Use It or Lose It: Darwin and Aesthetic Appreciation

In his autobiography, Charles Darwin makes the argument that because his brain has become "a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts," rather than an arena for aesthetic or artistic enjoyment. The part of his brain formerly devoted to the appreciation of such arts has atrophied and these "higher tastes" no longer appeal to him. Darwin remarks that at this time in his life, he "cannot endure to read a line of poetry" and claims that the works of Shakespeare now "nauseate" him. Music and beautiful scenery no longer inspire positive feelings in him, either. Novels, however, still bring pleasure to Darwin at this time because he believes them to be a sort of "degenerate aestheticism," meaning that Darwin still regards novels as "works of the imagination" but believes them to be of a lower order then poetry, music, or pretty scenery.

Darwin never explicitly states why he considers fictional books to be over a lower order than other art forms, but he does mention that he still finds books rooted in fact to be as appealing as ever. I can only speculate that Darwin prefers novels to other art forms because novels relate more the the books of facts that he was so used to reading and enjoying. There are likely to be a few facts worked into any given novel, and one could argue that many novels teach a lesson to readers through some sort of moral. It is somewhat rare that a novel would be purely aesthetic, whereas there are plenty of songs written just because they sound good and several poems forced together by pretty rhyme. I cannot, however, be sure of the true reasons for Darwin's assertion that novels are of a lower order than other art forms.

In any case, I do not believe that whether Darwin prefers to read books or poems in his old age is what should most concern us about the "theory of literary (r)evolution" section of his autobiography. My biggest concern is that this brilliant man once enjoyed many aesthetic things and has now narrowed his interest in art down to solely novels with Disney endings and lovable, attractive female characters. I am struck with the concern that Darwin's theory is more of a theory of devolution in the case of literature than one of evolution. Similar to how as humans became more intelligent, they appeared to become weaker and more fragile, as Darwin's mind became stronger in the terms of scientific though and analyzing data, it became weaker in his ability to relish in the arts.

Though Darwin never would have read May Kendall's "The Lower Life," because he grew to find poetry insufferable, and he would have hated H. G. Wells' The Time Machine, due to its absence of lovable female characters and presence an ending that is disturbing more than happy. Regardless, both contain subject matter related to Darwin's predicament with the arts.

For example, in May Kendall's "The Lower Life," Kendall remarks on the fact that in human evolution toward a greater mind, we have regressed in many categories, and as a result, many "lower" animals can do certain things better than people can. For instance, birds are much better at naturally being able to take off flying than humans. Similarly, in Darwin's "evolution" into a revolutionary theorist, he began lagging in subjects not fact-based which he was less devoted to. Just as humans don't have a need for gills because they don't live in the water, Darwin's brain stopped needing to appreciate art when he began exclusively studying fact.

If Darwin had bothered to read The Time Machine, he may have realized that the book has the same moral that he attempts to convey in his autobiography. Darwin's specialization led him to lost aesthetic appreciation. Similarly, the Morlocks in The Time Machine have no aesthetic appeal or focus, but they are very intelligent, and they are science and fact-minded, as well. On the other hand, the Eloi are all about aesthetic appeal. They have devolved away from the ability to reason and behave like unmedicated children with A.D.D. Both of these races come from the Victorian humans. The message that Wells gets across is that these two sides of a human should never be separated. Aesthetics and fact need to be together as one in order for our race to exist. Otherwise, like the Morlocks and the Eloi, humans will meet their impending doom, caused by relying on either art or science too heavily. For example, the Morlocks rely solely on the Eloi for food. The Eloi depend on fruit, but when the fruit goes away, both species will die out.

Darwin describes his state as "enfeebled" after reflecting on the "atrophy" of his mind. He thus recognizes that by separating himself from "the higher tastes" of aesthetics, he is weakening himself and thereby weakening mankind by doing so (assuming that he should go on to pass off such habits to his offspring).