Huxley: From Devil’s Disciple to Evolution’s High Priest
focuses on the life of a tireless, effective advocate for evolution and
science. This is an impressively well-researched, highly informative tome. Its
32 page bibliography and 1581 endnotes testify to the author’s assiduous
research and command of the details. Adrian Desmond does an admirably thorough
job of presenting the story of T.H. Huxley’s private life and public
contributions.
This representation of a life in science demonstrates the
contributions of Huxley, who is overshadowed by his friend Charles Darwin in
the modern public mind. But without the pugnacious activism of T.H. Huxley,
there would have been a greater delay in recognition for the brilliant but meek
Darwin and his Natural Selection. We would not be as far along as we are now in
our understanding of evolution. While this is the chief contribution for which
Huxley is known, there is so much more for which he deserves recognition.
Desmond presents Huxley’s life as one of constant hard work
and achievement. In addition to lecturing and teaching, this educator chaired
the Royal Society, the British Association for the Advancement of Science, the
Metaphysics Society and many committees too numerous to mention. His work on
the London School Board resulted in the inclusion of science education in the
public schools. In Higher Education, he was the driving force behind the
creation of South Kensington College, a pioneering institution of science
during a time when gentlemanly liberal arts were still the norm. Additionally,
he published throughout his life, adding to our knowledge in significant ways.
Huxley is widely credited as the discoverer of the bird-dinosaur evolutionary
link.
This scientist also expanded our thinking philosophically. Employing the root of the Greek “gnosis” (to
know) he created the word “agnostic” (one who does not or cannot know) and was
the catalyst for this secular philosophy. With his emphasis on “the
scientific method and its sensual limitations,” Huxley determined that one
could neither prove nor disprove God (Desmond, p. 374). While this approach
lacks the satisfying certainty of both Theism and Atheism, it was an idea made
for a historical moment, providing an exceptional foil against the intrusions
of state sponsored Anglicanism on science.
While Desmond presents Huxley as an industrious achiever,
this book is in no way a hagiography. Privately, the evolutionist innovator is
characterized as prone to “volcanic moods” and “depressive” with periodic
“breakdowns” from both overwork and his emotional demons (Desmond, pp. 84 &
537). Politically, the author is not afraid to show his subjects regressive
attitudes. Huxley’s support of violent British imperialism is extreme enough to
shock his family. He refers to Afghan tribes defending their land as
“blood-thirsty thieves” and approves of England’s “civilizing influence” in
South Africa even if it meant using a “heavy hand” (Desmond, p. 493).
Even regarding Huxley’s stellar professional life, the
biographer can be rightfully critical. When Huxley fails in a speech, the
Desmond explains why (Desmond, p. 478). When Huxley fails to understand Natural
Selection even after Darwin works on him, Desmond elucidates how he is being
dense (Desmond, p. 223). Though Huxley was an advocate for women’s education,
he believed that their “natural limitations” would prevent them from competing
with men for science positions (Desmond, p. 371). The career scientist’s record
is not presented without blemishes.
Another consistent theme throughout the work is Great
Britain’s transformation from a society of privileged gentlemen directing science,
business and politics, to a meritocracy where industrious working-class and
middle-class men could make a name for themselves. This new ethos is
particularly evident in science which, up until this time, was the past time of
wealthy aristocrats. “In came the academics and empire builders, secular sons
with their B.Sc.s…out went the marginalized clergymen” and elites (Desmond, p.
424).
Despite the book’s many merits, there is no nice way to say
this and still be accurate: the writing is awful. Desmond opens with excessive
melodrama:
“The lanky
15 year-old sidled down fetid alleyways, past gin palaces and dance halls.
Sailors hung out of windows, the gaiety of their boozy whores belying the
squalor around them. The boy’s predatory looks and patched clothes seemed in
keeping. But his black eyes betrayed a horror at the sights: ten crammed into a
room, babies diseased from erupting cesspits, the uncoffined dead gnawed by rats”
(Desmond, p. 3).
When the style is not being melodramatic, it is pompous and
excessively ornamental: “Nature was no capricious dame to be appeased by the
gods” (Desmond, p. 85). Rarely are
statements made simply. Where Huxley is consulting with factory bosses and
engineers, Desmond confuses the message that hard-working professionals were
replacing privileged aristocrats: Using grandiloquent imagery, he writes
“Huxley was in his muddy boots, moving the centre of the world, making the dead
Oxbridge outer planets revolve round the solar furnace of the Black Country”
(Desmond, p. 513). A more Hemingway-esque pen could have easily trimmed at
least 100 pages from the biography by eliminating overblown decoration.
Though the writing is atrocious, no literary criticism can
demean the quality of the information. Desmond has researched well. There are
probably other books on Huxley that waste less time with bombast. However, one
would be hard-pressed to find a study as thorough. Readers will have to decide
for themselves how much pretentious writing they can tolerate.
Desmond, Adrian. Huxley. From Devil’s Disciple to Evolution’s
High Priest. Reading,
Mass : Addison-Wesley, 1997.
