Upon reading the introduction of the Origin of Species my perception of this type of literature has completely changed. I was expecting dry scientific language, and was pleasantly surprised because this is such an incredibly beautiful subject that deserves to be presented as such.I find it fascinating that Charles Darwin was able to present his ideas in such a clear and beautiful manner; I have read countless textbooks that do not treat the material in this way, and it comes across as very boring and difficult to process. Treating a topic as complex and grand as Natural Selection with literary artisism, allows the ideologies to become tangible. Explaining genetics in terms of numbers, chemical equations, or large words is not as impactful as equating it to something that resonates with the spirit of humanity. Darwin balances his scientific ideas with perfectly beautiful metaphors that truly capture the essence of his ideas. This reflects the idea that nature is the driving and supporting force for not only art, but science as well and that the two can and must coexist. Darwin’s masterful use of language shines a beautiful light on science and allows someone like me (who is not scientifically inclined but still enjoys and appreciates the field immensely) to understand these concepts. The Origin of Species did not read like 1850’s scientific research, but instead it was poetic and more beautiful that I had ever imagined it could be. It is also outstanding that all of this research was done without the use of genetic testing; leaving all observing and data collecting to the eye. The fact that Darwin was able to construct such an incredible theory through observation is incredible, and proves that the natural world has much to teach us if only we open our eyes. This is something that is often overlooked in today’s society, even the observation of people can prove informational. I do, however, wonder what man might have been able to figure out on his own without technology and modern day science? Is observation enough to understand the world that we live in? One problem many people had and continue to have with Darwin is that he was uncovering things many thought to be better left unknown; while this is a completely valid point that still rings true today, it is also engrained in mans nature to be curious and question the universe.
ENG 230: Introduction to Environmental Literature
reading in a weathered world
I agree with you that Darwin’s accessible language makes reading Origins more enjoyable. I think part of the reason he went so in depth with metaphors was that he had to prove the existence of evolution without hard scientific evidence. Because the time scale was so large and he didn’t have access to modern genetics, logic and reasoning was the best way for Darwin to express his thoughts to the public. Today, we demand a higher standard for scientists. The flip side is that for things that are difficult to “prove,” such as climate change, there’s leeway for interest groups to distort findings and mislead America.
I really enjoyed reading your post, and especially liked your claim that “Explaining genetics in terms of numbers, chemical equations, or large words is not as impactful as equating it to something that resonates with the spirit of humanity.” Your idea that to really explain something we need language that resonates with our spirits resonates with some of what we were discussing at the end of class today: that literature offers us other ways of knowing that go beyond statistics, graphs, or other forms of scientific data. You ask whether observation is enough to understand the world we live in. I don’t think it’s enough, but it’s necessary. Sometimes learning to see things anew is the most important thing we can do.