Introducing Farley Mowat's The Dog Who Wouldn't Be: A Reader's Guide

R.G. Moyles is a professor of English at the University of Alberta.

If you can convince yourself that Mowat’s lovable book requires
explication or critical commentary, then you will find that York’s
75-page essay (with chronology and bibliography) serves the purpose. I
see no need for such elucidation and will even go so far as to suggest
that she may be doing readers (especially students) a disservice by
supplying them with ready-made critical responses. Mowat’s work is,
after all, hardly a literary classic, or even a work that requires a
great deal of critical acumen to appreciate. In fact, York admits this
in her conclusion where she argues that “there must be room for a
serious study of works of literature which are, admittedly, not
great.” And it is such an awareness that causes her to “reach” for
lofty interpretations, eventually characterizing the book as a kind of
spiritual odyssey. (“The Dog Who Wouldn’t Be describes, stage by
stage, the process by which this family is revitalized in a spiritual
sense.”) There is, it seems to me, a great deal of sophistry involved
in such an argument.

If (God forbid!) you should have trouble understanding Mowat’s book,
York’s “Reader’s Guide” is certainly worth the money, It is well
written, comprehensive, logically arranged, lucid, and engaging. It is a
far cut above the Coles Notes approach (though it does contribute
slightly to the syndrome) and is intrinsically satisfying. But, please
read Mowat’s book first; form your own critical judgment, and then
approach this study with the courage to debate its arguments and
conclusions.