In "When Elephants Weep", author Jeffrey Moussaief Masson attempts to demonstrate that humans are far from being the only animals to lead complex emotional lives. If someone wanted to make a case for animal rights, it would probably have a greater chance of success if it were based on animal intelligence, as that is much easier to prove and quantify than emotions. But there is already a body of literature on animal intelligence, and many researchers continue to pursue an understanding in that area. This is why Jeffrey Masson has written a book on animal emotions. It is a topic that is very much underrepresented in literature, probably because the idea of animal emotions is much vilified in the scientific community. The content of "When Elephants Weep" comprises, almost entirely, evidence of the existence of emotions -some primitive, some complex- in animals other than humans. Most of the evidence is anecdotal, although there are some examples of controlled studies as well. Most of the emotions that are discussed fit into these broad categories: fear, hope, love, sadness, grief, rage, compassion, shame, aesthetic appreciation, and a sense of justice. Apart from the evidence presented, the text contains a lot of criticism of the scientific community's staunch reluctance to acknowledge the existence of emotions in animals on the basis that any such idea would be anthropomorphic. But the fact is that the scientific community can no more prove the existence of emotions in humans than it can in animals. And it will not be able to do so until it possesses the technology to identify and detect the neuropathways responsible for emotions. Until then, we accept that humans have emotions based on their behavior and our own experience. The author believes it perfectly reasonable to acknowledge the emotional lives of animals for the same reasons. The quality of the writing itself in "When Elephants Weep" is not especially good, but I do recognize that it is very difficult to produce a pleasant and engaging writing style when one is simply cataloging a lot of data. And the author occasionally does seem to be imagining emotions where they could not possibly exist. But I give this book 4 stars and recommend it because it tackles an important subject that we read about all too little. And, despite its faults, readers will come away from this book having learned a lot about the lives of animals. If you need more encouragement, Dr. Jane Goodall has given the book high praise.

It's incredible how many people can believe that animals are without emotions. Every story that Moussaieff recounts in his book is further proof that humans are not authentic in their possession of emotions. The intensity of the examples portrayed envelops you and you only want to read more about the fascinating feelings that animals have. Any pet owner knows that animals can feel happiness or sadness, but Moussaieff is out to prove to the skeptics that besides those two, there are scores of other emotions that dwell in the hearts of animals. I highly recommend this book to anybody, especially if you love animals or heartwarming anecdotes. I also dare anyone to read this book and still be convinced that animals do not feel things such as contentment, grief, shame, pride, anger, or jealousy.

This book has been an eye-opener for me. It outlines the hidden assumptions, as well as the explicit scientific philosophies, behind the academic world's disrespect and irreverence for animals. Because it analyzes and weighs ideas, it is not an easy read in many sections--thus, I think, the number of reviews which gave it 1 or 2 stars. Like some readers, I thought there would be a lot more anecdotes in the book, and yet, I learned a lot more about the flaws in how we think about animals from the authors' discussions about human viewpoints. Be prepared to put on your thinking cap when you sit down with this book--although there are entertaining vignettes, that's not the main point. Also, the reader(s) who were incensed about the authors' "attack" on scientific method did not closely read the text, I believe. The authors' arguments were based on voluminous research and are in line with many dissenting scientists' viewpoints. I find that there are many folks who believe in reductionist science so strongly that it becomes almost a religion for them--and when their "religion" is "attacked", they simply ignore the evidence on the other side whilst saying the opposing views are bogus. The authors should probably take it as a positive sign that they have triggered this sort of outrage. This book is aimed at minds willing to work, rather than be spoonfed. If you want an easy read, buy "Ring of Bright Water" or something along those lines.