Tough Love: Sentiment, Science, and Dogs
An Anchorhold Films Production


It’s a commonly accepted idea that dogs are “man’s best friend.” We give them a special place in our lives and they are, in turn, loyal companions. At the same time, many modern dog owners also believe that they are supposed to establish themselves as the “alpha dog” in relation to their pets. This is a status supposedly achieved through attitudes and acts of domination, varying by emphasis on physical restraint and disciplinary “correction,” well-timed verbal praise and controlled food rewards, or a combination of all those techniques.

Yet the notion that cherished “best friends” are meant to strictly obey our will is something of a paradox. How can we reconcile feelings of respect and even love with expectations of submission and compliance? Is there a valid and compelling justification for establishing (or trying to establish) dominance over our dogs? Does our claim to that power follow from fixed biological facts? Is it warranted by the nature of dogs and what we are to them through a shared evolutionary history? Is our dominance a “tough love,” perhaps what they actually want and need?

Since its advent in the 1940s, wildlife biologists have revised the original theory of the “alpha wolf” and related ideas about wolf pack structure, including the essential claim that pack hierarchy rests on frequent aggressive displays. Likewise, they have questioned and even dismissed the idea that dogs are merely domesticated wolves, so that to understand the one is to understand the other. This scientific shake-up seems to leave us on somewhat tenuous grounds for dealing with our dogs as if we were their alpha, gaining their obedience through domination. Still, millions of people continue using the “alpha dog” concept to train and order their relationships with their pets.

Tough Love confronts the current disconnect between science and popular practice by putting “alpha dog” in historical perspective. It begins with a look at late nineteenth and early twentieth century approaches to teaching dog obedience, including a debate between advocates of what was then termed “breaking” and “training.” It ends with an assessment of contemporary dog training and rehabilitation, focusing particularly on disagreement between advocates of physical correction and proponents of exclusive reliance on food rewards and other positive reinforcement. Connecting those two points in time, the documentary traces the origins, development, and application of the “alpha dog” concept itself.

Having done all that, Tough Love means to leave viewers with a better sense of what dogs are or should be to us. It puts a spotlight on notions that dog owners often take for granted and presents an opportunity for refining those beliefs. It does not suggest that we discard everything that’s old for something entirely new, but rather that we understand the various historical, scientific, and social dimensions of certain ideas and make a more conscious choice about how we adopt them. Probing into assumptions that frame our engagement with canines also compels us to wrestle with larger, existential questions about biological determinism, free will, social hierarchy, and the exercise of power.

While the documentary relies on interviews with scientists, historians, and philosophers, Tough Love incorporates the observations and opinions of professional dog trainers, humane society staff, and numerous ordinary dog owners too. Additionally, it relies on a mix of archival still images and video, cover shot and b-roll footage of dogs at work, at play, and at rest, as well as “found” and excerpted film and video. Because many of these elements are visually rich, and to meet current expectations for picture quality, the film is shot in a 16:9 aspect ratio (wide screen) at high definition (HD) resolution (1080/24p).

Promotion of the film will be done by several different means, including targeted mailings of marketing materials (e.g., demo copies, postcards, and posters), a multi-feature website, organized screenings for select audiences, film festival submissions, as well as pitches to relevant television programs and pay-on-demand stations. This plan will generate a large and varied national audience, produce strong sales and rentals, and position the documentary to make a measurable contribution to an important, ongoing public debate.

Director: Chad Montrie

Address: History Department, University of Massachusetts Lowell,
850 Broadway Street, Lowell, Mass., 01854

Email: Phone: 978-934-2653

2