Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker

by A.N. Wilson

Charles Darwin: the man who discovered evolution? The man who killed off God? Or a flawed man of his age, part genius, part ruthless careerist who would not acknowledge his debts to other thinkers?

In this bold new life - the first single volume biography in twenty-five years - A. N. Wilson, the acclaimed author of The Victorians and God's Funeral, goes in search of the celebrated but contradictory figure Charles Darwin.

Darwin was described by his friend and champion, Thomas Huxley, as a 'symbol'. But what did he symbolize? In Wilson's portrait, both sympathetic and critical, Darwin was two men. On the one hand, he was a naturalist of genius, a patient and precise collector and curator who greatly expanded the possibilities of taxonomy and geology. On the other hand, Darwin, a seemingly diffident man who appeared gentle and even lazy, hid a burning ambition to be a universal genius. He longed to have a theory which explained everything.

But was Darwin's 1859 master work, On the Origin of Species, really what it seemed, a work about natural history? Or was it in fact a consolation myth for the Victorian middle classes, reassuring them that the selfishness and indifference to the poor were part of nature's grand plan?

Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker is a radical reappraisal of one of the great Victorians, a book which isn't afraid to challenge the Darwinian orthodoxy while bringing us closer to the man, his revolutionary idea and the wider Victorian age.

Genres: Biography, Science, Nonfiction, History, Evolution, Victorian, History Of Science

Hardcover

First published December 12, 2017

About the author

Andrew Norman Wilson is an English writer and newspaper columnist, known for his critical biographies, novels, works of popular history and religious views. He is an occasional columnist for the Daily Mail and former columnist for the London Evening Standard, and has been an occasional contributor to the Times Literary Supplement, New Statesman, The Spectator and The Observer.

Reviews

[PattyMacDotComma · Rating 1 out of 5]

"In 2017, geneticist Adam Rutherford posted a customer review on Amazon of A.N. Wilson’s Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker. Under the title “Deranged”, Rutherford roared: 'I am a scientist who has studied evolution for many years … [Wilson] has managed to do something impressive, which is to draw conclusions which are so comprehensively batshit as to fall into the category of ‘not even wrong’.' (Amazon made him change 'batshit' to 'bonkers'.*)"

This is why we need book reviewers who don't pull punches. I haven't read this book, but I feel the need to share this excellent article and the review to which they refer.

The article in Stuff.co.nz is about the importance of book reviews and reviewers in general, and it refers specifically to Rutherford's opinion of this book.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment...

It's an entertaining article, especially for bookish types like me. I then felt compelled to read Rutherford's actual review of this book on Amazon.uk (I didn't find it on Goodreads, but you don't have to be a member to read it on the UK Amazon site.)

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/customer-...

I am shelving this as Did Not Finish, Bio-Memoir; Non-Fiction, and Science-Med-Env (medicine environment), although maybe I need a special category for Wrong-Just-Wrong. Fake news?

I would give Rutherford's review (and the article) five stars. I'm going to give the book ONE, for the cover, just to add my small voice to those who want facts and more than a pretty cover to judge a book by.

*I have often crossed swords with Amazon over word choices, although I know enough to write 'batsh*t' - not that I've ever used that one!

His credentials are good, and I trust his opinion.

https://www.goodreads.com/author/show...

https://www.adamrutherford.com/

But wait - there's more! An Amazon review by John van Wyhe
https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/customer-...

[Alan Clark · Rating 1 out of 5]

Wilson claims that Darwin was a fraud, and this book is riddled with other errors - for details, and refutations of his claims, see here:

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/com...

You have been warned.

[P. Wilson · Rating 4 out of 5]

AN Wilson has received a lot of very bad reviews from scientists for his intellectual biography of Charles Darwin. I'm not surprised. Mr. Wilson has pulled the cossacks on the academic priesthood and they don't like it. (As Mr. Wilson points out, science proceeds by testing, or 'falsifying' conjectures. But how does this operate in the academy where careers are built on defending, not criticizing, positions?)
I know just enough about evolutionary theory and the scientific process to know that Mr. Wilson is not uninformed--his argument that Darwin's theory of natural selection was a Victorian "just so story" concocted to satisfy the psychic need of the British ruling class is right on. Karl Popper, the philosopher of science, has written that any conjecture starts as a metaphysical proposition--a myth. And the myth behind natural selection was that that those who survive and rise to the top--be it a species or a class--are there because they were the best, the 'fittest.'
Nor is Wilson, a confessing Anglican, a 'creationist' as several reviewers have tried to paint him. He is much too a subtle a thinker to fall into that category. And therein likes the problem with the reviewers--Wilson is so much more well read than most scientists that he can bring figures such as Prince Peter Kropotkin into the argument. A fascinating, witty, and challenging book. Worth the read!

[May Ling · Rating 3 out of 5]

Summary: This book has over 400 citations. He knows his stuff about Darwin. It's a great biography. He lost 2 stars, b/c he would have avoided all the mess if he'd just written a better biography and stopped at that.

This book is weird. It's a good biography trying to make a nuanced point about why Darwin is wrong and somewhere in there, it's b/c of what we know today, but that can't be right. I mean, no one is 100% right at first. so how can he be so unhappy to write a book. I mean he's great during the period of this book he stays with just Darwin’s biography and what happened. As he departs into his own thoughts, it's tough. Very tough.

He's correct factually and its all so well researched, it's just his conclusions are a bit off. I mean before the time of Darwin there was just so much going on that was crazy-sauce.

The entire prelude starting with Page 1.
If he had just left this whole preface out it would not have confused readers. He doesn't get back to why he doesn't agree on DNA, until the end of his book. As a result, he creates a sandwich of ugly around an otherwise pretty solid piece of biographical writing. It's like coating chocolate with whatever you would never eat. I mean, saying you don't agree with what Darwin said b/c and DNA proves it is like saying, you don't agree with Newton b/c Ultimately Gravity had some more meaningful equations via Einsteins work. It would piss off a bunch of scientists who look at things a little differently. I don't know who told him to do that. Unfortunate.

p. 17: He's talking about the impact of the work on Victorian sensibility. Recall this period is the lead into the Industrial Rev really taking off. And you got mad income disparity.
"Darwin offered to the emergent Victorian middle classes a consolation myth. He told them that all their getting and spending, all their neglect of their own poor huddled masses, all their greed and selfishness was in fact natural." [the last word italicized]
Is it dramatic? Yes. But is it totally off-base? I don't think so. I mean the religion of science does take off pretty aggressively with Eugenics and Huxley the like afterward.

p. 32 He talks about how Darwin was baller rich. Also, he's reinforcing the point about the rise of Capitalism over Aristocracy. I mean, I'm not quite sure, but kind of? I guess the aristocracy took care of the poor, but it seems off. It also might be the case that capitalists as with today are seen as exploitative and that might be why he's really going there.

p. 50 - He talks about what was going on in Edinborough with Jameson was very formative vs. if he'd just gone to Cambridge.

p. 58 His whole point is that Lamark was first and that (p59) in his first draft of Origin of the species he even rips of Lamark's categories. Touche. But Lamark does not have all of Darwin's data so his story isn't as good IMO.

p. 109 - "Only relatively recently, in the last decade or so, have Darwin scholars realized the importance of his geological notes. The geological journals were for a long time unread, lying with other abundant manuscript material in Cambridge University Library." This is crazy to me that people didn't think this. How do you not think this after reading the Voyage of the Beagle?!?! I mean Lydell is ALL over that book to the point that I ended up reading Lydells book! But I don't dispute that Wilson is right.

p. 141 - "The lack of evidence suggests either very great discretion or very great restraint; if the latter, it was perhaps more easily achieved in one with very low libido. Certainly in Tahiti, hwere there would undoubtedly have been opportunity to enjoy the women, we find him merely basking in the sunshine, enjoying the fruit ('I do not know anything more delicious than the milk of a young Cocoa Nut')...The splendid Queen Pomare of Tahiti came on board the Beagle - 'an awkward [sic] large woman without any beauty, gracefulness or dignity of manners.'"

The rest of this book is Darwin vs everyone else that is his contemporary. It's interesting, but it wasn't worth taking notes on as it's his interpretation of the things Darwin said about other people but didn't say in a strong enough way for us to draw any conclusion. So like Marx sent his book. Huxley and he were buddies. Malthus was someone Darwin hated, but that whole group had a unique way of thinking that led to Eugenics and the terrors of WWII to come 50 years later.

p. 275 He's talking about Origin of Species is being written in 1856 (it was published in 1859 btw, not sure why people don't just lay stuff out) and how Mendel comes in starts publishing on ideas about genetics because he's looking at seeds. But the author fails to pin date to it. According to Wikipedia, these studies are happening around 1856 through the 1860s with a final publication of findings in 1865. So I'm not sure why he thinks Mendel and the Watson and Crick (on DNA) should take more credit.

So weird this book. On the one hand full of great info. On the other hand, such a weird sandwich of a wrapping.

[Bookreporter.com Biography & Memoir · Rating 5 out of 5]

Nearly two decades before embarking on the five years of intensive research that would result in his compelling new biography, CHARLES DARWIN: VICTORIAN MYTHMAKER, A. N. (Andrew Norman) Wilson recalls visiting the iconic British naturalist’s beloved home and refuge of Down House in Kent. Something about the apparently casual 1990s visit, he muses near the end of more than 400 pages, deeply planted a little seed that sparked a big project’s “long gestation.”

By the time I’d reached that point in an intensely satisfying reading experience --- especially for a non-scientist --- I could trust Wilson’s informed and even prescient choice behind every noun, verb and descriptor, including the rather clinical-sounding “gestation.” Nothing more aptly describes the meticulous care and sensibility (another great Victorian term!) this prolific and wide-ranging British author of some four-dozen titles has poured into the first substantial single-volume Darwin biography published in more than a generation.

Unlike the vast majority of biographies about people so famous it would seem all has been said and written about them previously, Wilson departs from focusing exclusively on Charles Darwin, the individual behind ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES (1859). Instead, he draws into Darwin’s personal and professional orbits the fascinating history of the evolutionary idea itself, probing deeply into its convoluted social, religious, political and scientific context for Victorians and their descendants.

This is not only a much harder literary and scholarly feat to pull off convincingly --- it is also a far more courageous approach, one that opens with the ringing first-page proclamation, “Darwin was wrong.” As expected, those three assertive little words have drawn much fire from 21st-century Neo-Darwinists over the few weeks since the book’s launch in December 2017.

But there’s a powerful point to be made here, and Wilson makes it incomparably well throughout 17 absorbing chapters that cast an astonishingly wide net. The rest of CHARLES DARWIN: VICTORIAN MYTHMAKER painstakingly, yet often poetically, dissects some of the vast body of decades-long interactions, connections and correspondence that on numerous occasions caused even Darwin himself to feel that parts of his never-quite-gelled evolutionary theory were, in fact, wrong.

In revealing the eclectic journey of the evolutionary idea, which Darwin pointedly did not invent on his own, Wilson’s account follows multiple threads of scientific inquiry that the reclusive, unpredictable and inconsistent genius maintained with scores of other great “gentlemen scientists” of his era. More often than not, he answered colleagues’ criticisms and suggested corrections by revising his own work in light of rapidly developing Victorian scientific knowledge and new evidence. As a prime example, Wilson reminds us at several key points that no fewer than six revised editions of ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES had appeared during the 23 years before Darwin’s death in 1882 and that the changes incorporated into each succeeding one are all important to the history of evolution --- an idea that in itself just kept on evolving with every new technological advance and unprecedented fossil discovery.

Throughout CHARLES DARWIN: VICTORIAN MYTHMAKER, Wilson deftly illustrates that as Darwin’s influence spread through multiple layers of Victorian society, it drew public attention to science and scientists as never before. ON THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES (not even his most popular work at the time) attracted avid readership from nobility to the working classes. Darwin, himself no overnight success as a scientist, nevertheless came along at a time when British society was experiencing a huge collective hunger for accessible knowledge about where life comes from, how it survives and adapts, where humans --- scientifically, not supernaturally --- fit into the great scheme of things, whether nature even needed God. In attempting to come to grips with such persistent and unsettling issues, Darwin and his colleagues virtually invented the proactive popularization of science. (Where would today’s television hosts be without them?)

So rather than hailing Darwin as the stand-alone originator of an evolutionary theory that proposed to answer all the big questions of how and why sentient life populates planet Earth, Wilson situates the great and still-revered botanist-naturalist in a more meaningful and challenging role as a supremely accomplished catalyst, one whose work exposed scientific and philosophical problems that once had been the exclusive domain of elite men’s clubs and academia. Whether intentionally or not, Darwin, so human in his failings yet so extraordinary in intellect, did indeed capture, proclaim and share the great Victorian myth, not as a substitute for scientific fact but as a place from which new truths continue to emerge.

And as Darwin himself did so well, A. N. Wilson succeeds by presenting the fascinating and continuing history of evolution in symphonic prose that tangibly sings with his deep passion for the matter at hand. If you’re looking for a different, mindful and powerfully provocative reassessment of Charles Darwin, you could do no better than spend your Christmas money on CHARLES DARWIN: VICTORIAN MYTHMAKER.

Reviewed by Pauline Finch

[SvaboZiska · Rating 1 out of 5]

I chose to read this book with an open mind. I have always been a firm believer in Darwin's theory, but when Wilson stated he had evidence, which didn't support the theory, I was intrigued. Chapter after chapter I waited until he presented said evidence. Every once in a while he referenced to a scientist, but it turned out to be cherry-picking. He only shows what supports and confirms his claim. The evidence from Wilson's side is scarce.
Reading the book gives a bitter taste. Wilson paints a vivid picture about what kind of man Darwin was. With more cherry-picking, one does not get to see any good sides of Darwin. Wilson even tries to link his theory with Nazism. There are many things which made this book difficult to read. Not because it was badly written, but because of the constant attack on Darwin and his theory.

[Danielle Clode · Rating 2 out of 5]

'Millions of words have been printed by and about Charles Darwin. There are hundreds of biographies, the dozens of books he wrote (including his own autobiography), as well as various pamphlets, essays, correspondence, diaries, manuscript notes, and other ephemera. Fascinating though the man and his work is, it must be hard to come up with anything new to say about him.'
'What is new in this book is not convincing, and what is convincing is not new. There are many better biographies of Darwin to read. Save yourself from having to navigate the unnecessary spin in this one.'
Full review at :https://www.australianbookreview.com....

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

A challenging and nuanced view of the life of Charles Darwin and his role in advancing the science of evolution. You have to give kudos to an author who is willing to confront the dominant narrative and back it up with skillful analysis and writing.

[Laurel Hicks · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well done! He should have taken it a step farther, though.

[Emily Levit · Rating 1 out of 5]

This author could not have made a more fascinating life sound more dull. He just couldn't have. One of the most boring reads of my life. Finally quit about half way.

[Claret Press · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first sentence of AN Wilson's biography goes to the heart of the book. "Darwin was wrong." It's a great opening statement from a man who knows his topic cold, having already written the celebrated biography of the era, The Victorians. Darwin was wrong because he didn't also discover genetics. He merely discovered the why and the how of natural selection, which to Wilson's way of thinking, is insufficient to warrant the status that Darwin holds. In addition, the idea that some form of evolution existed - which the Victorians called transmutation - was well accepted currency. So Darwin didn't even invent that.

But Wilson dodges the big question that underlies his thesis: What is original thought? Or even, what is original?

Wilson shows with considerable learning the debate that swirled around Victorian England. It was an era with enough money to produce an educated and sophisticated rentier class, the vast majority of whom undoubtedly did precious little. However, enough did something that the era surged with new ideas, new inventions, and new discoveries. And Darwin was in the thick of it, reading and writing letters, collecting and dissecting, thinking and publishing. With the exception of some silly vicar who insisted that God created fossils to test our faith, most people accepted that the world was not built in 6 days, that species came and went, and that nature was in a state of flux. What no one could figure out was how and why species changed, went extinct, or arose in the first place.

In this mess of almost-there theories, contradictions, false facts, and huge amounts of data, Darwin struggled to make sense of it all. And he more or less did. It's like he looked at the mess sideways so he could discard the useless and wrong, pluck out the relevant, and create a coherent - if incomplete - theory of change: the how and the why of evolution.

To my way of thinking, being able to do that is a kind of genius. Perhaps I am overly generous in my appreciation. Or perhaps Wilson is overly sour.

If there is an unkind take on Darwin, Wilson takes it. Wilson insists that Darwin was ambitious (like that's a bad thing) and gave little credit to others despite the numbers who went before him, yet is incapable of explaining why Darwin created a public forum to present the theory of evolution jointly with Alfred Russel Wallace, even though Wallace came a good 15 years after Darwin presented his idea to leading naturalists and was therefore not his equal. Wilson makes much of Darwin's hypochronia before telling us two thirds of the way through the book in a few sentences that a scholar ha since proved that Darwin suffered from a genuine disease. Having spent the 1st third of the book telling us how Darwin merely copied everyone else's ideas having contributed nothing, he then dismisses in a paragraph Darwin's published paper on barncles, so brilliant it got the Scientific Paper of the Year Award (or whatever it was called). This is the kind of achievement that most academics who gnaw off their left arm for yet it barely rated a 350 words. And as for why Darwin became so celebrated? Not for his theory, no no. It's because he was in the right place at the right time with a culture who wanted an explanation for why the British were ruling the world, that is, survival of the fittest.

I found Wilson tiresome, although the book itself I found superb. That's one of those contradictions that only a genius could explain.

[Jonathan]

I think the correct phrase is "ohhhh BURN!"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outloo...

[Cam · Rating 1 out of 5]

Tendentious and filled with errors. Makes big and trivial errors both biographical and scientific.

Apparantly the authors other biographies are well-recieved?? I'd tread carefully to avoid Gell-man amnesia as I doubt this is the only time he's intellectually dishonest.

[Thespian Artichoke · Rating 4 out of 5]

A crystalline and cannily calibrated debunk of Darwinism. Genius.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Simply the best biography of Charles Darwin on the market. A breath of fresh air, after reading so many hagiographies.

[Maria · Rating 3 out of 5]

Charles Darwin, famous for articulating the theory of evolution was a man of vision and a man of his time. Victorian England was a thriving country, full of social mobility, and scientific progress.

Why I started this book: I'm always eager to learn more about famous people... especially in audiobook format.

Why I finished it: Bit like reading a tabloid article (with plenty of documentation) from nearly 200 years ago. Fascinating information about the Darwin family and Charles' illnesses. This book raises the question of what is original thought vs. public zeitgeist? How much can a scientist be blamed for how the public reacts to his research? (Weird, that Wilson didn't also explore the question of if everyone is already moving towards this theory how much blame does one scientist own for how the public reacts to his work.)

[Lisa · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't end up loving this, mostly because I think his logic is flawed and heavily dependent on giving this "maverick" pushback reading of Darwin. What's the opposite of a hagiography? This would be that, not quite a takedown but a very dispassionate look at Darwin as a self-promoter and builder on others' ideas, when it comes to "his" theory of evolution, without giving due credit. I'm going to reserve judgment on his argument until I get to the end, though I don't think it really holds water. But it was interesting in theory, anyway.

Enormously well-researched, to the point where it kind of shows overmuch sometimes—Wilson gives context for his contexts—but I did enjoy the very extensive road map of the science of the day, which is an interest of mine (and why I'm reviewing it in the first place). I did find myself rereading passages often to get all of what Wilson's packing in there. Plus the book was published in the UK first, so there are a lot of Britishisms that make navigating it even more involved.

This is also really making me want to read my copy of The Invention of Nature: Alexander von Humboldt's New World, since it sings his praises a lot.

[Pater Edmund · Rating 3 out of 5]

Reviewers have pointed out some inaccuracies of scientific details, but Wilson's book gives an amusing and plausible account of Darwin's character. It is of course a take down of an eminent Victorian, very much in the tradition of Lytton Strachey, but it seems less unfair than Strachey was to his eminent Victorians.

[Abdullah Mirza · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not as bad as the critics say.

[Angeline Walsh · Rating 3 out of 5]

What this book is not: a “debunking” of the theory of evolution.

What this book is: a biography of Charles Darwin and his writings, with all of its flaws and biases, analysed against history and modern scientific developments.

I’m convinced that most of the 1-star reviewers didn’t actually read this book—or, if they did, they are not being intellectually honest.

(And for those who gave it a low rating simply because the author is not a scientist - why? One doesn’t need to be a expert in a subject to write competently about it. It’s like saying someone can’t write a biography of Paul McCartney without having written hundreds of successful pop songs.)

It’s not an exaggeration to say that Darwin has become something of a secular god to scientific atheists and humanists. It’s also curious to me that while such people have the prerogative to criticize and question faith traditions and religious leaders, approaching Darwinism or evolutionary biology with the same skepticism is considered repugnant.

Darwin was intelligent and knowledgeable—but he was also human. His theories were undoubtedly influenced by patriarchal ideals and the pervasive classism and white superiority of the mid-Victorian age. So why should we not have the right to question how many of his ideas are rooted in scientific truth—and which ones are mere science fiction?

The worst thing about this book is that it’s just so-so. Wilson is a good writer, but his prose gets bogged down by the barrage of names, dates, and events thrown at the reader in succession. The book goes from being a thoughtful examination of Darwin’s life and the legacy of Victorian science to high school history textbook tedium.

[Graham Bear · Rating 5 out of 5]

From a historical perspective this book makes a plausible case for Darwin's own doubts. Some Scientists believe the opposite. Wilson was trained at Oxford and I find this book persuasive. However I'm more inclined towards Rupert Sheldrakes epigenetic interpretation via Lamarck . Darwin had no knowledge of Genetics or Epigenetics.

[Sherry · Rating 2 out of 5]

not much of a biography, more an argument against his theory. Guess the title "Victorian Mythmaker:" should have tipped me off. Very dry and a bit confusing with all the quotes and references. Did not enjoy this book, forced myself to finish.

[Al · Rating 1 out of 5]

https://www.newscientist.com/article/...

[Kevin · Rating 1 out of 5]

I have tried a little project of trying to read biographies of some of the most important people in history as I thought it would be good to know a bit more about them all. I picked up this one in the library and as I hadn't read a biography of Darwin (or his own autobiography) but have read On the Origin of Species. I had heard of the author as one of those historians and biographers that sometimes write for newspapers and so hoped that this might be a readable book to learn a lot more about Darwin's life.

It may well be my fault for just picking this one up without researching it beforehand, but unfortunately that is nothing like what this book is. It is very readable, the biographer has researched lots of little facts about Darwin, his family, his friends etc. and clearly knows a lot about Victorian England. What he chooses to do however, is attempt some kind of character assassination of Darwin and an attempt to rubbish his scientific achievements. I don't know if this is just an attempt to try and be shocking or a genuine view he has developed about the inadequacy of Charles Darwin's evolutionary theories and importance, but it is really odd and didn't work at all for me.

I am not a scientist, and neither is A.N. Wilson, but he argues that Darwin overstates his own importance in terms of evolution (in that some people put forward similar theories in the past and some of his contemporaries also arrived at similar conclusions), that the idea of natural selection evolving slowly over time is not backed up by the fossil evidence, and that subsequent genetic discoveries fundamentally undermine Darwin's discoveries. From what I can tell, most scientists don't agree with any of this - Darwin does credit his contemporaries (the biography does cite examples of this), there is some relevant fossil evidence (but it is just never going to be fully comprehensive) and plenty of scientists have found Darwin's ideas useful in understanding and explaining genetics. Now, you could argue this is all a bit of fun, and why not debate these scientific ideas. The problem is trying to wedge them into a biography feels like the wrong vehicle to do this - just make your own argument and have it out with some scientists if that is what you want to do. I think Wilson doesn't really have his own argument though - he just wants to pick out particular gaps and problems (many of which Darwin himself acknowledged in his lifetime) to try and say Darwin was wrong.

What is even worse though, is that Wilson doesn't stop there. He goes on to make the argument that there is a clear, intentional link between Darwin's theories and the ideas of Hitler and the Nazis. The Nazis obviously had weird ideas about genetics and the superiority of particular races, there was a kind of 'social Darwinism' putting different races above others in terms of their importance, and Darwin did share some of the outdated, colonial ideas of other Victorian English gentlemen of his time but to suggest that this amounts to him basically wanting to see the Holocaust happen seems completely ridiculous. Also, while it may well be based in fact, but the great relish with which Wilson seems to get in going into great detail about Darwin's lifelong health problems with flatulence, also feels like another unnecessary way he is just trying to put the boot in.

Overall, it is a real shame this book doesn't stick more to just explaining more about Darwin's life, time and thinking in the context of what was happening at the time, with greater balance about the strengths and criticisms of his scientific ideas. Wilson has a good eye for interesting details, the deaths of Darwin's children are quite heartbreaking, and he has an engaging writing style which would have made this a good book. Instead by undertaking an unconvincing demolition job on Charles Darwin's personality and a seemingly poorly understood scientific attack on his work as well I feel like Wilson has really let himself down.

If you want to read a good biography about Charles Darwin then I would say don't start with this one. If you want a readable but jarring attack on someone who really doesn't seem to deserve it, then maybe you would like this - but really, who does want that?

[Ian Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

CHARLES DARWIN – Victorian Mythmaker by A.N. Wilson – a Hachette book
Review by Ian Smith
As an author, Wilson is nothing if not prolific; over 40 of his works are listed with an etc. at the bottom. His knowledge is extensive yet, somewhat sadly for me, he expects everyone else to be at the same level, clearly evidenced by three consecutive untranslated sentences in French early in the piece. I’m sorry, but not all of us are multilingual.
His pretentiousness continues as he throws significant numbers of characters in quickly, to the point where I found myself somewhat lost at times; which is a shame because the train of thought entailed in this volume is well supported and exceptionally well researched. The angle that Darwin was less than generous when it came to mentioning those who had either influenced him or come before him is convincingly maintained when his family tree and those who taught him, particularly at Edinburgh, are highlighted along with their knowledge as to geology and variance of species.
Publications, such as his grandfather’s Zoonomia, are highlighted as tomes that must have formed some of Darwin’s opinions, despite his lack of acknowledgement later. Cambridge University was the next step of his formative years and here he was exposed to even more material that must surely have embedded itself into his brain, particularly bearing in mind that Darwin was an avid reader. Because Wilson has utilized and quoted many sources, the reader may find the constant switching of styles somewhat disjointing and requiring constant attention.
Darwin’s acceptance in getting aboard the Beagle was fortuitous, because he wasn’t the first choice and it was against the advice of his estranged father, his mother having died over a decade earlier. Nonetheless, it cannot be denied that he made full use of the opportunity, collecting samples at every available opportunity, following in the heady footsteps of Humboldt, a man he held in great esteem, who set the standard.
However, the observation of the variance of finches on the Galapagos Islands, so long the supposed corner stone of Darwin’s theory of evolution, is erroneous. In fact, it was Beagle Captain Fitzroy’s separate collection (correctly labelled) that was sent to the renowned John Gould who then formulated the theory. In a gross miscarriage of entitlement, the falsehood has been perpetuated.
His strength was in barnacles and he stuck to the samples he brought back for some time and studied them intensely, an act that later supported his thesis on evolution.
His relationship with the Wedgewoods, famed in the pottery industry, was deep, especially after he married his cousin Emma Wedgewood and brought nine children into the world, though sadly not all lasted till adulthood. Charles’ chronic illness, or should that be illnesses, are dealt with in detail as well as his home life.
The machinations of how he got to publish his most famous work and the doubts and uncertainty that accompanied it get a searching airing, as do the others who formulated revolutionary ideas, such as Malthus and Wallace to name but a few.
Basically, if you want to know all there is to know about Charles Darwin, then I would highly recommend this volume; just don’t expect to digest it in a sitting or two.

[Sarah Beth · Rating 3 out of 5]

I received an uncorrected proof copy of this book from HarperCollins.

Charles Darwin was born in 1809 the son of a prosperous doctor turned banker. His grandfather, Dr. Erasmus Darwin "was not merely a sought-after physician. He was also an inventor. Addicted to ever-faster travel, he invented a steering mechanism for his phaeton which, in essence, still used in motorcars" (22). But not only was he a "medical, technological, and scientific prodigy," he was also arguably the most famous poet in England (23). Charles' mother Sukey was the oldest daughter of Josiah Wedgwood, the millionaire known for the pottery that still bears his name. Thus not only did Darwin come by his lifelong pursuits naturally, but he had the means that made it possible for him to do so.

Wilson argues that Darwin had three great preoccupations; one was a passion for the natural world, another dependency on his family (he married his first cousin, Emma Wedgwood, and largely only socialized with family), and the third was to promote his own name and greatness. Wilson makes it clear that throughout his life, Darwin had a habit of downplaying or entirely omitting the contributions of colleagues and forebears in order to represent himself as "the pioneer evolutionist" (52). Wilson argues that Darwin had a "genius for self-promotion" (147).

Perhaps most surprising to me, a newcomer to the life of Darwin, was how little of his life was actually spent in the wild. He spent five years exploring the world and collecting specimens. The remainder of his life was spent largely closeted with his wife and children and working and writing on the finds from that trip. In fact, he was a sickly man throughout life and was often in bed with some illness or other. Another shock was reading that the famous finches, whose differences among the Galapagos islands figures strongly in any discussion of Darwin's theory of evolution, was not even mentioned in The Origin of Species. In fact, it was ornithologist John Gould who noted the differences in the finches. Also interesting was Darwin's denial that he had ever read his grandfather's writing that asserted that all life originated "from non-life in the ocean bed" (57), a denial that served to enhance his status as sole father of evolutionary theory. In sum, Darwin was indeed excellent at promoting the myth of his own greatness, the legacy of which is still distorted and made much grander than reality today.

In writing this biography, Wilson argues that he is writing "the biography not merely of a man, but of his idea" (6). Darwin spent years fleshing out and revising his theory on evolution. "It will always be hard to know which caused him the greater anxiety: the fear that his theory might be true - thereby dismissing the God of the Bible, perhaps any God - or the fear that it might be false - thereby diminishing him from the status of greatest scientific mind of the nineteenth century" (187).

[Lynn · Rating 3 out of 5]

I was given a copy of this book by Harper Collins exchange for an honest review.


Today's Nonfiction post is on Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker by A. N. Wilson. It is 448 pages long including notes. The cover is black with a picture of Darwin and the title next to him. The intended reader is someone who is interested in Darwin and how he helped to build his image. There is some mild foul language, no sex, and no violence in this book. There Be Spoilers Ahead.


From the back of teh book- With the publication of On the Origin of Species, Charles Darwin—hailed as the man who "discovered evolution"—was propelled into the pantheon of great scientific thinkers, alongside Galileo, Copernicus, and Newton. Eminent writer A. N. Wilson challenges this long-held assumption. Contextualizing Darwin and his ideas, he offers a groundbreaking critical look at this revered figure in modern science.In this beautifully written, deeply erudite portrait, Wilson argues that Darwin was not an original scientific thinker, but a ruthless and determined self-promoter who did not credit the many great sages whose ideas he advanced in his book. Furthermore, Wilson contends that religion and Darwinism have much more in common than it would seem, for the acceptance of Darwin's theory involves a pretty significant leap of faith.Armed with an extraordinary breadth of knowledge, Wilson explores how Darwin and his theory were very much a product of their place and time. The "Survival of the Fittest" was really the Survival of Middle Class families like the Darwins—members of a relatively new economic strata who benefited from the rising Industrial Revolution at the expense of the working classes. Following Darwin’s theory, the wretched state of the poor was an outcome of nature, not the greed and neglect of the moneyed classes. In a paradigm-shifting conclusion, Wilson suggests that it remains to be seen, as this class dies out, whether the Darwinian idea will survive, or whether it, like other Victorian fads, will become a footnote in our intellectual history.Brilliant, daring, and ambitious, Charles Darwin explores this legendary man as never before, and challenges us to reconsider our understanding of both Darwin and modern science itself.


Review- In this book Wilson wants to try and find the real Charles Darwin and discuss why it is so hard to just discover him for yourself. Wilson gets his hands on many first hand resources and he does his best to help make sense of Darwin's life and his times. Darwin was a man of his times and his scientific thinking is very much of it. But Wilson cannot help that much of what makes up this book is not very interesting. The book drags at many points as we move through Darwin's life and I was glad to be done with this book. If you are very interested in Darwin's life then you should read this book. If not then pass on it.


I give this book a Three out of Five stars.

[K. Morral · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an interesting, well written and clearly well researched book. Some people may find it controversial as it challenges deeply understood perceptions of Darwin, it certainly opened my eyes, but is done in (what I considered at least) a fair and balanced approach. Darwin is shown to be a complex individual (aren’t we all) living in a complex society.

It is a biography of the theory of evolution, and ‘The Origins of the Species’ as much as it is a biography of Charles Darwin. Discussing the topic before Charles Darwin’s time, with the writings of Charles’ grandfather Erasmus Darwin (whom I knew nothing about!), continuing through with reviews of the theories of Lyell and Lamarck (amongst others) contemporary with Darwin’s early development, publications which took place in the 20 years it took Darwin (Charles) to develop his own theory, and continuing beyond to the subsequent challenging topics of eugenics which developed almost as a result, and the current understanding of genetics.

By exploring the history of these ideas, the book does touch on some complex topics, and there would certainly be benefit from reading this a second time, or accompanied by some of the other material referenced, if a thorough understanding is required.

In order to explain Darwin’s character, his life choices and the context of his theories, we are taken on a detailed review not just of Darwin’s life, but of the people, places and ideas that surrounded him. This is a fascinating insight into Victorian upper-middle class life (which many may think gives an unfair view of life, certainly not representative of most of the population (and indeed it isn’t), but as this may have been the dominant class of that period, it is a view that needs to be represented).

My understanding of Charles Darwin has been changed, though I acknowledge that this is the only biography of him that I have read. I believe him to be an excellent naturalist, a warm and loving family man, but not a natural scientific-philosopher. He had very high expectations and dreams for himself and his theories, but not necessarily the means to achieve them. If he had simply focused on studying individual species – he studied earth worms, barnacles and pigeon breeding incredibly successfully – he would have succeeded in most of his aims. But he wanted to be able to explain everything, and seemed to want to please everyone. Two incredibly difficult things to achieve.

Reading this book as context for my own writing – a historical fiction with a naturalist as one of the main protagonists – has been incredibly helpful. Not only has my understanding of the Victorian lifestyle context been improved, but I have a greater understanding of the people in that sphere of study and influence and an understanding how Darwin’s ‘Origin’s of the Species’ was received.

[Peter Herrmann · Rating 3 out of 5]

My 3-star rating is an average: for historic interest, details, research, readability it is 5-stars (as is everything I've read so far from Wilson); for its basic premise, 1-star. True, 'Darwin was wrong', as Wilson says, but only in that his theory was incomplete. Same as Newton was wrong about gravity, because Einstein later showed Newton's calculations to be incomplete. Also, it seems that Wilson faults Darwin for Social Darwinism and it's evils (including Hitler); whereas biological Darwinism is a very different animal (pun intended). He faults Darwin for over-emphasizing the role of competition in nature, but cites a few of Darwin's own examples (in a later work of Darwin) citing cooperation. He also faults Darwin for not being the first to document biological evolution. Sure; but might as well fault Newton for not being the first to envision a heliocentric solar system, or that Galileo discovered much about gravity well before Newton. But what bothers me more is that Wilson missed a great opportunity to elaborate on the pieces that Darwin left out: punctuated equilibrium (the phenomena that operate faster than gradualism); or genetic mutation; or epigenetics. These are big pieces ... which science just hadn't uncovered during Darwin's lifetime. Wilson mentions them briefly - almost in passing - but just keeps hammering away at the failures of gradualism to explain it all - as if gradualism plays no roll whatsoever; or hammering away at Darwin's over-emphasis of Malthus. Just a few more words by Wilson (and actual examples), on the relative weighting of these factors (punctuated equilibrium, genetics, epigenetics, competition [which likely now seems to explain why Neanderthals have gone extinct] vs symbiosis) to explain biological change over time, would have helped. Clearly Wilson has done much reading in this field, and he understands the science. But I think he wanted to make an iconoclastic point .. at which - imho - he came up short.

[Angela · Rating 3 out of 5]

Started off well, but became waffly as the book grappled with some of the problematic assumptions of man as pinnacle of evolution. Stephen Gould has ably shown why this thinking is flawed, and I kept wishing Wilson would bring him into his deliberations. But he didn't, and indeed left key works by Gould out of the bibliography. This led to the notion that language acquisition makes humans more "advanced" not being adequately critiqued. Another problem with the book was the absolute mistreatment of Darwin's illness as psychosomatic, which became more and more a lazy, shorthand way of saying Darwin was flawed, again, a common problem in biographies. A third problem was that, in discussing the problem of eugenics as part of Darwin's thinking, he manages to being in the Nazis and their racial eugenics, without once mentioning that the main aspect of eugenic ideology, entrenched over decades, was contempt for disabled people and a wish to eliminate them as "weakest". In a whole discussion about problems in the idea "survival of the fittest" as Darwin was using the notion, to not discuss this was astounding. Ultimately an unsatisfactory read that left gaps in the whole discussion it purported to elucidate.