[This page printed from http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/Jan2003Hawai'iDarwin.html]
30 September 2002 
© [All Rights Reserved.] For
presentation at the "Hawai'i
International Conference on Arts and Humanities" in
Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 12-15, 2003.
© [All Rights Reserved.] For presentation at the "Hawai'i International Conference on Arts and Humanities" in Honolulu, Hawai'i, January 12-15, 2003.
ABSTRACT: REPORT ON ISSUES RELATED TO TEACHING
This presentation builds upon (and adds to) previous papers and publications that have dealt with teaching, theatrical techniques, and Charles R. Darwin (1809-1882). Serving as dramaturge for several California State University, Chico productions (and performing in others) has allowed me to combine some of my anthropological knowledge with theatrical techniques. My interest in Darwin extends over decades and since 1990 I have been "doing Darwin" in the first person for university classes as well as the general public. At CSU, Chico, a Darwin DVD is being created and videotapes have been produced for teaching purposes (available on the World Wide Web: see references at end of paper). Darwin is a fascinating individual and many have written much about him and there is a "Darwin" industry; the personality and background, however, of every commentator about Darwin plays a role in the ever-changing image of this amazing 19th century individual. I desire to humanize Darwin for my students (and the public) and, hopefully, provide a more thoughtful interpretation of Darwin to date. [Darwin, Teaching, Theater, Media] [176 words]
ANTHROPOLOGY AND THE THEATRE
THE EARLY YEARS AND THE VOYAGE OF HMS BEAGLE (1831-1836)
ERRORS IN THE IMAGE OF DARWIN
EPILOGUE I: EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
EPILOGUE II: AUGUSTE COMTE (1798-1857)
REFERENCES CITED (INCLUDING WEB REFERENCES)
"The Russians have a proverb: He lies like an eyewitness. Few eyewitnesses see it all, fewer still understand all the implications. And their reports are always personal. Yet what they see is essential. History begins with people caught in the moment-by-moment rush of events. The correspondent on the scene shares the jolt of joy or horror in watching the world change in an instant. Personal bias becomes part of the story, and often makes the account more vivid [stress added]." David Colbert [Editor], 1997, Eyewitness to America: 500 Years of America in the Words of Those Who Saw It Happen (NY: Pantheon Books), page xxvii.
I first visited Hawai'i in 1970, en route to fieldwork in the Polynesian Kingdom of Tonga (1970 and 1971) and in 1972 I received my Ph.D. in Anthropology from the University of Oregon. While the ideas of Charles R. Darwin (1809-1882) played no part in my dissertation research his works were a part of my education. I knew of course that Darwin had traveled across the Pacific while on HMS Beagle (1831-1836), but he had not been to Tonga. As with Darwin, though, I have been to Tahiti (1971 and 1981), have visited Down House (Darwin's home in Kent, England,1991 and 1999), and have sailed through the Galápagos Islands (2000). In 2001-2002 I traveled to Sydney, Tasmania, and New Zealand, going to some locations that Darwin had visited.
I bring to my interpretation of Darwin a passionate attempt to humanize Darwin and have comments on "images" of Darwin portrayed to the public (and scientific community) by certain authors: images which are in error but continue to, unfortunately, persist. This paper (accompanied by a few minutes of videotape) documents some of the selected images that are presented by individuals concerning the life, research, and publications of Charles R. Darwin. Incidentally, the idea of appearing as Darwin, in costume (and shaved head) is not a new idea: Zoology Professor Richard Eakin (1910-1999), University of California (Berkeley), portrayed a variety of individuals (including William Harvey, Gregor Mendel, Louis Pasteur, and Charles Darwin) to inspire students about science (R.M. Eakin, 1975, Great Scientists Speak Again) and in the 1970s, Leon Lessinger and Don Gillis wrote of Teaching as a Performing Art and raised (and answered!) the following questions:
"What is a performing artist? For that matter, what--really--is a teacher? Are teachers performers and performers teachers? Do they have anything in common? Can teachers be better teachers if they also become better performers? What is performance? What is teaching? What is art? What qualifications must a performer have before he [or she!] may be considered to be an artist? How does a teacher know when he has become a good teacher?" Leon M. Lessinger & Don Gillis, 1976, Teaching As A Performing Art (Dallas, Texas: Crescendo Publications, Inc.), page 9.
The book is called to you attention for some of the answers they provide to these questions:
"...the performing artist is keenly aware of the centrality of the setting, the props, the lights and the supporting cast to his success. he recognizes that his performance occurs within a set of coordinated and purposeful elements, i.e., a system. If this system is accountable, that is, if each element does what it is supposed to do to achieve results and if it is well coordinated, he can effectively engage and win the audience." Leon M. Lessinger & Don Gillis, 1976, Teaching As A Performing Art (Dallas, Texas: Crescendo Publications, Inc.), page 27.
For the 1997-1999 Academic years, I was recognized by my teaching colleagues as one of five "Master Teachers" at California State University, Chico, and in 1997 wrote the following:
"Teaching is work but teaching is fun. Someone once asked in a class, "How would you like to be remembered after your death?" My response was, "He made a positive difference." As a teaching cultural anthropologist, my role is to encourage individuals to discover cultural differences in the world and make the connections that enable them to understand and appreciate the similarities in diversity. In addition, I believe a teacher should encourage the joy of learning. While teaching can be a singular experience, I do not think teaching means that one works alone: one incorporates ideas of other people through words, readings, videos, and now, the Internet. Every multimedia item in a class may be considered a "guest-lecturer" that needs to be critically evaluated. If teaching is fun, learning should be fun, and I attempt to weave my enthusiasm and joy of teaching with the joy of learning and the joy of life. Teaching is my profession of choice." (Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1997, http://www.csuchico.edu/pub/inside/archive/97_10_23/enthusiasm.html; and see http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/MT1997Essay.html)
ANTHROPOLOGY AND THE THEATRE
My interest in Darwin has extended over decades and I have been "doing Darwin" in the first person since October 4, 1990. Several videotapes have been created for instructional purposes and these are available via the World Wide Web (please see references at the end of this paper). Darwin is interesting and many have written much about him and there is a "Darwin" industry, a term used by Michael Ruse in 1974 (and 1996). Science, however, is not a neutral endeavor and the personality and background of every participant plays a role in the ever-developing story: hence, my desire to humanize Darwin for my students (and the general public) and perhaps better understand him and the impact of his ideas to date. I teach the History of Anthropological Theory at my institution and when I discuss various individuals, I attempt to remove them from their academic pedestals and share with my students the problems and processes of research and scholarship that went into making these individual an important contributor to the discipline. Anthropologists stress the "context" of the data so I stress that one should individuals I deal with (especially Charles Darwin) within the milieu of the times.
I have served as a dramaturge for several productions at California State University, Chico and have performed in various productions (please see references at the end of this paper) and I have come to realize that both the theatre and classroom create an ephemeral sense of intimacy for performers (or instructors) and patrons (or students). The theatrical performance lasts an afternoon or an evening and usually ends in a few days; for the classroom, the sense of intimacy can last for weeks or years, but it also ends. My wish is to make both the theatrical experience and the classroom experience a wonderful one; if it is a great one, I hope people enjoy and savor it! If, on the other hand, it is a bad performance (or a bad lecture), I tell people to forget it: life is too short! But we should try and make it the best experience we can. I appreciate the words of my academic colleagues in the Theatre Department who wrote the following:
"Acting is one of the most exciting, enjoyable, and creative art forms in existence. It can also be one of the most daunting, challenging, and humbling experience anyone can face. Cultural anthropologists tell us that acting, at least in ritual form, is as old as the first humans sitting around the prehistoric campfire playing out for the gathered community the roles of demons, hunted animals, or even rain spirits." Susan Pate, Randy Wonzong, Donna Breed, 1996, A Beginning Actor's Companion, 3rd edition, page 1.
In portraying Darwin in the "first person" and looking at the individuals who write about Darwin, the observer (or the participant)we learn something about both Darwin and something about the person who writes about Darwin. Individuals writing about Darwin often choose to select points for their own purposes. In reading Darwin one should ask, which "Darwin are you reading?" This is similar to the question that Sir Gavin de Beer (once a Director of the Natural History Department of the British Museum, London) asked in 1964:
"How many, even among professional biologists and geologists, read Darwin's original works? They would be astonished to find that in addition to the demonstrations of fact and theory for which they are justly famous, they [Darwin's original works] contain an inexhaustible supply of problems for research of central importance at the present day [stress added]." Gavin De Beer, 1964, Charles Darwin: Evolution by Natural Selection (NY: Doubleday), page vi.
The various versions, or images, of Darwin continue to this date (and probably never will be resolved) and as Ghiselin wrote in 1976:
"The question of 'why there are so many Darwins' seems not to have been resolved, in spite of much new research. Historians continue to provide one set of interpretations, biologists another." Michael T. Ghiselin, 1976, Two Darwins: History Versus Criticism. Journal of the History of Biology, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Spring 1976), pages 121-132, page 121.
This paper provides one representation of Darwin and also documents some of the "selected images" that are presented by various individuals concerning the life, research, and publications of Charles R. Darwin and once again, Lessinger and Gillis are appropriate to cite:
"In the performing arts, the symphony orchestra, band, or chorus may best illustrate our ensemble concept of teacher and class, largely because (1) there is a teacher (the conductor) who trains (in rehearsals) for performance, (2) there is a literature (tightly structured) which they may use for performance, (3) there is a classroom (the rehearsal hall), and (4) there is an objective (the performance of the music)." Leon M. Lessinger & Don Gillis, 1976, Teaching As A Performing Art (Dallas, Texas: Crescendo Publications, Inc.), page 103.
I attempt to incorporate all of this into my "version" of Charles R. Darwin.
THE EARLY YEARS AND THE VOYAGE OF HMS BEAGLE (1831-1836)
"The fact is that Charles Darwin was in almost all respects a fairly standard example of the nineteenth century student, well off, active in field sports, working hard enough to avoid academic failure, but a long way from academic success." Peter Brent 1981, Charles Darwin: A Man Of Enlarged Curiosity (NY: Harper & Row), page 89.
Charles R. Darwin, born in Shrewsbury (England), was one of six children born to Susannah Wedgwood (1765-1817), wife of Robert Waring Darwin (1768-1848). Charles Darwin had three older sisters: Marianne (1798-1858), Caroline (1800-1888), Susanne (1803-1866), as well as a younger one, Emily Catherine (1810-1866) and an older brother, Erasmus (1804-1881). Darwin's brother, Erasmus Darwin (named after their paternal grandfather, the eminent physician Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802) had a tremendous amount of influence on Charles Darwin. When Charles Darwin was 8 years old his mother died at the age of fifty-two and Darwin's father, a prosperous and prominent physician in Shrewsbury, did not see fit to re-marry. In hindsight we view Charles R. Darwin as a scholar and scientist; as a child, however, Darwin's father became frustrated with him, stating on one occasion that "You care for nothing but shooting, dogs and rat-catching, and you will be a disgrace to yourself and your family" (Julian Huxley and H.B.D. Kettlewell, 1965, Charles Darwin And His World [NY: Viking Press), page 16). As a Darwin scholar has written:
"He was an Englishman who went on a five-year voyage when he was young and then retired to a house in the country, not far from London. He wrote an account of his voyage, and then he wrote a book setting down his theory of evolution, based on a process he called natural selection, a theory that provided the foundation for modern biology. He was often ill and never left England again." John P. Wiley, Jr., 1998, Expressions: The Visible Link. Smithsonian, June, pages 22-24, page 22.
Charles Darwin has often described as the unpaid naturalist on the HMS Beagle's circumnavigation of the globe over the years 1831-1836; although he may have returned as the naturalist, it was actually the Beagle's surgeon Robert McCormick (1800-1890) who held the official position as naturalist. The Captain of HMS Beagle, Robert FitzRoy (1805-1865) wanted a traveling companion (a gentleman to accompany him) and Darwin was to be the "gentleman naturalist" on board (with no navy duties to perform). Darwin, however, conducted a great deal of research and in April 1832 McCormick was "invalided out" back to England and Darwin was the naturalist for the rest of the voyage.
HMS Beagle sailed from England on the 27th of December in 1831 and returned on 2 October 1836. On the 4th of October 1836, Charles Darwin went to Shrewsbury and his family. In 1876 Darwin began an "autobiography" (eventually published) and in it he wrote of the voyage which had a tremendous impact on him (and the scientific world to date):
"The voyage of the Beagle has been by far the most important event of my life and has determined my whole career; yet it depended on so small a circumstance as my uncle offering to drive me 30 miles to Shrewsbury, which few uncles would have done, and on such as trifle as the shape of my nose. I have always felt that I owe to the voyage the first real training or education of my mind. I was led to attend closely to several branches of natural history, and thus my powers of observation were improved, though they were already fairly developed [stress added]." Charles Darwin, 1887, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882, With original omissions restored Edited with Appendix and Notes by his grand-daughter Nora Barlow, 1958 (NY: W.W. Norton 1969 edition), pages 76-77.
Charles R. Darwin was not the first to be invited to join the HMS Beagle expedition. When he eventually did meet with Captain Robert FitzRoy, Captain FitzRoy did not like the shape of Charles R. Darwin's nose! As the delightful 1982 Darwin for Beginners, by Jonathan Miller & Borin Van Loon states it:
"On the 5th of September , Darwin was interviewed by Captain FitzRoy of HMS Beagle. At this point, the whole project nearly came to grief. FitzRoy, a devotee of the fashionable Science of Physiognomy, took exception to the shape of Darwin's nose, thinking that it betrayed signs of laziness and hesitancy. For some reason, FitzRoy overcame his scruples and Darwin was signed on." Jonathan Miller & Borin Van Loon, 1982, Darwin for Beginners (NY: Pantheon Books), page 64.
Darwin himself realized that he was not the first choice, for he wrote to his father as follows: "...they must have offered to many others before me the place of Naturalist." Charles Darwin to Dr. Robert Darwin, August 31, 1831. Nora Barlow, 1967, Darwin and Henslow: The Growth of An Idea - Letters 1831-1860 edited by Nora Barlow. (Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press), pages 34-35. Nevertheless, Charles Darwin did join HMS Beagle and the rest is history!
After conducting research in South America (for several years), Darwin went to the Galápagos Islands, some 600 miles west of the South American nation of Ecuador (and currently one of the 22 provinces of Ecuador). One of the most vivid descriptions of the Galápagos Islands (located on the Equator was written by the American Author Herman Melville (1819-1891), who stopped in the Galápagos on the whaler Acushnet, shortly after the 1835 visit of the HMS Beagle. Melville wrote:
"Take five-and-twenty heaps of cinders dumped here and there in an outside city lot--imagine some of them magnified into mountains, and the vacant lot the sea; and you will have a fit idea of the general aspect of the Encantadas, or Enchanted Isles. A group of rather extinct volcanoes than of isles; looking much as the world at large might, after a penal conflagration." Nigel Calder, 1973, The Life Game: Evolution And The New Biology (NY: Dell), page 44.
Charles Darwin, however, interpreted the Galápagos Islands in a slightly different manner:
"The natural history of these islands is eminently curious, and well deserves attention. Hence, both in space and time, we seem to be brought somewhat near to that great fact--that mystery of mysteries--the first appearance of new beings on this earth [stress added]." Charles Darwin, 1845, The Voyage of the Beagle [Edited by Leonard Engel, 1962, NY: Doubleday], pages 378-379.
"It is no doubt the chief work of my life. It was from the very first highly successful. The first small edition of 1250 copies was sold on the day of publication, and a second edition of 3000 copies soon afterward. Sixteen thousand copies have now (1876) been sold in England and considering how stiff a book it is, this is a large sale. It has been translated into almost every European tongue, even into such languages as Spanish, Bohemia, Polish, and Russian. It has also, according to Miss Bird, been translated into Japanese. Even an essay in Hebrew has appeared on it, showing that the theory is contained in the Old Testament! [stress added]." Charles Darwin, 1887, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882, With original omissions restored Edited with Appendix and Notes by his grand-daughter Nora Barlow, 1958 (NY: W.W. Norton 1969 edition), pages 122-123.
"Probably no other book and certainly no other scientific book, has produced anything like the disturbance in the minds of its readers, whether they were critics or supporters. It is difficult today, when the last of the dust of conflict has settled and the last sound controversy has died away, to recall the bitterness of that historic battle between prejudice and reason." Theodore H. Savory, 1967, The Language of Science, page 13 and page 161.
Darwin returned home and in July of 1837, he began his notebooks, culminating in Origin in 1859. He started gathering facts on variations in plants and animals under domestication and existing in the wilds of nature and by 1844 he had enlarged his notes into a sketch of the conclusions he thought probable. Charles Darwin proposed to his cousin Emma Wedgwood (1808-1892) on November 11, 1838 and they were married January 30, 1839. Emma Darwin eventually gave birth to ten children and Charles Darwin conducted his scientific research. It has been estimated that Darwin published some "seven thousand pages, about three million words" in his lifetime (John Bowlby, 1990, Charles Darwin: A New Life [NY: W.W. Norton], page 5); he was strongly encouraged by his intellectual colleagues to share his research and he was to eventually publish "seventeen works in twenty one volumes, or fifteen if the three volumes of geology of the Beagle are treated as one" (R.B. Freeman, 1978, Charles Darwin: A Companion [Folkestone, Kent, England: Dawson] page 77).
The inspiration for Darwin's research, however, came in 1838 when he was reading a particular essay and a translated statement from Louis Pasteur (1882-1895) is appropriate: "In the field of observation, chance only favors those who are prepared." As Darwin later wrote in his Autobiography:
"In October, 1838, that is fifteen months after I had begun my systematic enquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus on Population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved, and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The result of this would be the formation of a new species. Here then I had at last got a theory by which to work....[stress added]." Francis Darwin, 1950, Charles Darwin's Autobiography: With His Notes And Letters Depicting The Growth of The Origin of Species [NY: Schuman], page 54.
Charles R. Darwin drew upon the ideas and information of numerous individuals. In 2001, Alan Rauch published a very interesting book entitled Useful Knowledge: The Victorians, Morality And The March of Intellect (Durham: Duke University Press) and in it he writes the following:
"Darwin's theory neatly summed up a view of the natural world that did not privilege any living thing over another. Instead, all organisms (including, by implication, humans) were subject to the physical forces of nature and, of course, to each other. Combined with new perspectives on space, time, and matter, this view removed man from centrality in the universe. The age-old idea that man was a creature revered by nature and favored by God could no longer be professed without serious misgivings. But Darwin's impact is also striking because of the manner in which he helped create this new worldview. By accumulating bits of knowledge from here and there and assembling them in the encyclopedic Origin to form his evolutionary argument, Darwin demonstrated that knowledge was itself material. 23 [Note. 23: "The material that Darwin uses in Origin is nothing if not eclectic, relying on a familiar but odd assemblage of organisms, including pigeons, dogs, elephants, and local crops. It is thus a catalog of life that resists the exotic species described in the Voyage of the Beagle [stress added]." Alan Rauch, 2001, Useful Knowledge: The Victorians, Morality And The March of Intellect (Durham: Duke University Press), pages 12 and 207-208.
Darwin is important and understanding of the "history" that goes into an understanding of Darwin is also important! As Steven Rose has written:
"While it is the case, as the population geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky [1900-1975] put it, that nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution, his claim requires extension. Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of history--the evolutionary history of the species, the developmental history of the individual living organism, and, for humans, of course, social, cultural and technological history. To this must be added the history of our own sciences, which provides the framing assumptions within which we attempt to view and interpret the world [stress added]." Steven Rose, 2000, Escaping Evolutionary Psychology. Alas, Poor Darwin: Arguments Against Evolutionary Psychology, edited by Hilary Rose and Steven Rose (NY: Harmony Books), pages 299-320, pages 307-308.
Darwin's true monumental work, for which he is most often remembered (and, unfortunately, criticized) was On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (this is the on-line version of the first edition of 1859 edition). Darwin continued to do his research and he continuously revised Origin in his lifetime; please note the changes Darwin made in the SIX editions of Origin (as calculated by Morse Peckham [Editor], 1959, The Origin Of Species By Charles Darwin: A Variorum Text):
Charles R. Darwin took great care not to write about Homo sapiens in Origin in 1859 and all he had to say about "man" in 1859 was as follows:
"In the distant future I see open fields for far more important researches. Psychology will be based on a new foundation, that of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and capacity by gradation. Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history. [Chapter XV: "Recapitulation And Conclusion"]
Indeed, for those who read the Origin at the time (and the wealth of detailed information it presented), people were amazed; as Timothy Ferris wrote in 1988:
"Indeed, the book was so detailed and modest that it struck many readers as self-evident. This was a source of strength, in that nothing so persuades a man [or any individual!] to accept a novel idea as the sense that he already knew it to be true. ("How extremely stupid of me not to have thought of that," said Thomas Huxley, previously an evolutionary skeptic, upon reading the Origin.") Timothy Ferris, 1988, Coming of Age in the Milky Way (New York; Doubleday/Anchor Books) page 243.
With proper reading and an understanding of Charles R. Darwin's Origin (and how it came to be as well as the changes he made in his lifetime), we can better interpret the past, judge the present, and understand ourselves in hoping for the future! That is why "Darwin lives" today and why it is important to contextualize the changes in Charles R. Darwin over time and realize that different individuals read and utilize "Darwininan Ideas" for their own purposes, and hence various "selected images" of Darwin exists in both the public and scientific communities.
ERRORS IN THE IMAGE OF DARWIN
"The notion that the Church was unanimous in an obscurantist rejection of Darwin in 1859 is as ignorant and incorrect as is also the belief that the scientific community was unanimous in welcoming him. The black-and-white accounts of those intellectually tempestuous times, so assiduously propagated in the media and in certain kinds of popular scientific writing, are just not true [stress added]." John Polkinghorne, 2000, Faith, Science & Understanding (New Haven: Yale University Press), page 29.
"Image Errors" of Darwin appear almost anywhere one looks and this is not the place to analyze every image (a book is planned one day), but I wish to merely point out some errors. For example, Charles Darwin is, unfortunately, associated with "Social Darwinism" (which really should be called "Social Spencerism" after Herbert Spencer). Darwin borrowed the phrase "survival of the fittest" from Spencer but the phrase did not appear in the first edition of Origin in 1859 but was only incorporated for the first time in the 5th edition of 1869 . It appears in my copy of sixth edition of 1872 as follows:
"I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection, in order to mark its relation to man's power of selection. But the expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer, of the Survival of the Fittest, is more accurate, and is sometimes equally convenient." [Chapter XV: "Recapitulation And Conclusion"]
As one has written:
"Darwinism was pressed into service as a guarantee for the most disparate political theories. Militaristic nationalists maintained that wars between nations corresponded with Darwin's 'struggle for existence' and that the victory in this struggle must go to those states or nations which were most fitted to lead mankind onward. Conservative minds saw in the upper classes an élite which had been created by centuries of selection and on these grounds maintained that a hierarchical social structures was biologically conditioned. Socialists, using Darwin as a reference, demanded equality, which would give equal opportunity to all and thus lead to 'natural' selection. More than any of the others, the Liberals exploited Darwinian authority for their own ends. Just as human beings, they said, had evolved through free biological competition, so the best type of man would evolve through free social compensation [stress added]." Herbert Tingsten, 1965 [Viktoria Och Viktorianerna], 1972 English translation, Victorian And The Victorians: The Personalities, Politics, and Scandals of An Era (USA: Delacorte Press/Seymour Lawrence), page 233.
Each of us can read anything we wish into virtually everything and just as in the 19th century, "Darwinism" meant different things to different people at different times, so it goes today. As Michael Ruse wrote in 1998:
"We have a veritable Hegelian contradiction. Darwinism is sexist. Darwinism is feminist. How can this be? The obvious answer is that, in some sense, Darwinism is simply a clotheshorse on which people will hang any ideology that they find comforting. You are a sexist? Darwinism will accommodate you. You are a feminist? Darwinism will accommodate you, too [stress added]." Michael Ruse, 1998, Is Darwin Sexist? (And If It Is, So What?). A House Built on Sand: Exposing Postmodernist Myths About Science (NY: Oxford University Press), edited by Noretta Koertge (pages 119-129), page 121.
The aforementioned Darwin Industry is alive and well and as Gillian Beer pointed out in her second edition of Darwin's Plots, published in the year 2000:
"Darwin has grown younger in recent years. He is no longer the authoritative old man with a beard substituting for God. Instead his work and life are again in contention and debate. Sociologists, microbiologists, linguists, sociobiologists, philosophers, feminists, psychologists, biographers, geneticists, novelists, poets, post-colonialists, have their say." Gillian Beer, 2000, Darwin's Plots: Evolutionary Narrative In Darwin, George Eliot and Nineteenth-Century Fiction (Second Edition) (Cambridge University Press), page xvii.
Darwin lives and all (and that is such an understatement!) all that Darwin researched and demonstrated in his lifetime (with an immense amount of data that every educated person of the times could comprehend) is that while human beings consciously practice domestic selection, nature practices natural selection. Natural selection meant that the population which is best adapted to the environment, be it bird or plant or domesticated horse or cow or pig, survives. Origin is readily available in numerous versions (paperback, hardback, and on the web), but what edition of Origin have you read? Darwin took his critics to heart and the various revisions in Origin (for example) have been documented:
"...in response to numerous criticisms Darwin undertook constant revisions between the book's first appearance in 1859 and the sixth edition of 1872. The later editions thus differ considerably from the first, and the last edition contains an additional chapter (chapter 7) dealing with objections to the theory. These changes tend to obscure the original argument and the first edition is thus by far the clearest expression of Darwin's insight [stress added]." Peter J. Bowler, 1990, Charles Darwin: The Man And His Influence (Oxford University Press), page 144.
Everyone makes mistakes, ranging from the accidental to.... Consider, if you will, Philip Appleman (noted Darwin scholar who edited the Darwin: A Norton Critical Edition three times (1970, 1979, and 2001) and and who also edited Thomas Robert Malthus: An Essay on the Principle of Population (1976), yet in the Malthus volume one reads an excerpt from Origin with the following footnote by Appleman: "The present text is from Chapter 3 of the seventh edition of The Origin of Species [stress added] (1976, page 157) yet there was no 7th edition, which Appleman surely knows! Allison Jolly has written a wonderful 1999 book entitled Lucy's Legacy: Sex And Intelligence in Human Evolution wherein it is (erroneously) stated that Darwin " kept the last paragraph of his masterpiece unchanged through all successive editions of the Origin" and then there is a quote (from the first edition) on page 16: "There is a grandeur ." This "unchanged" statement is totally incorrect because in the second Origin edition of 1860 Darwin included the term "Creator." Jolly misleads readers and Stephen J. Gould consistently omits Charles R. Darwin's reference to the "Creator" in his own writings. In a 1993 publication Gould ended his essay entitled "Shoemaker And Morning Star" as follows:
"And I remembered that Charles Darwin had drawn the very same contrast in the final lines of the Origin of Species. When asking himself, in one climactic paragraph, to define the essence of the differences between life and the inanimate cosmos, Darwin chose the directional character of evolution vs. the cyclic repeatability of our clockwork solar system [and Gould then quotes the following from Darwin]: 'There is a grandeur in this view of life.... [these "...." are placed by Gould in his quote, which continues as follows] Whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved [stress added].'" Stephen J. Gould, 1993, Shoemaker And Morning Star. Eight Little Piggies: Reflections In Natural History, pp. 206-217, pages 216-217.
Gould must have had a reason for not mentioning Darwin's reference to the "Creator," but it is not obvious to the casual reader. Why does Gould not quote from editions two (1860) through six (1872)? The Darwin statement (in the final chapter) in all editions of Origin after 1860 published in his lifetime is as follows:
"Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved [stress added]." Chapter XV: "Recapitulation And Conclusion."
Darwin also wrote of a "God of Nature" in his 1839 The Voyage of the Beagle as follows:
"Among the scenes which are deeply impressed on my mind, none exceed in sublimity the primeval forests undefaced by the hand of man; whether those of Brazil, where the powers of Life are predominant, or those of Tierra del Fuego, where Death and Decay prevail. Both are temples filled with the varied productions of the God of Nature:--no one can stand in these solitudes unmoved, and not feel that there is more in man than the mere breath of his body [stress added]." Charles R. Darwin, 1839, The Voyage of the Beagle [Leonard Engel, Editor of the 1962 edition.] (NY: Anchor), page 436.
Returning to Darwin's Origin, we can read numerous instances of a "Creator" in Darwin, such as:
"He who believes in separate and innumerable acts of creation may say, that in these cases it has pleased the Creator to cause a being of one type to take the place of one belonging to another type; but this seems to me only re-stating the fact in dignified language. [stress added]." Chapter VI: Difficulties of The Theory]
"Have we any right to assume that the Creator works by intellectual powers like those of man?" [stress added] [Chapter VI: Difficulties of The Theory]
"On the ordinary view of the independent creation of each being, we can only say that so it is; that it has pleased the Creator to construct all the animals and plants in each great class on a uniform plan; but this is not a scientific explanation [stress added]." [Chapter XIV: Mutual Affinities Of Organic Beings: Morphology: Embryology: Rudimentary Organs]
Charles R. Darwin did not reject all religious beliefs and did not deny the existence of a supreme being and was not an atheist ("a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of God or Gods") but an agnostic, a word coined in 1869 by his good friend and scientific associate, Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-1895). As a 20th century commentator on Huxley wrote: "Agnosticism, as Huxley had originally employed the term, signified simply a reservation of judgement in matters not subject to verification [stress added]" (Albert Ashforth, 1969, Thomas Henry Huxley [NY: Twayne Publishers, Inc.], page 120). The inability of Charles Darwin to "verify" a supreme being (while still writing about a Creator) did cause a problem for his wife Emma, who maintained a deep orthodox religious conviction throughout her life; they loved each other and life went on but his agnostic beliefs did "make her sad" and uneasy for his sake (G. De Beer, 1964, Charles Darwin: Evolution By Natural Selection [NY: Doubleday], page 269).
Various "images" of Darwin appear in print, depending on who you read. Egregious references to Darwin, as well as his colleague Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-1895) appear, for example, in Parker and McKinney's 1999 publication entitled Origins of Intelligence: The Evolution of Cognitive Development in Monkeys, Apes, and Humans (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press) wherein the following appears: "Ever since Darwin (1930) proclaimed that human intelligence arose through natural selection and since Huxley (1959) proclaimed the genealogical affinity between humans and great apes...." (1999, page 3). A careful reader asks: "1930" and "1959"? Going to their references provides no solution, for one reads: "Darwin, C. (1930). The Descent of man. New York: Appleton and Co." as well as "Huxley, T.H. (1959). Man's place in nature. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press." Where does one discover that these gentlemen actually published their respective works in the 19th century? How does the first-time reader have any sense of history? Alfred W. Crosby published Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900 in 1976 (Cambridge University Press) and it has a healthy dose of "Darwinian" ideas an information and although Crosby obviously has historical narrative in mind in the body of the text, going to references on simply reads the following: Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (New York: Mentor, 1958, 332" as well as "Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species and the Descent of Man (New York: Modern Library), n.d.), 429 (A.W. Crosby, 1976, Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900 (Cambridge University Press), pages 353 and 359. Once again, using these references, how would the first-time reader have any sense of history?
While some authors correctly make reference to Darwin, even prestigious journals make errors: consider, for example, a 1999 statement by Frank C. Erk who was wrong in writing that:
"In a sense, Darwin's hand was forced, in spite of his pious inference at the end of the Origin: 'There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one .' [stress added]." ("Scopes, Evolution and Religion." Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 74, No. 1, March 1999, pp 51-55, p 52).
The Darwin of 1859 was not the Darwin Erk writes about. If one does not know Darwin and one only accepts what others write about Darwin (including this writer) one can have images of Darwin built on various (and sometimes erroneous) foundations!
"Charles Darwin, whose life spanned much of the nineteenth century, is the most influential biologist to have lived. Not only did he change the course of biological science but he changed for ever how philosophers and theologians conceive of man's place in nature. An outstanding scientist who excelled first as an observer and later as a theorist and experimenter, he was also a singularly attractive character beloved by family and colleagues alike." John Bowlby, 1991, Charles Darwin : A New Life (NY: W.W. Norton), page 1.
Darwin was conducting research and writing until the last year of his life. While visiting a friend in London (December 1881) he suffered a mild heart seizure. On his 73rd birthday (1882), he wrote to a friend that "my course is nearly run" and he died on Wednesday April 19, 1882 (Julian Huxley and H.B.D. Kettlewell, 1965, Charles Darwin And His World (NY: Viking Press). When Darwin had his fatal heart attack, he made no deathbed statement as to his faith. However, had he been asked the question, "Darwin, have you made peace with God?" I think that he would have responded with the words attributed to Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) who, on his deathbed, is said to have replied to that question with "I didn't know we had quarreled" (Huston Smith, 1958, The Religions of Man [NY: Mentor], page 328). Over the years a "story" appears: "Did you know that Charles Darwin became a Christian before he died? It's true. I read about it once in a book--or was it a magazine. I forget. Anyway...." (James Moore, 1994, The Darwin Legend (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books], page 21). Moore proves the story false by citing Francis Darwin (1848-1925), son of Charles and Emma Darwin:
"Lady Hope's account of my father's views on religion is quite untrue. I have publicly accused her of falsehood, but have not seen any reply. My father's agnostic point of view is given in my 'Life and Letters of Charles Darwin,' Vol. I., pp. 304-317. You are at liberty to publish the above statement. Indeed, I shall be glad if you will do so. Yours faithfully, Francis Darwin. Brookthorpe, Gloucester. May 28, 1918."
Although Charles Darwin wished to be buried in the village of Down, Kent, where he and his wife Emma had lived for forty years (1842-1882) it was not to be; on April 24, 1882, as a result of a request by various individuals, Charles R. Darwin was buried in Westminster Abbey, close to Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727). In ending I quote from Richard M. Eakin who is making the following statement as Charles Darwin:
"If I had any advice to you it is just this: love science but do not worship it. Put science in its proper place, ranking it along with philosophy and history, music and religion, literature and art. If I had my life to live again [Darwin says], I would make it a rule to read some poetry and listen to some music at least once every week." Richard M. Eakin, 1975, Great Scientists Speak Again, page 107.
EPILOGUE I: EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
In my own research on Darwin I concentrate on the intellectual history of the times and who influenced whom: I do not get into the nuances of "evolutionary biology" since that is, indeed, a specialization in-and-of itself and the "debate" on the meaning of words dealing with "Darwin" is extensive; citing Jacques Barzun ("here is not the place to trace out the lines of thought"), let me add the following:
"Nothing said or written has, to this day, succeeded in erasing the confusion between Evolution and Natural Selection. Likewise, scientists are still convinced that Origin of Species assigns natural selection as the cause of evolution, whereas the sixth and last edition of the book  reinstates two others: Lamarck's use and disuse and environmental influences. Darwin later wrote a large book illustrating the further role of sexual selection . This cloudy state of affairs has even thickened. Here is not the place to trace out the lines of thought that lead from Darwin to the quite different Darwinism and on to the conflicting beliefs that are now held by the authorities in various centers of research and publication. Nobody questions evolution--there seems no reason to, but what is taught about its character and its mechanism is by no means consistent; yet the diversity of views is rarely confided to the student or educated reader [stress added]." Jacques Barzun, 2000, From Dawn To Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life - 1500 To The Present (NY: HarperCollins), page 571.
Consider the words of Richard Morris, from his 2001 publication entitled The Evolutionists: The Struggle for Darwin's Soul: "Evolutionary biology is a science in ferment. It is a field in which new discoveries are being made at an ever-increasing rate, a field in which controversies abound" (page 235). Elsewhere he pointed out that "Darwin's theory of evolution is universally accepted among biologists. However Darwin's 'theory' is not a single idea; some scientists have broken it down into five or more subtheories. Thus it is possible for scientists to agree on many details of the theory while arguing about others" (page 3). Morris writes that the essence of the debate is as follows:
"According to the noted British geneticist John Maynard Smith, Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould is 'a man whose ideas are so confused as to be hardly worth bothering with.' Oxford University Zoologist Richard Dawkins, author of the best-selling The Selfish Gene [1976 and second editions of 1989], charges that Gould's view of evolution is based on a fundamental misunderstanding. Tufts University philosopher Daniel Dennett goes further. According to Dennett, Gould is a 'would-be-revolutionary' who has mounted a series of attacks on conventional Darwinism over the years. Furthermore Dennett says, as the best-known writer of evolutionary topics, Gould has had an influence that is 'immense and distorting.' Gould must have some 'hidden agenda,' Dennet speculates. Perhaps it is Gould's Marxists leanings, he says, that have caused him to attack evolutionary theory [stress added]." Richard Morris, 2001, The Evolutionists: The Struggle for Darwin's Soul (NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.), page 1.
Who ever said that the history of science could be dull and that scientists are neutral and without interesting and conflicting personalities? It is quite theatrical at times! Morris continues:
"Gould, on the other hand, brands Maynard Smith, Dawkins, and Dennett as 'Darwin fundamentalists,' who place an emphasis on one component of Charles Darwin's thinking and 'push their line with an almost theological fervor.' Maynard Smith, he says, has apparently gotten caught up in an 'apocalyptic ultra-Darwinian fervor.' Dennet's writings, he adds, are characterized by 'hint, innuendo, false attribution and error.' If the Victorian era British biologist T.E. [sic.] Huxley [1825-1895] had been 'Darwin's Bulldog,' Gould concludes, then perhaps Dennett should be characterized as 'Dawkin's lapdog' [stress added]." Richard Morris, 2001, The Evolutionists: The Struggle for Darwin's Soul (NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.), pages 1-2.
What do you know about the commentators who are writing about Darwin and which "Darwin" are you reading?
EPILOGUE II: AUGUSTE COMTE (1798-1857)
Comte's published works (as well as numerous other authors) contributed to the milieu of Darwin's times and Comte definitely deserves a "special" mention. Schweber (1977) has already documented Auguste Comte's influence on Darwin:
"It is my thesis that by August 1838 Darwin had indeed apprehended the essential features of the evolutionary mechanism. During the week of August 7, 1838, Darwin read David Brewster's review of Comte's Cours de philosophie positive in the July 1838 issue of the Edinburgh Review. The review gave Darwin added confidence and impressed him with the importance of having his evolutionary theory be predictive. It gave him insight in how the dynamic stability of a system can be explained in terms of its evolutionary history. The review clarified for Darwin some methodological points, particularly the roles of prediction and hypothesis, in the formulation of a theory. It also made clearer to him the role that 'artificial selection' was to play in the 'argument.'" Silvan S. Schweber, 1977, The Origin of the Origin Revisited. Journal of the History of Biology. Vol. 10, No. 2 (Fall), pages 229-316, page 231.
While a graduate student at the University of Oregon I read Cours de philosophie positive as part of an exciting year-long seminar (1968->1969) that dealt with the "French connection" in Anthropology. We read (and disccused) works and ideas including Comte, the Marquis de Condorcet (1743-1794), Émile Durkheim (1858-1917), Marcel Mauss (1872-1950), and (of course), Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908- ). As is well known, Comte and St. Simon (1760-1825) are known as the founders of sociology. In Volume IV of Cours de philosophie positive (or System of Positive Polity), published in 1839, Comte coined the term sociologie to serve as an equivalent to "social physics" (which came from Comte and St. Simon) and his schema was as follows: Mathematics, Astronomy, Physics, Chemistry, Biology, and Sociology. Perhaps what is not well known is that Comte "expanded" on his hierarchy of science in 1852 and wrote the following:
"Elle n'était point apprécable avant que ma fondation de la sociologie eut terminé la préparation encyclopédique qu'exigeait l'avénement systématique de la véritable anthropologie, à laquelle il faut conserver son nom sacré de morals. Cette condition finale étant désormais remplie, et m'ayant déjà conduit à construire subjectivement la saine théorie cérébrale, le septieme et dernier degré de la grand hiérarchie abstraite devient aussi caractérise que tous les autres."
A translation from 1874 available in the library at the University of Oregon was as follows:
"The consequences could not be seen, until, by founding Sociology, I was able to add the last group to the Encyclopedic series of the sciences, When this was affected, it was possible to have a systematic basis for an Anthropology, or true science of Man, though this science ought ever to retain its sacred name of morals. Now that this last condition has been fulfilled, and now that it has already enabled me to construct on subjective methods a sound Cerebral Theory, the seventh and last gradation in the Grand Hierarchy of Abstract Science is a distinctively defined as any of the others [stress added]" (1874 translation of System of Positive Polity, Vol. II, pages 356-347).
Elsewhere Comte had written:
"Leaving Sociology, it only remains for me to describe the third term of the grand progressive series, which gives us the true encyclopedic inventory: I mean the study of Moral Laws, the necessary goal of all healthy speculation. The field of Morals [Note: Anthropology] is at once more special, more complex, and more noble than that of Sociology strictly so called, the exact rank of which has been determined....Morals is the most eminent of the sciences, both because of the superior dignity of its object, Man, from which we get our type of true nobleness, and because, as I am about to explain, of its theoretic plentitudes [stress added]."
Anthropology continues to be exciting (and continues to have "theoretic plentitudes"), thirty years after receiving my Ph.D. from the University of Oregon. I now try to "weave" my limited knowledge of the theatre with my appreciation of anthropology in attempting to portray Charles R. Darwin to students, the general public, and colleagues.
REFERENCES CITED (INCLUDING WEB REFERENCES):
Philip Appleman [Editor], 1976, Thomas Robert Malthus: An Essay on the Principle of Population (NY: W.W. Norton & Co.).
Philip Appleman [Editor], 2001, Darwin: A Norton Critical Edition, 3rd edition (NY: W.W. Norton & Co.).
Albert Ashforth, 1969, Thomas Henry Huxley (NY: Twayne Publishers, Inc.).
Nora Barlow, 1967, Darwin and Henslow: The Growth of An Idea - Letters 1831-1860 edited by Nora Barlow. (Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press).
Jacques Barzun, 2000, From Dawn To Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life - 1500 To The Present (NY: HarperCollins).
Peter J. Bowler, 1990, Charles Darwin: The Man And His Influence (Oxford University Press).
John Bowlby, 1991, Charles Darwin : A New Life (NY: W.W. Norton).
Peter Brent, 1981, Charles Darwin : A Man of Enlarged Curiosity (NY: Harper & Row).
Janet Browne, 1995, Charles Darwin - Voyaging: Volume I Of A Biography (NY: Alfred P. Knopf).
David Colbert [Editor], 1997, Eyewitness to America: 500 Years of America in the Words of Those Who Saw It Happen (NY: Pantheon Books).
Auguste Comte, 1839, Cours de philosophie positive (Paris: Schleicher frères, 1907-08 Edition 5. éd., identique à la première, parue au commencement de Juillet 1830).
Auguste Comte, 1874, The positive philosophy of Auguste Comte. Freely translated and condensed by Harriet Martineau. In two volumes (1893 edition) (London: Keagan Paul).
Alfred W. Crosby, 1976, Ecological Imperialism: The Biological Expansion of Europe, 900-1900 (Cambridge University Press).
Gavin De Beer, 1964, Charles Darwin: Evolution by Natural Selection (NY: Doubleday).
Nigel Calder, 1973, The Life Game: Evolution And The New Biology (NY: Dell).
Charles Darwin, 1845, The Voyage of the Beagle [Edited by Leonard Engel, 1962, NY: Doubleday].
Charles R. Darwin, 1859 (as well as): 1860 (2nd edition), 1861 (3rd), 1866 (4th), 1869 (5th), and 1872 (6th), On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life [Note: this is the on-line version of the 1859 edition]. [Note: Publishers, locations, and introductions vary.]
Charles R. Darwin, 1871, The Descent of Man And Selection in Relation to Sex (Princeton University Press edition, 1981, with Introduction by John T. Bonner and Robert M. May).
Charles Darwin, 1887, The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882, With original omissions restored Edited with Appendix and Notes by his grand-daughter Nora Barlow, 1958 (NY: W.W. Norton 1969 edition).
Francis Darwin, 1950, Charles Darwin's Autobiography: With His Notes And Letters Depicting The Growth of The Origin of Species (NY: Schuman).
Richard M. Eakin,1975, Great Scientists Speak Again (University of California Press).
Frank C. Erk 1999, Scopes, Evolution and Religion. Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 74, No. 1, March 1999, pp 51-55.
Timothy Ferris, 1988, Coming of Age in the Milky Way (New York: Doubleday/Anchor Books).
R.B. Freeman, 1978, Charles Darwin: A Companion (Folkestone, Kent, England: Dawson).
Michael T. Ghiselin, 1976, Two Darwins: History Versus Criticism. Journal of the History of Biology, Vol. 9, No. 1 (Spring 1976), pages 121-132.
Stephen J. Gould, 1993, Shoemaker And Morning Star. Eight Little Piggies: Reflections In Natural History, pp. 206-217.
Julian Huxley and H.B.D. Kettlewell, 1965, Charles Darwin And His World (NY: Viking Press).
Thomas Henry Huxley, 1863, Evidence As To Man's Place In Nature (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press edition, 1959, with introduction by Ashley Montagu).
Allison Jolly, 1999, Lucy's Legacy: Sex And Intelligence in Human Evolution (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).
Leon M. Lessinger & Don Gillis, 1976, Teaching As A Performing Art (Dallas, Texas: Crescendo Publications, Inc.).
Jonathan Miller & Borin Van Loon,1982, Darwin for Beginners (NY: Pantheon Books).
James Moore, 1994, The Darwin Legend (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books).
Richard Morris, 2001, The Evolutionists: The Struggle for Darwin's Soul (NY: W.H. Freeman & Co.).
Taylor Parker and Michael L. McKinney, 1999, Origins of Intelligence: The Evolution of Cognitive Development in Monkeys, Apes, and Humans (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press).
Susan Pate, Randy Wonzong, Donna Breed, 1996, A Beginning Actor's Companion (3rd edition) (Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.).
Robert T. Pennock [Editor], 2001, Intelligent Design Creationism And Its Critics: Philosophical, Theological, And Scientific Perspectives (Cambridge: MIT Press).
John Polkinghorne, 2000, Faith, Science & Understanding (New Haven: Yale University Press).
Alan Rauch, 2001, Useful Knowledge: The Victorians, Morality And The March of Intellect (Durham: Duke University Press).
Michael Ruse, 1974, The Darwin Industry &endash; A Critical Evaluation. History of Science, Vol. 12, Part I, No. 15, pages 43-58.
Michael Ruse, 1996, The Darwin Industry: A Guide. Victorian Studies, Vol. 39, No. 2 (Winter), pages 217-235.
Michael Ruse. 1998, Is Darwin Sexist? (And If It Is, So What?). A House Built on Sand: Exposing Postmodernist Myths About Science, edited by Noretta Koertge. (New York: Oxford University Press), pages 119-129.
Theodore H. Savory, 1967, The Language of Science.
Silvan S. Schweber, 1977, The Origin of the Origin Revisited. Journal of the History of Biology. Vol. 10, No. 2 (Fall), pages 229-316.
Huston Smith, 1958, The Religions of Man [NY: Mentor].
Herbert Tingsten, 1965 [Viktoria Och Viktorianerna], 1972 English translation, Victorian And The Victorians: The Personalities, Politics, and Scandals of An Era (USA: Delacorte Press/Seymour Lawrence).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1972 Tongan Culture: The Methodology of an Ethnographic Reconstruction. (Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1993, Charles R. Darwin: Happy 116th Anniversary. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/Darwin116.html]. For the 92nd Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association Meetings, Washington D.C., November 17-21, 1993.]
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1996a Performed as "Dr. Amos D. Keller" in Inherit The Wind at CSU, Chico, directed by Dr. Randy Wonzong (March 12-17).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1996b, Performed as a "waiter" in La Boheme at CSU, Chico, directed by Professor Gwen Curatilo (November 12-17).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1997a, The Enthusiasm Of teaching. Inside Chico (California State University, Chico), 1997, Vol 26, No. 7 (October 23), page 2. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/MT1997Essay.html; and see: http://www.csuchico.edu/pub/inside/archive/97_10_23/enthusiasm.html].
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1997b, Charles Darwin: Reflections - Part one: The Beginning. [ ~Seventeen Minutes: Darwin in England]. [http://rce.csuchico.edu/darwin/RV/darwinreflections.ram]. Produced and Edited by Ms. Donna Crowe: Instructional Media Center, CSU, Chico. Available via the Internet with REAL PLAYER [http://www.real.com/player/index.html].
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1998a, Folklore Concerning Charles R. Darwin. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/Darwin_Folklore.html] For the Meetings of the Southwestern Anthropological Society and The California Folklore Society, Sacramento, California, April 16-18, 1998.
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1998b Performed as "Russian Intruder" in See How They Run (one of the Summer Court Theatre ensemble productions), directed by Dr. Sue Pate (July 7-11).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1999a, Charles Darwin: - Part One: The Voyage. [ ~Twenty-two Minutes. Darwin sailing from England to South America.] [http://rce.csuchico.edu/darwin/RV/darwinvoyage.ram] Produced and Edited by Ms. Donna Crowe: Instructional Media Center, CSU, Chico. Available via the Internet with REAL PLAYER [http://www.real.com/player/index.html].
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1999b Performed as "Ferapont Spiridonych" in the CSU, Chico production of Anton Chekhov's The Three Sisters, directed by Dr. Sue Pate (March 10-14); please see here for Sandra L. Barton's rendition of Ferapont and how portrayed).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 1999c, Performed as "Reverend Dr. Harper" in the Fall 1999 Encore! (Chico Community Production) of Arsenic and Old Lace (November 5-14), directed by Gary Hibbs.
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2000a, Mnemonics, Quotations, And A Notebook: "Tricks" For Appreciating Cultural Diversity. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/TeachingT.html] Strategies in Teaching Anthropology, edited by Patricia C. Rice & David W.McCurdy. (NJ: Prentice-Hall), pages 132-140.
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2000b Dramaturge and performed as "Dr. Gaspard Jadin" & "Sewer Man" in the CSU, Chico Spring 2000 production of Jean Giradoux's The Madwoman of Chaillot (March 7-12), directed by Dr. Sue Pate. Please click here for the makeup design of Dr. Jadin and here for how it was eventually portrayed; and please click here for the rendition of "Sewer Man" and here for how it was eventually portrayed.
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2000c, Reprised the role of "Reverend Dr. Harper" (Arsenic and Old Lace) for the CSU, Chico Summer 2000 Court Theatre Potpourri (Fifth Annual Benefit Performance, June 11, 2000).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2000d, Teaching As Theatre: Some Classroom Ideas, Specifically Those Concerning Charles R. Darwin (1809-1882) [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/Darwin2000.html]. For the 99th Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological Association, San Francisco, California (November 15-19, 2002).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2000d, Darwin 2000-2001 [Self]Test One. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/SelfTesting/DarwinTestOne.htm].
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2001a, Charles Darwin: - Part Two: The Voyage. [ ~Twenty-two Minutes. Darwin from South America, through the Galápagos Islands, and back to England.] [http://rce.csuchico.edu/darwin/RV/darwin3.ram] Edited by Ms. Vilma Hernandez and Produced by Ms. Donna Crowe: Instructional Media Center, CSU, Chico. Available via the Internet with REAL PLAYER [http://www.real.com/player/index.html].
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2001b, Darwin 2001 Self-Test Two [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/ SelfTesting/DarwinTestTwo.htm].
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2001c http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/bethhenleyinfo.htm (Dramaturge information for the CSU, Chico Spring 2001 production of The Miss Firecracker Contest, Directed by Professor Sue Pate, April 3-8.)
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2001d http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/CourtTheaJune10.html [On Mark A. Beal.] For the CSU, Chico Summer 2001 Court Theatre Memories and More (Sixth Annual Benefit Performance, June 10, 2001).
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2001e, Darwin, Dying, and Death: Philosophical Perspectives. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/FA2001Unitarian.html] For the Unitarian Fellowship of Chico on November 4, 2001.
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2002a, Teaching As Theatre. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/StrategiesTwo.html]Strategies in Teaching Anthropology, 2nd edition, edited by Patricia C. Rice & David W.McCurdy. (NJ: Prentice-Hall), pages 147-149.
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2002b, On Darwin: Countdown to 2008 / 2009. [http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/DarwinSacFeb2002.html] For a presentation at the "Darwin Day" activities, sponsored by HAGSA [The Humanist Association of the Greater Sacramento Area], Sacramento, California, February 10, 2002.
Charles F. Urbanowicz, 2002c, Dramaturge and performed as "Abraham Kaplan" in the CSU, Chico Spring 2002 production of Elmer Rice's Street Scene (March 6-10), directed by Dr. Randy Wonzong.
John P. Wiley, Jr., 1998, Expressions: The Visible Link. Smithsonian, June, pages 22-24, page 22.
To go to the home page of the Department of Anthropology.
To go to the home page of California State University, Chico.
[This page printed from http://www.csuchico.edu/~curban/Jan2003Hawai'iDarwin.html]
Copyright © 2001; all rights reserved by Charles F. Urbanowicz
30 September 2002 by cfu