Does anyone still read this stuff?
Animal studies is alive and well. In fact it's generating so much new work and debate that it's cursed with the reputation of being a faddish thing to do. But we won't let that get us down. After all, some fads stick and become part of the conversation. And animal studies isn't Rick Astley; it's Madonna. It's not Orbitz; it's Redbull.
While generating a lot of buzz and new ways of reading texts, a test for the field will be whether major claims for its relevance win over enough converts to make its arguments and debates stick. Will the ideas of Animal studies seep in deep enough for us to really start analyzing the characters of—whoa—animals?
After all, so-called faddish theories like Feminist Literary Criticism made political and thematic claims, but they also changed how we read literature at large. We're not just tooting the ol' Lit horn here (well, sure, we're doing that as well): when people start analyzing books a certain way, you know that that theory has entered the consciousness. Think of the Bechdel test, an example of Feminist Lit Crit that has hit the mainstream. When an example of Feminist theory shows up in an article about Oscar nominees, you know that it's there to stay.
Animal studies is still just an adorable baby kitten/puppy/duckling/joey. It's too early to tell. Will Animal Studies find ways to make its readings transcend those texts that are explicitly about animals? Will it enter the public consciousness? Our money's on yes.