What do you think?
Rate this book
The Well-Dressed Ape: A Natural History of Myself
Book by Holmes, Hannah
368 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2008
27 people are currently reading
393 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews
January 20, 2012
This woman’s humour is a bit wet – you know, lots of puns and cutesy expressions. Her humour even extends to talking about hunting cookies (I think that is an Americanism for biscuit, if you were wondering). So, lots of this is knee slapping stuff.
Look, I could forgive even a crap sense of humour if that was all I had to put up with. I can forgive cute. I can forgive punny. What I struggle to forgive is yet another educated woman telling me about the clear differences between men and women’s brains, another woman making jokes about her inadequacies in being born without a penis. She needs to urgently read Delusions of Gender.
Some of the things said here are just silly – women hear differently to men because they have smaller heads and so sound takes less time to … oh wait a second, how fast does sound travel again? And how much bigger are men’s heads to women’s? I guess women see differently too, because light has less distance to travel…
And there is lots of bio-bunk and evolutionary just-so stories to explain differences between the sexes that she admits might not even exist. One of my favourites being that men are sexually aroused by the smell of cinnamon, apparently – or rather, they might be, except that the experiment that confirmed this hadn’t really been very well conducted the author informs us – which might beg the question why we are being treated to this crap and nonsense. Actually, that was exactly the question it did beg when I stopped listening to this one about a quarter of the way through. Although, if she had said men become sexually aroused over almond croissant I might have let this one slip.
The worst moment was one that reminded me of my undergrad philosophy classes where morons would argue that there is no way to know if the colour I see as red is not the colour you see as blue. She says there is no way to answer this question – and she says this immediately after an extended discussion on the differences in eyesight between dogs and owls and humans – humans having a much better sense of colour, depth of field and eyesight generally than dogs, for example, finding it easier to see a tennis ball in grass. But then, I guess she might explain this apparent contradiction as being her using her more intuitive female brain while I have to make do with my stodgy masculine logical one. Oh well, one must make do with the equipment one has been gifted.
This is actually a great idea for a book – perhaps if someone could write it without all of the ‘received wisdom’ about the ‘proven’ differences between the sexes (that are neither proven nor differences) it might even make a book worth reading. Not something I can really say about this one, though.
Look, I could forgive even a crap sense of humour if that was all I had to put up with. I can forgive cute. I can forgive punny. What I struggle to forgive is yet another educated woman telling me about the clear differences between men and women’s brains, another woman making jokes about her inadequacies in being born without a penis. She needs to urgently read Delusions of Gender.
Some of the things said here are just silly – women hear differently to men because they have smaller heads and so sound takes less time to … oh wait a second, how fast does sound travel again? And how much bigger are men’s heads to women’s? I guess women see differently too, because light has less distance to travel…
And there is lots of bio-bunk and evolutionary just-so stories to explain differences between the sexes that she admits might not even exist. One of my favourites being that men are sexually aroused by the smell of cinnamon, apparently – or rather, they might be, except that the experiment that confirmed this hadn’t really been very well conducted the author informs us – which might beg the question why we are being treated to this crap and nonsense. Actually, that was exactly the question it did beg when I stopped listening to this one about a quarter of the way through. Although, if she had said men become sexually aroused over almond croissant I might have let this one slip.
The worst moment was one that reminded me of my undergrad philosophy classes where morons would argue that there is no way to know if the colour I see as red is not the colour you see as blue. She says there is no way to answer this question – and she says this immediately after an extended discussion on the differences in eyesight between dogs and owls and humans – humans having a much better sense of colour, depth of field and eyesight generally than dogs, for example, finding it easier to see a tennis ball in grass. But then, I guess she might explain this apparent contradiction as being her using her more intuitive female brain while I have to make do with my stodgy masculine logical one. Oh well, one must make do with the equipment one has been gifted.
This is actually a great idea for a book – perhaps if someone could write it without all of the ‘received wisdom’ about the ‘proven’ differences between the sexes (that are neither proven nor differences) it might even make a book worth reading. Not something I can really say about this one, though.
March 7, 2009
I confess that I have only read the first 50 pages plus a few other sections of this book. It is chatty and interesting and fun to read in some ways, but tiresome in others.
The author begins by saying she is going to write about humans in the way that scientists write about other living creatures - that is, analytically - but at the same time, she is going to use herself as the sample human. The result is an odd and sometimes annoying mixture of distanced science-speak and chummy "It's all about me" banter.
I enjoyed the insights into my own species, and I enjoyed the voice of the author when she was talking about herself, but I felt jarred by the coy lurches into and out of memoir mode.
Hmm.
I'm going to set this book aside for a while and maybe come back to it later.
The author begins by saying she is going to write about humans in the way that scientists write about other living creatures - that is, analytically - but at the same time, she is going to use herself as the sample human. The result is an odd and sometimes annoying mixture of distanced science-speak and chummy "It's all about me" banter.
I enjoyed the insights into my own species, and I enjoyed the voice of the author when she was talking about herself, but I felt jarred by the coy lurches into and out of memoir mode.
Hmm.
I'm going to set this book aside for a while and maybe come back to it later.
August 7, 2009
Really enjoyed this book, she explains alot about why we r the way we r.
HH i so whitty , i love her compairsons & explainations. The book reminds me that we are animals, civilized animals and that is where our instincts come from. our main objective is to reproduce. and it all comes down to that, bigger house attracts more women, more money....altthough sex doesnt equal reproductions always in these days its still in our nature.
our eating habits are based on those of our ancestors and back when they needed and craved high fat foods b/c they were not as easy to come by-no 7_11's back then! really interesting to see why i feel the way i do sometimes, why we are attracted to each other why we are possesive and territorial, at times a little hard to read w/ all the facts but she mainly threw in funny explanations and poked fun at humans in general and herself.
i found the chapter about how mens and womens brains develop and process things differently really interesting. explains why we communicate so badly with one another. also very interested is lefty's and how they use different parts of the brain also
I highlighted like 1/2 of the book but here are some of my fav's.
"Men's nipples are about as useless as an eye on the bottom of a foot."
"Most members of the warm-blooded crowd need between 4 and 8 percent body fat on hand to support normal activity and reproduction. I am probably carrying 30 percent, because....i need to have a cookie and think about that."
"one reason i have so much body fat is that i'm female. a fit human male is about 15 percent fat, while a female, on whom offspring depend for nourishment, is 23 percent. I carry even more than that because...because cookies are too damned easy to capture"
"why fat and sugar? why don't i crave salad? my body is lagging behind the times. for the first few million years of hominid existence, salad was everywhere. you had to kick it out of the way just to get around. by contrast, energy-rich foods were either too seasonal or too fleet-footed for convenience. "
"humans, although naturally social animals, are nonetheless suspicious of strangers. Unless we're given a reason not to, most animals tend to view on e another first as competition, and only later as potential friends and mates."
"bonobos rarely encounter a conflict they can't resolve by copulating"
"based on shreds of date, my fevered brain concocted a detailed delusion of who this males was and how we would run into each others arms across the Town Landing parking lot, and build a white castle on a hilltop and make a living raising unicorns...."
"the hormone fluctuation , the dopamine, the serotonin- last only a year or two. Then you're suddenly looking across the breakfast table at a deeply flawed and aggravating...well, a human. and that's why we have oxytocin, which can be renewed daily. As i sit muttering about unanswered questions and unwashed dishes, my mate lays his warm forepaws on my shoulders and kissed my cheek. the oxytocin, always ready to serve, glows in my brain, and we stay bonded for another day."
"the human animal is turning into an animal that chooses wheather or not to fulfill its biological mandate."
"humans choosing not to breed is growing. if this cultural fashion were to catch on worldwide, wouldn't that be an innovative way for an animal to go extinct not for lack of habitat or food, but for lack of interest"
"Pap Loon, who took the day shift, sitting on two eggs beside a Maine Lake. Sitting. and sitting. And turning his head. and sitting. for twelve hours. If that were my job i'd kick the eggs into the water and drown myself within the first half hours.But the loon brain must have evolved to withstand a burden of tedium that would shatter a human skull. for all we can tell, incubating may be a loon's favorite activity, permitting all manner of mental gymnastics."
"humans are hardwired to fear foreigners...we fear the unfamiliar especially if she's scowling"
""naked mole rats bite first and ask questions later"
"we cling to beliefs that should be destroyed by facts. we leap before we look. we think ourselves into bad decisions"
"all human brains are vulnerable to addiction because our brains produce such terribly pleasing chemicals when we repeat certain behaviors: sex, eating, various drugs"
"Humans crave drugs" to deliver us from the tyranny of our frightfully busy brains?"
"All communication is a sign of failure. If everybody is leased with the situation, then there is no need for communications"
"Vocal communication became a smashing success in the animal kingdom because it cut down on biting"
"females broadcast more info about themselves and other humans than do males. Male communication more often concerns objects"
"Humans lie all day long. we do it so often it doesnt even require much effort: "i'm fine, thank." " i don't mind waiting." "what a cute baby." " Iraq has weapons of mass destruction."...in a human, the lies flow like water."
" females more often lie in the interest of maintaining social harmony and soothing others; males are more likely to dissemble in a way that brightens their own image."
HH i so whitty , i love her compairsons & explainations. The book reminds me that we are animals, civilized animals and that is where our instincts come from. our main objective is to reproduce. and it all comes down to that, bigger house attracts more women, more money....altthough sex doesnt equal reproductions always in these days its still in our nature.
our eating habits are based on those of our ancestors and back when they needed and craved high fat foods b/c they were not as easy to come by-no 7_11's back then! really interesting to see why i feel the way i do sometimes, why we are attracted to each other why we are possesive and territorial, at times a little hard to read w/ all the facts but she mainly threw in funny explanations and poked fun at humans in general and herself.
i found the chapter about how mens and womens brains develop and process things differently really interesting. explains why we communicate so badly with one another. also very interested is lefty's and how they use different parts of the brain also
I highlighted like 1/2 of the book but here are some of my fav's.
"Men's nipples are about as useless as an eye on the bottom of a foot."
"Most members of the warm-blooded crowd need between 4 and 8 percent body fat on hand to support normal activity and reproduction. I am probably carrying 30 percent, because....i need to have a cookie and think about that."
"one reason i have so much body fat is that i'm female. a fit human male is about 15 percent fat, while a female, on whom offspring depend for nourishment, is 23 percent. I carry even more than that because...because cookies are too damned easy to capture"
"why fat and sugar? why don't i crave salad? my body is lagging behind the times. for the first few million years of hominid existence, salad was everywhere. you had to kick it out of the way just to get around. by contrast, energy-rich foods were either too seasonal or too fleet-footed for convenience. "
"humans, although naturally social animals, are nonetheless suspicious of strangers. Unless we're given a reason not to, most animals tend to view on e another first as competition, and only later as potential friends and mates."
"bonobos rarely encounter a conflict they can't resolve by copulating"
"based on shreds of date, my fevered brain concocted a detailed delusion of who this males was and how we would run into each others arms across the Town Landing parking lot, and build a white castle on a hilltop and make a living raising unicorns...."
"the hormone fluctuation , the dopamine, the serotonin- last only a year or two. Then you're suddenly looking across the breakfast table at a deeply flawed and aggravating...well, a human. and that's why we have oxytocin, which can be renewed daily. As i sit muttering about unanswered questions and unwashed dishes, my mate lays his warm forepaws on my shoulders and kissed my cheek. the oxytocin, always ready to serve, glows in my brain, and we stay bonded for another day."
"the human animal is turning into an animal that chooses wheather or not to fulfill its biological mandate."
"humans choosing not to breed is growing. if this cultural fashion were to catch on worldwide, wouldn't that be an innovative way for an animal to go extinct not for lack of habitat or food, but for lack of interest"
"Pap Loon, who took the day shift, sitting on two eggs beside a Maine Lake. Sitting. and sitting. And turning his head. and sitting. for twelve hours. If that were my job i'd kick the eggs into the water and drown myself within the first half hours.But the loon brain must have evolved to withstand a burden of tedium that would shatter a human skull. for all we can tell, incubating may be a loon's favorite activity, permitting all manner of mental gymnastics."
"humans are hardwired to fear foreigners...we fear the unfamiliar especially if she's scowling"
""naked mole rats bite first and ask questions later"
"we cling to beliefs that should be destroyed by facts. we leap before we look. we think ourselves into bad decisions"
"all human brains are vulnerable to addiction because our brains produce such terribly pleasing chemicals when we repeat certain behaviors: sex, eating, various drugs"
"Humans crave drugs" to deliver us from the tyranny of our frightfully busy brains?"
"All communication is a sign of failure. If everybody is leased with the situation, then there is no need for communications"
"Vocal communication became a smashing success in the animal kingdom because it cut down on biting"
"females broadcast more info about themselves and other humans than do males. Male communication more often concerns objects"
"Humans lie all day long. we do it so often it doesnt even require much effort: "i'm fine, thank." " i don't mind waiting." "what a cute baby." " Iraq has weapons of mass destruction."...in a human, the lies flow like water."
" females more often lie in the interest of maintaining social harmony and soothing others; males are more likely to dissemble in a way that brightens their own image."
January 5, 2016
The Secret Life of Dust, by Holmes, is one of my all-time favorite books. So, I was excited to read Holmes' new book. She was just as thorough as I imagined she would be. Never taking on a subject halfheartedly, she wrote from a broad lens. She didn't shy away from race and gender, like many scientists. Her discussion on gender was great at many points throughout the book and disappointing at other times. I would have liked to see her discuss the cultural effects more often. Sometimes she wrote as if the gender differences we see in our part of the world were a given. While she did try to look at gender around the world, in some parts of the book, at other times, she used studies only from the USA that, when conducted in other countries, show that gender differences go away in countries with more gender equality. I think she bought into gender differences a bit too much. That said, the rest of the book was absolutely fantastic!
She provided so many animal studies, I was entertained for hours. I love to know what animals do. When she brought up studies I was already familiar with, I was not one bit bored. I love her writing. He insight is often spot on and she does a great job of researching her subject. There is very little left out of this biopic of humans that reaches far back into prehistory and spans all of the exciting time from then until now.
She provided so many animal studies, I was entertained for hours. I love to know what animals do. When she brought up studies I was already familiar with, I was not one bit bored. I love her writing. He insight is often spot on and she does a great job of researching her subject. There is very little left out of this biopic of humans that reaches far back into prehistory and spans all of the exciting time from then until now.
March 3, 2009
A really fun read. I enjoyed the clinical take on humans, and although I've read several books on evolutionary biology, this one focused mainly on humans and included some new facts that I hadn't known before. (For example, did you know that in hunter gatherer tribes, women often get last pick of meat that the male hunters bring back -- sometimes after children and dogs? Perhaps this explains -- or is justified by -- the observation that women often seem to crave meat less than men? Maybe they need less, or are better able to satisfy their protein needs from other sources?) Anyway, a really interesting book. It got a little preachy in the last chapter, which was about environmental change caused by humans, but ultimately the takeaway was that humans changing their environment is something that has gone on for centuries, if not millenia, and although it's probably not a good thing, we are also smart enough to recognize the consequences and work towards reversing them. So it had a hopeful message in the end.
June 24, 2016
Hannah Holmes can make even dust interesting, and likewise, The Well Dressed Ape is probably the most interesting book you will ever read about the human animal. Holmes examines homo sapiens the way one would examine any other creature in the animal kingdom. Her approach and delivery make learning fun. The author's. tone is always familiar, full of wry humor and fascinating observations and comparisons. you will be amazed how much you will learn.
May 14, 2009
This is a great book for anyone even mildly interested in understanding human behavior or evolution. I recommended it to 2 non-science friends and they have definately enjoyed it in both book form and audio. There are many real applications and scenarios in this book which would help anyone understand even the more complex ideas. The only drawback was that there is so much info and it is so interesting, it took longer than normal for me to read it.
September 24, 2009
Neat book! It reads a little bit like Malcolm Gladwell's books. Tons of interesting factoids about human evolutionary biology and behavior, but it is very accessible, written for the general public. I listened to it on audio (always risky when reading non-fiction) and found it entertaining. Holmes' writing style is engaging; I even laughed out loud in quite a few spots. Anyway, I recommend it.
August 9, 2009
Being a lover of all things natural and environmental, this book appealed to me. It categorized humans in much the same way one would categorize species, but it did so in a very clever and accessible way. There were also a lot of strange and interesting facts about humans that I never knew, and what's more fun than learning about ourselves?
September 9, 2017
I loved this book. Hannah Holmes is such a good writer, information and humor.
I may keep this book to reread later.
"Every species is biologically programmed to escape predators and parasites, to gather food, to shelter from the weather, and to reproduce. Although each animal has evolved to meet theses challenges in a different way, we are equals in the struggle."
I may keep this book to reread later.
"Every species is biologically programmed to escape predators and parasites, to gather food, to shelter from the weather, and to reproduce. Although each animal has evolved to meet theses challenges in a different way, we are equals in the struggle."
September 20, 2021
Fun science and research based book they explored what it means to be a human being by presenting herself as a studied animal: looking at all aspects physiological and environmental.
It’s full of facts and puns! My kind of books!
It’s full of facts and puns! My kind of books!
May 15, 2017
It's an interesting premise and well written but it's a bit long.
October 9, 2018
I enjoyed reading about how we fit into the web of life with other animals. The book gave many examples of interesting traits that we share with others.
November 10, 2018
delightful meander around the natural world, and it's oddest of all species, the homo sapien.
February 16, 2011
As darkness falls, I buck the human impulse to crawl under a furry hide and go to sleep. With a sheaf of journal articles and a tamed flame, I curl into a corner of the couch and compete like crazy. I'm not just writing a book here. I'm trying to write a book that's better than any other book. It takes a lot of time, this competing.
I’m one of those people who is fond of saying I could be a student forever. I already have more degrees than I can use and would happily pursue others purely out of curiosity and an interest in learning. So it’s probably not a surprise to hear that at one point in my life I was seriously considering pursuing some kind of Ph.D. The problem, I felt, was that the necessity to specialize would be too limiting. I didn’t want to focus on writing and reading just one narrow subject the rest of my life, because I’m interested in a little bit of everything. One thing I bumped into that really did intrigue me was a school that offered a “Doctorate of Interrelated Studies,” if I’ve remembered the name correctly. That was all about studying many different fields and making the connections between them.
This book is a little like that, which is what I particularly love about it and why Holmes was quite successful in competing for my attention. It’s a book written for the layperson and I imagine it could get long-winded and obvious for experts in the field(s) she covers, but I found it to be an excellent balance of information, insight, and personality. Holmes is writing a personal examination of the human animal from a biological perspective, a zoological field guide of sorts, to offer a comparison to others in the animal kingdom. So we get human biology and physiology, but learn much about the natural world along the way, as well as anthropology, sociology, psychology, and more. Topics covered by the chapters: physical description, the brain, perception, range, territoriality, diet, reproduction, behavior, communication, predators, and ecosystem impacts. On top of it all, Holmes uses herself as her primary subject for anecdotes to illustrate her points in a way that gets almost memoir-ish at times. I loved the mix of clinical, scientific terminology and folksy, personal voice. Even when I was familiar with the content she was covering, I kept reading to see which turn of phrase might delight me next. A sample bit from the introduction:
I am one of those people with a reputation for being a "natural" with children. Because I produced none of my own, my friends often make the observation with an air of puzzlement, after I've beguiled their offspring out of a sulk or into a game quieter than hurling pot lids.
The honest explanation has seemed too impolite to share: Of course I'm fluent in child. I've spent my whole life around wild animals. . . .
This is why I don’t find children baffling. They are young animals, unrefined in their instincts and impulses. If an animal is shy, I don’t gaze or grab at it, because those gestures are predatory. Instead, I avert my eyes and display something enticing. To avoid frightening the young human who has approached, it’s essential to project positive feelings. When a horse detects the stiffening of a fearful rider, the horse tenses because it has evolved to respect any indication of danger. Inversely, a fearful horse can be soothed by a rider who is at ease. And so it is with the young human: He monitors other humans for hesitations, signs of doubt, signs of danger. I try not to embody any. Thus, by exploiting an animal’s instincts, it’s possible to manipulate its behavior to suit yourself.
I’m one of those people who is fond of saying I could be a student forever. I already have more degrees than I can use and would happily pursue others purely out of curiosity and an interest in learning. So it’s probably not a surprise to hear that at one point in my life I was seriously considering pursuing some kind of Ph.D. The problem, I felt, was that the necessity to specialize would be too limiting. I didn’t want to focus on writing and reading just one narrow subject the rest of my life, because I’m interested in a little bit of everything. One thing I bumped into that really did intrigue me was a school that offered a “Doctorate of Interrelated Studies,” if I’ve remembered the name correctly. That was all about studying many different fields and making the connections between them.
This book is a little like that, which is what I particularly love about it and why Holmes was quite successful in competing for my attention. It’s a book written for the layperson and I imagine it could get long-winded and obvious for experts in the field(s) she covers, but I found it to be an excellent balance of information, insight, and personality. Holmes is writing a personal examination of the human animal from a biological perspective, a zoological field guide of sorts, to offer a comparison to others in the animal kingdom. So we get human biology and physiology, but learn much about the natural world along the way, as well as anthropology, sociology, psychology, and more. Topics covered by the chapters: physical description, the brain, perception, range, territoriality, diet, reproduction, behavior, communication, predators, and ecosystem impacts. On top of it all, Holmes uses herself as her primary subject for anecdotes to illustrate her points in a way that gets almost memoir-ish at times. I loved the mix of clinical, scientific terminology and folksy, personal voice. Even when I was familiar with the content she was covering, I kept reading to see which turn of phrase might delight me next. A sample bit from the introduction:
I am one of those people with a reputation for being a "natural" with children. Because I produced none of my own, my friends often make the observation with an air of puzzlement, after I've beguiled their offspring out of a sulk or into a game quieter than hurling pot lids.
The honest explanation has seemed too impolite to share: Of course I'm fluent in child. I've spent my whole life around wild animals. . . .
This is why I don’t find children baffling. They are young animals, unrefined in their instincts and impulses. If an animal is shy, I don’t gaze or grab at it, because those gestures are predatory. Instead, I avert my eyes and display something enticing. To avoid frightening the young human who has approached, it’s essential to project positive feelings. When a horse detects the stiffening of a fearful rider, the horse tenses because it has evolved to respect any indication of danger. Inversely, a fearful horse can be soothed by a rider who is at ease. And so it is with the young human: He monitors other humans for hesitations, signs of doubt, signs of danger. I try not to embody any. Thus, by exploiting an animal’s instincts, it’s possible to manipulate its behavior to suit yourself.
July 26, 2012
Gave up on this after about 70 pages. I thought it would be a fun, informative read-- kind of like the Wikipedia Entry for "Human," but more extensive. It turned out to be vapid, unscientific, and relatively boring-- not to mention unreliable. On page 9 the author says,
"Six or seven million years ago, one ape species split into two species. One of those two new apes went on to diversify into today's great apes--the gorilla, the bonobo and chimpanzee, the orangutan-- all of whom retain a respectable coat. The second evolved into the final great ape, me, the funnily furred."
This book was published in 2008! Even if the author hadn't wanted to take three seconds to confirm her summary of hominid evolution, wouldn't common sense alone have told her that chimpanzees and bonobos are more closely related to humans than they are to gorillas or orangutans? Since I was reading this book for educational purposes, this evidence of unreliability made it pretty much worthless for me. (On page 21, Holmes also makes the remarkable claim that human females can't store fat in their abdomens, which I can assure you isn't true.)
The whole time I was reading this I had the image of Hannah Holmes lounging on her porch with a drink in her hand, staring at her toes or something and wondering why they were shaped the way they were, then backing up her idle speculations with occasional bursts of research. There's some interesting/useful information about the human body's running adaptations that are explored in greater detail in Christopher McDougall's Born to Run (which is a fascinating book and well worth reading). More useful information on human evolution and the relationship between humans and other primates can be found in Jared Diamond's The Third Chimpanzee.
I'm sure Holmes' heart was in the right place when she wrote this book, but her organization and research are very sloppy. Instead of going from general to specific in her comparisons, she sometimes compares humans to other primates, sometimes to other mammals, sometimes to birds or insects, and then to mammals again, without any apparent rhyme or reason. I don't think there's anything in here that you couldn't learn for free on the internet-- though, again, I only got to about page 70. I picked it up fairly cheap at a used bookstore, so I'm not out oodles of money or anything, but I was looking forward to an interesting read and am fairly disappointed by what I found. Not recommended.
"Six or seven million years ago, one ape species split into two species. One of those two new apes went on to diversify into today's great apes--the gorilla, the bonobo and chimpanzee, the orangutan-- all of whom retain a respectable coat. The second evolved into the final great ape, me, the funnily furred."
This book was published in 2008! Even if the author hadn't wanted to take three seconds to confirm her summary of hominid evolution, wouldn't common sense alone have told her that chimpanzees and bonobos are more closely related to humans than they are to gorillas or orangutans? Since I was reading this book for educational purposes, this evidence of unreliability made it pretty much worthless for me. (On page 21, Holmes also makes the remarkable claim that human females can't store fat in their abdomens, which I can assure you isn't true.)
The whole time I was reading this I had the image of Hannah Holmes lounging on her porch with a drink in her hand, staring at her toes or something and wondering why they were shaped the way they were, then backing up her idle speculations with occasional bursts of research. There's some interesting/useful information about the human body's running adaptations that are explored in greater detail in Christopher McDougall's Born to Run (which is a fascinating book and well worth reading). More useful information on human evolution and the relationship between humans and other primates can be found in Jared Diamond's The Third Chimpanzee.
I'm sure Holmes' heart was in the right place when she wrote this book, but her organization and research are very sloppy. Instead of going from general to specific in her comparisons, she sometimes compares humans to other primates, sometimes to other mammals, sometimes to birds or insects, and then to mammals again, without any apparent rhyme or reason. I don't think there's anything in here that you couldn't learn for free on the internet-- though, again, I only got to about page 70. I picked it up fairly cheap at a used bookstore, so I'm not out oodles of money or anything, but I was looking forward to an interesting read and am fairly disappointed by what I found. Not recommended.
October 8, 2015
Subtitle: A Natural History of Myself
Normally, I read books that can be divided into two groups: Big Idea books (e.g. Dawkins' The Selfish Gene, or Taleb's Antifragility), and Many Small Idea books (often a collection of essays done by the writer for a magazine column). This book is more of a No Idea book. Oddly, it was still good.
This is mostly because Hannah Holmes is the kind of writer who can pull this off. My impression is that, after travelling to places like northern Scandinavia and deserts in central Asia and the Amazon jungle to find stories, she wanted to find a way to stay at home while writing. Hence, she decided to pick a subject (herself, or at least her own suburban type) and write about it as if she were a biologist examining it for the first time.
Thus, we have chapters on our sensory powers (mostly meager), diet (extraordinarily varied), methods of reproduction (most of the focus being on courtship, so calm down), communication, etc. Each one sticks, as much as possible, to a biologist's style of writing, but from time to time the first person point of view comes through.
One thing we learn about Holmes is that her childhood was chock full of animals. Her parents, both biologists, had such critters as an owl in the house for long periods of time. Holmes begins the book with the observation that, while childless herself, she is easily able to get along with small children, a fact which is sometimes surprising to her friends with children who struggle to cope with them. "The honest explanation has seemed to impolite to share. Of course I'm fluent in child. I've spent my whole life around wild animals."
This is more or less the point of this book; hearing Holmes' wry sense of humor come to bear on every aspect of the human being's biological existence. Not as comedic as Mary Roach, but definitely more prone to wisecrack than the hundreds of science journal articles she has apparently perused in preparation for this book, she has succeeded in making a book about nothing in particular (that we haven't already heard before) interesting.
Of course, there are occasional tidbits we didn't know. For example, that only about 5 percent of mammals form couples, although among birds it is rather more common. But by and large, this is not a book for getting smarter. It is, to a modest extent, a book about looking at what we already know from a different perspective. Mostly, it's a book about listening to a great writer show off her skill, spinning a great store of science fact and personal anecdote into several enjoyable evenings of storytelling. Perhaps she didn't have to go somewhere we don't want to go, in order to bring us this book, but she's earned her keep nonetheless.
Normally, I read books that can be divided into two groups: Big Idea books (e.g. Dawkins' The Selfish Gene, or Taleb's Antifragility), and Many Small Idea books (often a collection of essays done by the writer for a magazine column). This book is more of a No Idea book. Oddly, it was still good.
This is mostly because Hannah Holmes is the kind of writer who can pull this off. My impression is that, after travelling to places like northern Scandinavia and deserts in central Asia and the Amazon jungle to find stories, she wanted to find a way to stay at home while writing. Hence, she decided to pick a subject (herself, or at least her own suburban type) and write about it as if she were a biologist examining it for the first time.
Thus, we have chapters on our sensory powers (mostly meager), diet (extraordinarily varied), methods of reproduction (most of the focus being on courtship, so calm down), communication, etc. Each one sticks, as much as possible, to a biologist's style of writing, but from time to time the first person point of view comes through.
One thing we learn about Holmes is that her childhood was chock full of animals. Her parents, both biologists, had such critters as an owl in the house for long periods of time. Holmes begins the book with the observation that, while childless herself, she is easily able to get along with small children, a fact which is sometimes surprising to her friends with children who struggle to cope with them. "The honest explanation has seemed to impolite to share. Of course I'm fluent in child. I've spent my whole life around wild animals."
This is more or less the point of this book; hearing Holmes' wry sense of humor come to bear on every aspect of the human being's biological existence. Not as comedic as Mary Roach, but definitely more prone to wisecrack than the hundreds of science journal articles she has apparently perused in preparation for this book, she has succeeded in making a book about nothing in particular (that we haven't already heard before) interesting.
Of course, there are occasional tidbits we didn't know. For example, that only about 5 percent of mammals form couples, although among birds it is rather more common. But by and large, this is not a book for getting smarter. It is, to a modest extent, a book about looking at what we already know from a different perspective. Mostly, it's a book about listening to a great writer show off her skill, spinning a great store of science fact and personal anecdote into several enjoyable evenings of storytelling. Perhaps she didn't have to go somewhere we don't want to go, in order to bring us this book, but she's earned her keep nonetheless.
February 11, 2015
The author of this book is (now) a realtor. That surprised me and dismayed me a little too. Not that I have anything against realtors, but it just seemed to be a bit of a shame that someone as witty and erudite as this woman seems could end up selling real estate. I kind of expected a published author to be doing something more ... intellectual.
The only reason I read this book is that my sister bought it me for Christmas, and I wanted to be able to tell her that I appreciated her gift. For some reason beyond my ability to understand, we don't talk as much as I would like (my sister and I that is), and so I wanted to create an opportunity for us to have a conversation; and we did. It consisted of three text messages. Hey-ho.
The book itself is entertaining and informative and is delivered in a witty style. There are plenty of facts and figures, some of which are commonplace and some bizarre.
I like the way that the author treats humans as if they were just another animal. This works for me; it tickles my humour bone.
I also like that the book is relatively easy to read, even though I'm sure there are some long words in there. I think that perhaps I might be getting smarter from reading books like this. I also bet you 10 pence that there is a really bad spelling mistake somewhere in this text that makes it obvious that I'm not as smart as I think I am. In fact, I'm almost tempted to put one in on purpose - just to give you all a laugh. Hah - that'll get you thinking. Did I purposely bad-drive that word, just to get a laugh, or is it a genuine mistake that I should be derided, scorned and generally held in massive contempt for?
I'll never know unless you mock me.
Yes - that's an invitation.
The only reason I read this book is that my sister bought it me for Christmas, and I wanted to be able to tell her that I appreciated her gift. For some reason beyond my ability to understand, we don't talk as much as I would like (my sister and I that is), and so I wanted to create an opportunity for us to have a conversation; and we did. It consisted of three text messages. Hey-ho.
The book itself is entertaining and informative and is delivered in a witty style. There are plenty of facts and figures, some of which are commonplace and some bizarre.
I like the way that the author treats humans as if they were just another animal. This works for me; it tickles my humour bone.
I also like that the book is relatively easy to read, even though I'm sure there are some long words in there. I think that perhaps I might be getting smarter from reading books like this. I also bet you 10 pence that there is a really bad spelling mistake somewhere in this text that makes it obvious that I'm not as smart as I think I am. In fact, I'm almost tempted to put one in on purpose - just to give you all a laugh. Hah - that'll get you thinking. Did I purposely bad-drive that word, just to get a laugh, or is it a genuine mistake that I should be derided, scorned and generally held in massive contempt for?
I'll never know unless you mock me.
Yes - that's an invitation.
March 24, 2009
Extremely interesting. There's no absolute fact in this book as to why humans have the traits that we do, but Hannah Holmes offers up some really good guesses.
Funny, this book finally explained to me why I've always loved the idea of having a waterfall in my backyard. Humans crave views of water (for obvious reasons), but especially waterfalls, as they have the healthiest water available. I guess my dream is universal.
Favorite Quotes:
If your legacy relies on tricking your peers out of food or stealing a peer's partner for a quick mating, you'll need a lot of brain cells to keep track of who's who, who's where, and whom you can't trust...
(Regarding the sense of touch) It is also biologically reasonable that I stroke my dog, versus laying my hand still against him. The perception of velvetiness, like the perception of prickliness, stickiness, and scratchiness, depends on motion....Patting my dog is more than pleasant, it's healthful. All those cells and bulbs and disks need stimulation, especially in their youth.
The easiest way for a normal human to scramble her sense of balance is to go for a sail or read a book in the backseat of a moving car. The squid in her ear registers the bouncing, but the eyes beg to differ. Then, theory has it, the brain concludes the eyes must be hallucinating, deduces that the mouth must have gobbled something horrible, and directs the stomach to heave up the offending article.
Accordingly, when my senses register the proximity of a Chunky bar, my strongest urge is to snatch it up and get it down the hatch before, A: it gets moldy; B: it's eaten by bears; C: I'm eaten by bears.
Funny, this book finally explained to me why I've always loved the idea of having a waterfall in my backyard. Humans crave views of water (for obvious reasons), but especially waterfalls, as they have the healthiest water available. I guess my dream is universal.
Favorite Quotes:
If your legacy relies on tricking your peers out of food or stealing a peer's partner for a quick mating, you'll need a lot of brain cells to keep track of who's who, who's where, and whom you can't trust...
(Regarding the sense of touch) It is also biologically reasonable that I stroke my dog, versus laying my hand still against him. The perception of velvetiness, like the perception of prickliness, stickiness, and scratchiness, depends on motion....Patting my dog is more than pleasant, it's healthful. All those cells and bulbs and disks need stimulation, especially in their youth.
The easiest way for a normal human to scramble her sense of balance is to go for a sail or read a book in the backseat of a moving car. The squid in her ear registers the bouncing, but the eyes beg to differ. Then, theory has it, the brain concludes the eyes must be hallucinating, deduces that the mouth must have gobbled something horrible, and directs the stomach to heave up the offending article.
Accordingly, when my senses register the proximity of a Chunky bar, my strongest urge is to snatch it up and get it down the hatch before, A: it gets moldy; B: it's eaten by bears; C: I'm eaten by bears.
December 16, 2009
Holmes claims that a field guide to humans as apes does not exist, so she decided to write this book, even though many books (e.g., from Darwin's "Expressions of the Emotions in Man and Animals" to Morris's "The Naked Ape" and numerous books since then) all cover the topic of humans as apes in various detail. Holmes' contribution is that she puts this into a field guide format (somewhat) and then uses herself throughout the book as a case example of an "ape woman." For those who are new to this topic, Holmes' book is a very engaging and educational read.
Holmes does a good job of using updated literature. She is not shy about offering her own perspective and theories on numerous topics (e.g., on human aggression, we don't have long canine teeth because we use our hands and tools; the distinctive, unique feature of humans is our capacity for distant running), and she even ventures into the sensitive topic of race in a refreshing and non-threatening way. In other places, Holmes cites more or less conventional beliefs without question or doubt (e.g., that those with no children do their best to help their close relations with kids in order to promote the transfer of kindred DNA into the next generation). Her chapter topics cover more or less standard field guide material but, interestingly, she does not delve much into human rationality and its relationship to the rest of the body. Some of the language is of the "too cute" style which at times is distracting, and it's not really clear why the title of the book is "The Well-Dressed Ape."
Holmes does a good job of using updated literature. She is not shy about offering her own perspective and theories on numerous topics (e.g., on human aggression, we don't have long canine teeth because we use our hands and tools; the distinctive, unique feature of humans is our capacity for distant running), and she even ventures into the sensitive topic of race in a refreshing and non-threatening way. In other places, Holmes cites more or less conventional beliefs without question or doubt (e.g., that those with no children do their best to help their close relations with kids in order to promote the transfer of kindred DNA into the next generation). Her chapter topics cover more or less standard field guide material but, interestingly, she does not delve much into human rationality and its relationship to the rest of the body. Some of the language is of the "too cute" style which at times is distracting, and it's not really clear why the title of the book is "The Well-Dressed Ape."
July 21, 2010
I picked up The Well-Dressed Ape a little randomly in the library, and don't really regret it. Her writing is a little corny, she's obviously incomplete in a full description of the human body (that would be impossible), and sometimes the research felt either incomplete or repetitive. However, through those flaws, I definitely enjoyed the book. The premise is a field description of the animal homo sapiens. She goes top to bottom, describing brain, senses, posture, reproduction, locomotion, eating, homeostasis, and all kinds of behavior. She uses the homunculus analogy in her description of brain real estate, but the same analogy could be used in her page real estate. Most of her focus is on the senses, sexual behavior, brain usage, etc - I would have loved to be regaled with anecdotes and information about the organs, the bones, the muscles, the circulatory system, etc. Some of these get small mentions, but I wanted more. For someone who's not read a lot of books about human biology/psychology/evolution, the research she goes through won't be repetitive, but I tend to like that sort of book. Her approach on a familiar topic is unique enough that I stayed interested even through parts I found boring. Definitely recommended.
December 16, 2015
notes to self on a few fav points
pg 35
much of it
- lucy had brains about the size of a chimp, 3-6 millions years ago
- homo erectus had a brain nearly as large as mine, produced a tool kit of surprising sophistication
- scientists who recreated the island hopping lifestyle of h erectus in indonesia had to invent stone age tupperware and a sailing raft worthy of rough seas
- probably h erectus that begat homo neanderthalensis- who roamed europe to western asia until 35,000 years ago- they still hold the record for hominid brain size
page 79
COMT gene that can be a good painkiller or a not so good painkiller.
val-vals- 1/4 of pop= good painkiller
val-met- 1/2- moderate pain control
met-met- 1/4 of pop= two lousy versions of the gene
- generally women vs men feel pain quicker and can tolerate less pain- holds true w/ female animals too. possibbly a protective measure, to make sure she avoids harm because of reproductive role. avoid harm 'for two'.
for a female the sum of 3 pinches hurts more then the individual parts, not so for men- in them the brain regulates pain with cortisol & endorphins.
more faves I don't have time to write right now
pg
90
209
213
215
252
278
284
285
294
299
304
306
314
pg 35
much of it
- lucy had brains about the size of a chimp, 3-6 millions years ago
- homo erectus had a brain nearly as large as mine, produced a tool kit of surprising sophistication
- scientists who recreated the island hopping lifestyle of h erectus in indonesia had to invent stone age tupperware and a sailing raft worthy of rough seas
- probably h erectus that begat homo neanderthalensis- who roamed europe to western asia until 35,000 years ago- they still hold the record for hominid brain size
page 79
COMT gene that can be a good painkiller or a not so good painkiller.
val-vals- 1/4 of pop= good painkiller
val-met- 1/2- moderate pain control
met-met- 1/4 of pop= two lousy versions of the gene
- generally women vs men feel pain quicker and can tolerate less pain- holds true w/ female animals too. possibbly a protective measure, to make sure she avoids harm because of reproductive role. avoid harm 'for two'.
for a female the sum of 3 pinches hurts more then the individual parts, not so for men- in them the brain regulates pain with cortisol & endorphins.
more faves I don't have time to write right now
pg
90
209
213
215
252
278
284
285
294
299
304
306
314
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 11, 2009
Although humans are constantly asking questions about and trying to define themselves, there has never been a straightforward natural history on humans in the manner that ones are written for animals. Holmes uses herself--and the rest of humanity, of course--to write that history.
Chapters include information on habitat, diet, predelictions for reproduction, and other topics.
The best part of this book, however, are her constant comparisons of the human animal to other animals in behavior, evolution, and other things. You actually learn a lot about other creature as you read.
She's a witty writer and the book is never dull.
One of the things that bother me about science books--and Holmes is guilty of this--is that experiments on rats, mice, and other creatures are cited for conclusions about our own behavior or biology. First, I still don't understand how translating unnatural practices on animals kept in unnatural conditions can tell us anything about how humans might react. Second, and most important, no science writer ever expresses ethical qualms about animal testing. That bothers me a lot.
Chapters include information on habitat, diet, predelictions for reproduction, and other topics.
The best part of this book, however, are her constant comparisons of the human animal to other animals in behavior, evolution, and other things. You actually learn a lot about other creature as you read.
She's a witty writer and the book is never dull.
One of the things that bother me about science books--and Holmes is guilty of this--is that experiments on rats, mice, and other creatures are cited for conclusions about our own behavior or biology. First, I still don't understand how translating unnatural practices on animals kept in unnatural conditions can tell us anything about how humans might react. Second, and most important, no science writer ever expresses ethical qualms about animal testing. That bothers me a lot.
April 8, 2009
Innovative, funny, and fascinating. I guarantee you’ve never read anything like this. She explains the human body, physically and emotionally, in a creative and fun way, using the latest research. (I didn’t like her first book, Suburban Safari, nearly as much.) A few examples:
P. 79 Where once humans were divided into just two camps–stoics and whiners–a Michigan neuroscientist now grants us three: val-vals, met-mets, and val-mets. Each category represents a different combination of a mother and father’s COMT gene. This gene comes in two varieties: good painkiller and not-so-good painkiller. One quarter of humans are val-vals, who got the painkiller version from each parent. Half are val-mets, with moderate pain control. And the final quarter are met-mets, with two lousy versions of the gene, which essentially allows pain to run
roughshod through their brains. So if you whimper over splinters, you’re not a sissy, you’ve just been cheated by the Gene Fairy.
P. 81 Some researchers speculate that the space-savvy male brain evolved because all the hunters with bad spatial skills got lost and died childless.
P. 79 Where once humans were divided into just two camps–stoics and whiners–a Michigan neuroscientist now grants us three: val-vals, met-mets, and val-mets. Each category represents a different combination of a mother and father’s COMT gene. This gene comes in two varieties: good painkiller and not-so-good painkiller. One quarter of humans are val-vals, who got the painkiller version from each parent. Half are val-mets, with moderate pain control. And the final quarter are met-mets, with two lousy versions of the gene, which essentially allows pain to run
roughshod through their brains. So if you whimper over splinters, you’re not a sissy, you’ve just been cheated by the Gene Fairy.
P. 81 Some researchers speculate that the space-savvy male brain evolved because all the hunters with bad spatial skills got lost and died childless.
July 8, 2009
Holmes takes a look at humans from a biologist's viewpoint, as if we are just another species. The objective comparison of humans with other species is intriguing, especially because things that in the past were seen as uniquely human (tool use, language) have been found to exist in other species. But the true differences are telling -- that we feel guilt about eliminating other species, that we can think so abstractly, that we ponder our own existence so thoroughly. But it's clear that we evolved each of our physical and behavioral traits over time, just as all other species did. This book caused me to think about humans in a new light, and wonder even more about intelligent life on other planets.
August 2, 2016
I don't remember the specific details that I came across that were just plain off but there were several moments where I just wished the research had been stronger. She may be a science writer and not really a researcher, but that doesn't get her off the hook for the messy details. And more than this, what really bothered me was her narrative voice. Using herself as a long-legged, white-skinned, blonde ape just bothered me. Her use of her own body was not engaging or funny and it got in the way of the overview of human evolution she pulled together. She is attempting to do a good thing in her book but it didn't work for me on various levels, including what is sometimes a "chatty" tone that doesn't work, unfortunately -- or at least not for me.
June 29, 2009
Interesting subject, although I much prefer Desmond Morris' purely scientific take on the human species. Holmes interjects too much of her own thought and opinion, and throughout the read I couldn't decide if she was objectively studying the human species or merely criticizing those who differed from her.
This book is nowhere near the level of professionalism exhibited by Desmond Morris and Diane Ackerman. Anthropology is no place for snarkiness and haughty insight.
This book is nowhere near the level of professionalism exhibited by Desmond Morris and Diane Ackerman. Anthropology is no place for snarkiness and haughty insight.
June 11, 2009
This breezy though well-written look at humans through the lens of a naturalist was a lot of fun. It's not often that one has the opportunity to read about one's own species as another interesting animal. Like Holmes, I find humanity's evils a little easier to forgive when they are viewed in context of our animal heritage, and our altruism more noble. A solid, engaging, occasionally funny book. Recommended.
July 8, 2010
For years, I've wanted Bill Bryson to write a book about how the human body works. I thought this might be what I've been looking for, but it fell just slightly short. It's a good book, but it's more about why we are the way we are (evolution and whatnot) than how we work. Still, worth your time. Holmes takes a scientific approach to comparing homo sapiens to other primates as well as many other animals. Some fascinating tidbits here.
July 6, 2009
I heard the conversation with the author of the book Hannah Holmes on NPR's Talk of the Nation (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/st...) and the book sounded very interesting. SO I bought it. Now it will wait on my bookshelf for G.O.D. knows how long before I get to read it :/ Hopefully soon :)
***
***
Displaying 1 - 30 of 87 reviews