Eva al desnudo

by Elaine Morgan

Eva al desnudo no es un libro feminista; pero tampoco es "tarzanista". Elaine Morgan afirma que la evolución y la historia tienen por protagonista a la pareja humana. Ni la mujer es un juguete decorativo para el entretenimiento del hombre en sus horas de ocio, ni el hombre es un incauto instrumento entre los dedos de un supuesto maquiavelismo femenino. Ambas partes se necesitan recíproca e insustituiblemente, y la historia humana es una consecuencia de esta necesidad. Con implacable sensatez -y a veces con muy femenina picardía-, y siempre con solidez científica, Elaine Morgan plantea profundas objeciones al "Juego Evolucionista" de Charles Darwin, Desmond Morris, Konrad Lorenz o Robert Ardrey. La mítica y "conveniente" figura del Poderoso Cazador es sometida a un interrogatorio que ha logrado impresionar a los círculos críticos y científicos tanto de Europa como de los Estados Unidos: ¿Es que los hombres han sido alguna vez como esos Poderosos Cazadores descritos por el evolucionismo tradicional? ¿Se puede de veras afirmar que el primer ser humano fue un hombre? ¿Es real que la agresividad es el principal motor evolutivo del hombre? ¿Qué papel ha jugado el amor y cuánto y por qué surgió? ¿Cómo es que lloramos o hablamos? ¿Quién emitió la primera palabra?... Cada pregunta, aunque de inofensiva apariencia, va erosionando la imponente fachada construida por el "tarzanismo evolucionista" en el curso de los años. Y las respuestas de Elaine Morgan no contribuyen a la tranquilidad y altivez de los partidarios del "Poderoso Cazador"...

Genres: Nonfiction, Science, Feminism, History, Evolution, Anthropology, Biology

342 pages, Library Binding

First published January 1, 1972

About the author

Welsh feminist and proponent of the aquatic ape evolution theory, which claims that mankind evolved from sea-based apes.

Morgan was appointed Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) in the 2009 Birthday Honours for services to literature and to education.

Reviews

[Corry Hinckley · Rating 4 out of 5]

This completely changed the way I interpret information from most fields of science. This book somehow made it okay for me to assume that there are probably many many ways to investigate scientific mysteries (especially of the prehistoric variety)and absolutely no way to know what happened. It didn't make me more or less cynical, but it offered me the space to assume that the blanks filled in by scientists are more like an artist's representation based on personal experiences and biases. This book clarified: I don't know enough about the kinds of questions that require a lifetime of study to draw conclusions, therefore I choose the answers that fit into my world view. Also, the experts are no different, they simply have a lifetime of study added into their world view.

AND I love the way she writes.

[Jessica · Rating 5 out of 5]

Awesome. Sparked to read it by its mention in A Bone from a Dry Sea and my sudden need to be a feminist anthropologist. My very mediocre bio teacher was offended that I included theories from this book in a project on evolutionary stages, and wrote a nasty comment on my poster about only including 'accepted theories' in the future. Accepted by whom, punk? A theory's a theory, no matter how small.

[Judith Johnson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I wrote Elaine Morgan a fan letter after reading this book, and I still treasure her handwritten reply. Wonderful Welshwoman, talented and humble, who lived in the valleys all her life.
UPDATE!!! If you can, listen to this BBC Radio 4 Programme, The Waterside Ape, narrated by Sir David Attenborough: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07w4...

Plus Elaine Morgan did a brilliant Ted talk. Worth watching!

[Caterina · Rating 3 out of 5]

This odd, now-classic book presented Elaine Morgan's & marine biologist Alistair Hardy's unique "aquatic ape" theory, proposing that humans evolved primarily along coastlines where seafood (as well as plant food) was plentiful. According to their theory, humans' naked (hairless or less hairy) bodies evolved to adapt to the wet conditions of constantly being in the water gathering, diving, or fishing for food, similar to the smooth skins of water mammals like dolphins. Similarly, women's balloon-like breasts (unlike other hominids who have nipples but no breasts) and rounded hips with plentiful fat deposits were "designed" by evolution for flotation, and not primarily, as scientist Desmond Morris had proposed, because men thought curvy women were attractive.*

Morgan's book also pointed out masculinist (for lack of a better word) flaws in current evolutionary theories and proposed feminist interpretations that took women into account. Morgan was not a scientist but she was inspired by Hardy's theories and "ran with them" (BBC), continuing to develop them, search for evidence, and promote them through her death in 2013. For decades these theories were often dismissed, although a few scientists took them seriously as possibilities. But in recent years they have been enjoying renewed interest and respect because of more recent scientific discoveries that may support them. The Hardy-Morgan theory was the focus of this 2016 BBC program "The Waterside Ape" by David Attenborough: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07v...

As I've been reading more current popular science books on genetics, heredity, and evolution, some by scientists and others by science journalists, I've remembered some books I read in years past and added them to my "Read" books. I thought this unusual book deserved a few words.

*Morris's notion that women's bodily form evolved solely because men found it attractive seemed questionable to me, since other male hominids seem perfectly happy with non-curvy female hominids of their own species. Of course for humans there have been "fashions" in female attractiveness that probably were influenced by and influenced evolution at least somewhat. But then what about male attractiveness; female mammals including women are often the ones to select or reject male suitors.

1/13/2018 -- I've revised the review to credit Alistair Hardy. Also, I read this book so long ago that only the most unusual theory stands out in my memory. It may be that Morgan also addressed more conventional theories of women's body shape, such as having stored reserves of energy, but I don't remember.

[Alice · Rating 5 out of 5]

I chose this from my brother's bookshelf when he was in high school. I was looking for a trashy novel. It was an incredibly provocative anthropology book!

[Sariah · Rating 4 out of 5]

Morgan's theory on how human's evolved and how bipedalism developed are contraversal but her writing style is great. Even if you don't agree with her, or accept any of her arguments, the book is still informative and enjoyable to read.

[Glynda-lee Hoffmann · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the funniest, educational books still in print. Elaine Morgan turned the scientific world on its head by telling the story of evolution from the woman's point of view. Thirty years later not one scientist has bothered to respond to her thesis, though she is finally getting recognition elsewhere.

[Carol · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very entertaining read. She's so outraged at the sexism in anthropology, both popular and academic, that she made me angry too. I loved how she analyzed the evidence and came up with very different conclusions than those of the anthropological mainstream. In her view, women, sex, pregnancy and child rearing were much more important than we had been told. Which makes sense to me, child rearing especially. Because animals who can't raise their children to childbearing age don't pass on their genes.

However, it has come to light that her take on mankind's evolution ignores most of the evidence. I was disappointed when I learned this, but in the end I realized that however pretty such theories may be, we must align our beliefs with what the evidence tells us.

[Chrisl · Rating 5 out of 5]

15July2020 - awarding fifth star for frequency ... for the number of times this book comes to mind when reading reviews of Goodreaders.
***
Imagine you are a member of first Sapien tribe to explore the east coast of southeast Asia ... Frequently feasting on young sea cows.
***
Morgan's orientation starts with the aquatic theory of human evolution developed by Professor Sir Alister Hardy. During humankind’s evolution, the species was strongly influenced by living along coastlines.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elaine_...
quotes
“There were thousands of seabirds nesting on the cliffs, and as she had a firm hand grip and a good head for heights she filled another empty ecological niche as an egg collector.”

“She was very relieved to notice that even the large alarming-looking things that sometimes clambered out of the sea—things like seals, and giant turtles, and various kinds of sea cow, which were much commoner in those days—all proved to be very slow and clumsy and helpless on land, and in most cases totally disinclined to fight back when attacked. … When you’re dealing with dugongs or baby seal there is no risk involved …”

“He (Hardy) pointed out that the best way of keeping warm in water is to develop a layer of subcutaneous fat, analogous to the whale’s blubber, all over the surface of the body; that this is what all the aquatic animals have done; and that Homo sapiens, alone among the primates, has in fact developed this layer …”

“Dispersal of a species almost invariably results in variations of size; with most warm blooded species latitude alone will bring this about. The nearer poleward they live the bigger they become.”

***
Kirkus Review
"A kinky distaff view of evolution which won't satisfy Darwin's male progeny but does compellingly suggest that the whole ""androcentric"" science may need revision. Ms. Morgan's major target as she traces the descent of the ""fruit-eater, She"" is Robert Ardrey's aggressive, weapon-wielding Primal Hunter whose contribution to the evolution of Homo Sapiens is ingeniously undermined by her contention that hominoid development passed through an ""aquatic"" age during which we acquired everything except a snorkel and flippers. While swimming around in those ancient lakes She lost her fur, first used pebble tools, first cried through tear ducts, learned to frown and pis aller switched over from rear-mounting to ventro-ventral sex. The evolution of She links us to some pretty exotic creatures including the sea cow, the dolphin, and the mantee, but although her ethnology (and prose style) is rather free-wheeling it is more than just good sport. Morgan offers some highly intriguing hypotheses on the evolution of the nuclear family, male pair-bonding, monogamy, and language supported by deft citations of current research on the social behavior of primates and others. Among her conclusions: Daddy (who was never the great provider anyway) ""horned in on the matrifocal family group"" because he needed the economic security of home and hearth more than she did. A fruitful mating of Women's Lib with the (still highly conjectural) science of ethnology which may make even the Naked Ape in professorial garb sit up and take notice."
***
Interesting piece from the BBC
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/prof...

"Excelling in both the arts and science, she became a top TV writer, a feminist icon and a ground-breaking evolutionary theorist.
"Born into a poor mining family, she won a scholarship to Oxford University. When she arrived, they heard her valleys accent and assumed she was applying for a job as a cleaner. ..."

[Nicole · Rating 3 out of 5]

While written primarily as an amusing rebuttal to the poor reasoning of the book, The Naked Ape, it also turns to review an older hypothesis concerning the evolutionary pressures that shaped the hominins.
Morgan has some points she makes well but she is not trying to pretend she is a physical anthropologist. Her arguments are flawed but the basic concept is sound and has acquired a great deal of supporting evidence for hominins having spent a great deal of time in and around the shore for hunting food.
The idea that the pressure to remain broadly general in physical ability was so the inland regions could be hunted in rainy seasons and the shores steady food supply could be exploited during the dry season would encourage tool use and an increase in cerebral function. Movement between environments allowed hominins to exploit peak food sources inland and reliable shore resources so suffered less risk of seasonal hunger. Complex and varied situations selected for the brain's complex range of responses and the steady food supply supported the increased demands a larger brain makes in nutritional needs.
While no longer the best source of information on the subject the Descent of Woman served a purpose when it was published.

The Amphibious-Generalist Hypothesis of Human Evolution is the new synthesis.
http://www.geocities.com/gdvbqz/intro...
Omega-3 fatty acids, necessary for encephalizatin & brain health, are the best argument for coastal habitation having impacted hominin evolution as shore based foragers. The selection acted long enough to shape the basic structure and developmental pathways of the enlarging brain.
http://yannklimentidis.blogspot.com/2...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A730531
http://www.riverapes.com/
http://users.ugent.be/~mvaneech/Morga...

[Pj · Rating 5 out of 5]

At the beginning of the real Women's Lib movement, elaine Morgan took a serious risk and wrote this science book. In a part of the world then dominated almost solely by males, it took a lot of guts to write this piece, much of which is only now, some 40 years later, being vindicated and verified as having value. Her vision that the human species did not evolve because of testosterone but more probably because of estrogen was revolutionary in its day. A Good book for those who want to explore all possible evolutionary directions.

[Suman Srivastava · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent book. A classmate of mine pointed me to this book after I had written a blog post about evolution, and I’m thankful that she did. This book raises so many issues with the standard way in which we think of the evolution of Homo sapiens. Elaine Morgan explains the theory of the aquatic age brilliantly and convincingly. Shows that you don’t need to be a scientist to write well about science. Bring a good writer is at least as important. The postscript written 13 years after the book first came out tells us how conservative scientists can be. The postscript proves that Max Planck was right when he said that “science advances one funeral at a time.”

[Lucrezia Vaga · Rating 2 out of 5]

2 stars

“Morgan is the first to admit that The Descent of Woman was a thoroughly unscientific romp riddled with errors and convenient conclusions.”
(The Guardian, 2003 - link below)

Excuse me what??
When I picked up this book I thought I would read more about women’s role in evolution, instead I found myself gawking at pages rambling about the aquatic ape hypothesis (I would have not picked up this book had I known this). Don’t get me wrong, it is an fascinating theory and all, but after finding out that the author had NO SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND nor the credentials to write this book I kind of lost interest (I also got angry but this is on me, I bought this book on a whim and I did not check it out online).

The last chapters (“Primate Politics”, “What Women Want”, and “Present and Future”) are products of their time (1970s), but truly rage inducing. I think the author glossed over a lot of the struggles women faced (and face nowadays still) and oversimplified their rage/frustrations/discontent. I never knew why the author was bringing up a certain topic and her solutions for women’s happiness were kind of whack in my opinion.

I do not recommend this book if you are looking for a feminist text or a scientific one.

https://www.theguardian.com/education...

[Cat · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book was a ground breaker when it was first published. It remains one to this day.

[simbelmynë]

"[...] trudno mężczyźnie zrezygnować ze zwyczaju myślenia o sobie jako o centrum wszechświata. Postrzega on siebie całkiem nieświadomie jako główną linię ewolucji, z żeńskim satelitą obiegającym go, jak Księżyc obiega Ziemię."

[Max · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really cool ideas and loved the way she writes. I was very offended by what she said about manatees ("formless"? Please!!! They're perfect!!!!!!), found it pretty messed up how she quoted from antiquated racist sources without commenting on the racism, and found her version of feminism to be about what I'd expect from someone married to a man with three sons... deeply male-apologetic, denial regarding the intensity and frequency of male violence, and scolding towards women who experience enough self-empathy to become angry or even hateful towards the male (and/or male-serving) individuals or institutions that do us harm. Super intriguing ideas about human evolution though!!!

[Kaethe · Rating 3 out of 5]

A really thought-provoking and interesting idea that turns out to be wrong. But, hey, that's how science works. People come up with crazy or rational reasons for why something might be, and people come up with ways to test the ideas, and people critique those tests, and people do new tests, and eventually the answer becomes clear.

So, read, consider, and also check out http://www.aquaticape.org/.

[Diane · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the book that I have had to replace most often after loaning it out... and having it not return. It was a wonderful antidote to the prevailing views of "The Naked Ape" and continues to provide me with some wonderful ideas, though I read it many years ago.

[M.J. Johnson · Rating 5 out of 5]

I'd forgotten to list this book which I read sometime in the late eighties, much of which has remained with me ever since. My memory was jogged by Elaine Morgan's autobiography which I received from my wife for Christmas. Whether she's talking science or reminiscing the writing is always first-rate. I really admire this woman.

[Ali Kate Horsley · Rating 1 out of 5]

I'm not sure I can read all of this book (although I've made it over halfway). The 'science' was very unconvincing.

However, I think the book did a great job of challenging theories from the 1970s. I also enjoyed having women put at the centre of a book on evolution.

The chapters on the orgasm and love I found to be fairly old fashioned (and surely not much in these chapters can be right) - but no doubt it made a big splash at the time.

I don't agree with the aquatic ape theory but I enjoyed learning a bit more about it. The one part I find interesting was the theories' connection to human hair loss. I like the idea of the women of prehistory spending their days swimming in the sea.

[Sally · Rating 4 out of 5]

A surprisingly absorbing book, well written, that raises many issues and questions not commonly addressed. It is a corrective to the male-centric theories one still hears voiced by some anthropologists and popularizers that would lead you to believe that all human adaptations, advantages and advancements came from male-dominated activities and reflected male needs and desires. From these theories, you'd almost think that in the beginning all human beings were men, with women as a mere afterthought. Whatever one may think about the aquatic theory the author champions, it's a refreshing read.

[Jaclynn (JackieReadsAlot) · Rating 3 out of 5]

Had I known that there would be such a focus on the Aquatic Ape Theory I might have skipped this! It's a really thought-provoking and interesting idea that turned out to be entirely wrong. Thrown in were interesting facts related to the evolution of the female body, ie menopause, no visible estrus, etc. I was under the impression that the book would focus primarily on those interesting facts but I was mislead.

[Emily Spence · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book several years ago and while I don't believe all of Morgan's assertions, I found it refreshing to read an alternate view of our evolution. She recently gave a TED talk which can be viewed here.

[Rhonda · Rating 5 out of 5]

You want to know why women have breasts? Always thought it was to make us sexier to our men? Think again. The aquatic theory of evolution, which absolutely holds water, told from a feminist perspective. Taught me everything I every wanted to know about why humans are the way we are.

[Casey · Rating 5 out of 5]

What struck me the most in this book was, not the feminist angle, but the Aquatic Ape hypothesis. The aquatic evidence is convincing, and it makes more sense than the usual weak explanation of -- he stood up in a field of tall grass to stalk his prey.

[Alexandra]

This was interesting and I got to reading about pre-history first from sapiens, and then Ishmael. It was interesting to read another theory of evolution, specifically diving into why we lost our hair. The female perspective was refreshing. Got a bit off track in the last chapters about social gender norms, but for a book written in the 1970s, still interesting and relevant

[Samyy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Elaine is loud & sarcastic, but gets the message across concisely.

It’s a great, albeit slightly outdated, piece of literature.

[David · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wish I’d read this 50 years ago. A wonderfully written alternative to the prevailing (still) androcentric view of the development of homo sapiens. I’m not qualified to comment on the validity of the “aquatic ape” hypothesis but Morgan makes it seem very persuasive.

[Bonnie · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book should be taught in high school curriculums - a book of theses on human evolution that wholly takes into the account of women. This poked holes in almost every theory I'd been taught on human evolution. The only downside to this book is it was written in the 70s (so occasionally dated, though much still concrete) and some of her lesser ideal estimations - about where some evolutionary pathways may lead - came true. There is wisdom in this book for both women and men to create new roles in a new world - without contempt or control on either side. Understanding the past can help us understand our present and future. The author is thorough and at times down to earth and funny (in an Oxford educated type of way), ultimately wanting the reader to leave with compassion for both genders by understanding the plights of our ancestors. Loved this.

[Kamakana · Rating 2 out of 5]

130502: have not thought much about physical anthropology since an undergrad course at u- many many years (decades...) ago. i have no idea where the conversation is now re. evolution of hominids, but this does suggest some avenues of study, whether they were followed i do not know...

easy to read, a bit of a historical document as far as gender goes, but it is not like by now we men are so much more enlightened... working from limited physical sources, as anyone in this field does, seems like her arguments and extensions of the aquatic ape theory are reasonable, plausible, but i had never even heard of her theories before, i am not an academic, so all i can say is: intriguing...

fun read that answers too many questions in one way to be taken correctly. no one has followed her possible fictitious leads. serious anthropology is not likely to appreciate this work, just was different read...