 that Muttley unexpectedly lunged for a dog next to me, and Janet attributed it to some mysterious emanation from the ground because another dog fight had occurred earlier on the same spot. But I think it was more because Muttley and I were especially stressed because we had lagged behind and were struggling to keep up with the rest of the class. The following week was even more stressful, and that is when the only serious incident of dog aggression happened with Muttley. I may have mentioned another time shortly after, when we encountered some dogs on the NCRR trail, but it was mostly his usual out-of-control leash pulling, and probably not directed at the dogs. I was at that time very distraught over having decided to have him put down, and I was very sensitive to any possible dog aggression. Since that time he has been socialized with other dogs and people, and there have been no more incidents like those in the stressful classes. Tell me where the story has changed. Paul and Muttley |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
Paul E. Schoen wrote:
Tell me where the story has changed. Well, it changed a few times just in your descriptions above. "he was totally non-aggressive" then "OK, he was cat-aggressive" then "once did I notice any snarkiness, and that may have been started by the other dog, and there were no actual bites exchanged" (Fine, but does not represent NOT being aggressive towards dogs) And that was all in the same paragraph! Later: "Muttley had been barking and lunging for a while, but I had no idea that he might pose a problem" "When George walked by, ignoring Muttley completely, he went after him and nipped him in the butt. " "the first, only, and last incident of human aggression." (Again fine, but this hardly represents NOT being aggressive to people. On what planet would that be inferred from an actual bite?) That is simply in refrence to your denial. My initial comment was about him being trustworthy in the house alone. Most of the reason I was begging you to take him for training....with ANYONE...was because you were leaving him tied up almost 24/7 because you were convinced he was going to eat your cat. So yeah, the part I quoted was a gross misrepresentation of how things were. Tara |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
L A Times article on "Marley & Me"
"Tara Green" wrote in message ... Paul E. Schoen wrote: Tell me where the story has changed. Well, it changed a few times just in your descriptions above. "he was totally non-aggressive" then "OK, he was cat-aggressive" then "once did I notice any snarkiness, and that may have been started by the other dog, and there were no actual bites exchanged" (Fine, but does not represent NOT being aggressive towards dogs) This is my original post in this thread: "By the time I took him into class, he could be left alone in the house, and he was not aggressive toward people or other dogs. He did have cat aggression and he pulled on the leash when walking." And that was all in the same paragraph! Later: "Muttley had been barking and lunging for a while, but I had no idea that he might pose a problem" "When George walked by, ignoring Muttley completely, he went after him and nipped him in the butt. " "the first, only, and last incident of human aggression." (Again fine, but this hardly represents NOT being aggressive to people. On what planet would that be inferred from an actual bite?) There is a big difference between a dog who is consistently snarky and dangerous toward new people, and a dog who was fearful and subjected to a lot of noise and provocation, which I did not handle properly due to lack of experience. That is simply in refrence to your denial. My initial comment was about him being trustworthy in the house alone. Most of the reason I was begging you to take him for training....with ANYONE...was because you were leaving him tied up almost 24/7 because you were convinced he was going to eat your cat. So yeah, the part I quoted was a gross misrepresentation of how things were. You are dragging out dirt from 2-1/2 years ago. It was a bad situation for Muttley to be tethered outside as much as he was, but that was the only way I could keep him from soiling in the house or terrorizing my cat. I kept him with me in the bedroom almost every night, and it was mostly when I was gone to work that I had to keep him outside. He had not yet bonded with me and he did not recognize the house as his "den", because it was also inhabited by the cat, and he was leaving "messages" to her by soiling in various rooms of the house. And usually he seemed to prefer being kept outside. He had been a semi-feral dog and he really craved freedom, so he resisted being kept in a kennel and did not use the doghouse I got for him. But by the end of July, or perhaps mid-August, he communicated to me that he did not want to go outside, and after that time he seemed much more reliable in the house. I had also been making some progress trying to get him to accept the cat, but she was understandably concerned for her safety and would run if he got close to her. I was able to hold her in my arms while he watched from the other side of a screen door, so he was not instigating the aggression. But if she ran, then prey drive kicked in and it became a game. I don't know why you choose to nitpick and criticize so much. I have a nice dog who is well behaved and very low maintenance, with no major problems. I am going to observe a positive-oriented dog training class in a couple of weeks, and will have the trainer evaluate me and Muttley to see if she can help with some obedience issues. It would be nice if people like you would take a more positive attitude as well, and stop carping on problems that no longer exist. If you have any issues about me or Muttley in the here and now, then you are welcome to discuss them. But please stop your criticisms of the past. You are almost as bad as Jerry when you do that! Paul and Muttley |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
DJ Freddy Retro's dual-sided single "Runaway" / "Knock Three Times"is officially available on Casa Records! Featuring Jim Davis Jr. on vocals. | Susan Gabriella | Dog breeds | 0 | August 12th 08 11:03 AM |
NY Times article on "dog runners" | Melinda Shore | Dog behavior | 1 | June 21st 07 12:19 PM |