"I've seen people that don't treat their animals well and yet their animals are still just as loving to them even though they're not treated that well. It's very hard to find that kind of loyalty and love and affection in human beings"
About this Quote
Van Patten isn’t romanticizing pets so much as indicting the human ego that expects devotion on demand. The line lands because it starts from an uncomfortable observation: animals often keep loving the people who fail them. That’s not a Hallmark idea of loyalty; it’s closer to a moral stress test. If affection can survive neglect, what does that say about the caretaker, and what does it say about the love being offered?
As an actor best known for genial domesticity (the Eight Is Enough dad, the warm TV patriarch), Van Patten speaks from inside the culture of “family values,” where loyalty is praised but frequently conditional. The subtext is a sideways critique of how humans barter care: affection as reward, attention as currency, love as something you earn by behaving correctly. Pets short-circuit that system. Their attachment can look like purity, but it also exposes a darker truth: unconditional love can be exploited.
His phrasing does a sly rhetorical flip. He doesn’t say animals are better than humans; he says it’s hard to find that level of loyalty “in human beings,” implying that human love has terms and exit clauses. The context here is late-20th-century pop morality: growing awareness of animal neglect alongside a mainstream appetite for simple, readable goodness. Van Patten’s point cuts through both. If a dog’s devotion is reliable even when we’re not, that’s less a compliment to the dog than a challenge to us: the standard for “deserving” love should start with basic decency, not with being adored anyway.
As an actor best known for genial domesticity (the Eight Is Enough dad, the warm TV patriarch), Van Patten speaks from inside the culture of “family values,” where loyalty is praised but frequently conditional. The subtext is a sideways critique of how humans barter care: affection as reward, attention as currency, love as something you earn by behaving correctly. Pets short-circuit that system. Their attachment can look like purity, but it also exposes a darker truth: unconditional love can be exploited.
His phrasing does a sly rhetorical flip. He doesn’t say animals are better than humans; he says it’s hard to find that level of loyalty “in human beings,” implying that human love has terms and exit clauses. The context here is late-20th-century pop morality: growing awareness of animal neglect alongside a mainstream appetite for simple, readable goodness. Van Patten’s point cuts through both. If a dog’s devotion is reliable even when we’re not, that’s less a compliment to the dog than a challenge to us: the standard for “deserving” love should start with basic decency, not with being adored anyway.
Quote Details
| Topic | Pet Love |
|---|
More Quotes by Dick
Add to List
