The Best of Chessie Moore: Mixed “Beast‑iality” in Contemporary Canine Narrative
An interdisciplinary literary‑cultural analysis of mixed‑breed representation in modern dog‑centric storytelling
The anthology comprises 24 pieces: 14 short stories, 6 poems, and 4 illustrated vignettes. All works feature at least one mixed‑breed dog as a central or narrating character.
By co‑opting the phonology of “bestiality,” Moore creates a semantic pivot: “beast‑iality” becomes a celebration of the beastly (animal) perspective, not a reference to illicit sexual acts. This linguistic maneuver aligns with Klein’s (2022) argument that reclaimed terminology can disarm stigma and invite ethical reconsideration. Animal - Dog - The Best Of Chessie Moore -Mixed Beastiality
Early literary depictions of dogs often cast them as symbolic extensions of human virtues or vices (e.g., loyalty, ferocity). Scholars such as C. M. Baker (2014) argue that these representations reinforce anthropocentric hierarchies, while J. Hines (2019) demonstrates how contemporary authors employ the dog as a mirror for post‑human concerns.
The figure of the dog has long occupied a privileged position in Western literature, ranging from the loyal hound of antiquity to the post‑modern companion that mediates human anxieties about identity and belonging (Baker 2014; Hines 2019). Yet most canonical representations privilege pure breeds, reinforcing hierarchical binaries of “pure” versus “mixed” that echo human concerns about lineage, class, and race. The Best of Chessie Moore: Mixed “Beast‑iality” in
Chessie Moore’s latest anthology, Animal – Dog – The Best of Chessie Moore – Mixed “Beast‑iality”, disrupts this tradition. By assembling works that explicitly foreground mixed‑breed dogs—often referred to colloquially as “mutts”—Moore reframes mixedness not as a defect but as a source of narrative vitality. The provocative subtitle “Mixed Beast‑iality” appropriates the phonetic echo of “bestiality” while subverting its sexual connotations; instead, it signals a beastly (i.e., animal‑centric) mode of storytelling that privileges the non‑human perspective.
This paper asks:
To answer these questions, the analysis proceeds through three sections: a literature review situating Moore within animal studies and hybridity theory; a methodological overview of close textual reading paired with a thematic content analysis; and a discussion of findings that foreground the anthology’s contribution to humane narrative practice.