Who takes responsibility for horses like Murphy?

It was during the cold wet and dreary” Volcanic” summer of 1816, a summer brought on by the cataclysmic eruption of mount Tambora, that clouded the sun and plunged the world into a mini ice age, that a young 19 year old girl called Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin (later Mary Shelly), wrote the dark, haunting “Frankenstein the Modern Prometheus” Now simply known as “Frankenstein”.

There has been much speculation about the themes that obsessed her, and motivated her writing: she had suffered a miscarriage a short time before the tale was written, her mother died in childbirth, and there were her own uncertainties in her relationship with Percy Shelly, father if her child but still not yet her husband. But in essence the story is one of unrequited love, lack of understanding, and an exploration of our responsibilities when we create a life.

All the creature in Mary’s tale actually wants, and needs is to be, is accepted and loved. His rejection by his “creator” Victor, that sets the creature on a path of violence begs the question that if we create an “innocent” monster then spurn it, does that not make us worse than our creation?

It is a sad fact that so often animals bred for our pleasure and recreation, are rejected, abused and through no fault of theirs, turned into monsters. The Pit Bull Terrier for example was bred by us for a specific purpose, to kill; yet we seem surprised when it performs its intended job, by its own standards perfectly. Unfortunately unable to reason that it has killed a child, and will itself then be killed for its nature. Pit Bull terriers are perfectly safe when kept away from things that trigger their fighting aggression, yet tragedies still happen.

In Murphy we have what is perceived as a dangerous horse: his behaviour around strangers was created by the abuse and lack of care of others, and has lead many times to the comment “if I were you I’d have that thing shot”. Not you will notice: “the people who made this horse like this should be shot”. Here would be, after all, some sort of admission that as horse riders, owners, and equestrians in general, we all bear some sort of responsibility for the misfits created when the system goes wrong.

Some, even today, would rather believe in a horse actually being “evil” (as if real evil was not simply a human trait) and probably, had this been the middle Ages, would have called the animal possessed, and had it stoned or burnt. It is natural in Human beings to fear or revile what we do not understand, but is the attitude to rogue horses, or any other domesticated animal that in some way defies us, simply petulance? “I am your master, how dare you treat me so!” I firmly believe that there is never malice in the mind of any domestic animal that attacks a human, I simply wonder at our stupidity in expecting them not to attack!

We need to look at our domestic animals wild relatives to get the answers to any behavioural problems. Murphy was castrated fairly late in life, and almost certainly after he had covered a mare. Many of his instincts are therefore similar those of a wild stallion: his fiercely protective nature around his own territory, his macho posturing and aggression. This behaviour whilst ideally suited the stallion’s role as protector of the herd and champion of his own genes, is regarded as unacceptable in a domestic animal. He was beaten (he has the scars) and exhibits fear aggression when cornered by strangers. He was starved, and now sees it as necessary for his survival to defend his food. All these things are clearly visible, but people see the monster rather than the victim.

So we were delivered, albeit unwittingly and by the services of a rogue horse trader, one of the “ones that went wrong”. Are we supposed to kill this horse, an animal that is perfectly happy mixing with its own kind, and indeed fine with humans it knows, trusts, and in turn know how to handle it? To “put down” a horse that is a fine ride, and a source of tremendous pleasure to us, seems far more monstrous a solution.

It is as we have proved, perfectly possible to love a monster: especially one with such endearing habits and optimistic outlook as Murphy. He is completely unaware of the way in which his actions, although perfectly natural to him, put his future in the balance. After all he is only a horse, and all he really needs is to be warm, well fed, and to feel safe. All we really need is to be left in peace to mend in Murphy what others have broken, but I fear for the future, and see our life with the “Big Boy” as being one move of stable yard after another. Hounded out by prejudice, and condemned out of hand for our refusal to disown our own “Frankenstein‘s monster”.