Whatever Makes You Happy: A Look at Literature from Darwin’s Perspective

Darwin’s autobiography offers an interesting perspective on the appeal of different types of literature. Darwin places a great deal of value on poetry, while novels are of so little value that they help cause the atrophy of the brain from which he claims to suffer. In particular, Darwin places a high aesthetic and intellectual value on poetry; it is positioned, as a literature for “higher aesthetic tastes,” alongside essays and books on history, biography, and travel. This likely means that Darwin believes poetry shares the qualities of these works, such as a solid base in reality and a clear set of themes or ideas. On the other hand, Darwin calls novels “works of the imagination” which are “not of a very high order.” The degenerate novel’s traits contrast those of the more intellectual histories, biographies, and travels—at least from Darwin’s point of view (though his view was likely partially influenced by the society of his day). In this autobiography, Darwin suggests that aesthetic and intellectual values are the desired traits of the “natural selection” of literary forms. However, I believe that it is for enjoyment or entertainment and not simply for aesthetic or intellectual value that we should (and typically do) read, and the reason that a work of literature becomes well-known and long-lasting is because of the enjoyment we get from reading it.

All works of literature differ from text to text in terms of aesthetic and intellectual value, and the value placed on each text is completely subjective. Literature is primarily read because it is enjoyable. While the aesthetic and intellectual value may sometimes contribute to our enjoyment of literature, in other cases they may contribute very little to our enjoyment (as in Darwin’s case, since his preference for novels “that do not end unhappily” and contain “some person whom one can thoroughly love, and if a pretty woman all the better” made me think more of a soap opera than anything intellectual or aesthetic). In Darwin’s day, there seemed to have been a standard of “good” poetry—as he is able to rattle of a list of poets such as Milton, Byron, and Shakespeare—whose qualities, whether intellectual, aesthetic, imaginative, etc. made them engaging to read. The enjoyment gotten from reading these works and not necessarily the aesthetic or intellectual qualities (though they certainly don’t hurt) is what has made them persist as something of standards even in modern times. If they weren’t entertaining in some aspect, they wouldn’t have survived as well as they did.

On looking at “Lay of the Trilobite” from the perspective of Darwin’s autobiography, the poem seems to possess all of the traits Darwin would want to find in a poem. For example, the poem is—to me, as this value is subjective—stylistically, ideologically, and skillfully aesthetic. Looking at the rhyme scheme, the traits such as alliteration (“mighty mind,” etc.), allusion (“greet with hymn-book in one hand/ And pistol in the other!” suggests a missionary), and irony (such as “And oh, a pretty fix you’re in!”), can be considered aesthetically pleasing. The poem is also valuable intellectually; Darwin and other Victorians might have appreciated poetry for all of the potential it possesses in such a small area, and for all of the ideas it includes in addition to its aesthetic value. For example, there is the idea of the haughty or arrogant man (“The man cannot find “Sufficient vague and mighty thought/ To fill [his] mighty mind.”) and his decline (such as the “Politics to make you fight/ As if you were possessed.”) It is also interesting to note that the poem also has similarities to the idea of classification, as the footnote alludes to the difficulties with classifying nature just as it is difficult to classify all novels or all poetry or other literary genres in a hierarchy.

“Lay of the Trilobite” is entertaining, and its subject is an interesting one, as it presents an original point about the general reception of Charles Darwin’s works—which some accepted with arrogance, as the idea of Man being on the top of the evolutionary ladder was flattering—by turning the speaker’s reaction about at the end. The poem’s different point of view makes it an interesting read, which is likely why it has persisted in modern times. The fact that the poem possesses both an intellectual and an aesthetic value matches the qualities of poetry in Darwin’s theory of literary evolution, but this alone is not enough to allow literature to “select” and continue. Without someone’s—or really many someone’s—enjoyment of this poem, it would not be well-known today.

A look at The Time Machine from Darwin’s perspective, as well, is enlightening. This text is a novel and—according to Darwin—should be only somewhat aesthetically pleasing though not very intellectually valuable. Though it does not possess the same type of flow of words that poems like “Trilobite” do, one can argue that The Time Machine is just as aesthetically pleasing as well, with traits such as its long descriptive passages. While Darwin seems to claim that novels are not as intellectually pleasing, I would argue that The Time Machine is just as intellectually pleasing as “Trilobite” is. Naturally, this value is very subjective, but I believe that The Time Machine possesses a good deal of interesting ideas and themes such as invention, dystopia, and the theory of evolution. One of the novel’s ideas also has similarities with Darwin’s literary beliefs, as there is a contrast and separation between the aesthetics of the Eloi and the intellect of the Morlocks.

If enjoyment is the way in which certain types of literature persists, than I would argue that The Time Machine is much more likely to persist than “Lay of the Trilobite,” as it is more of a well-known and well-loved work today. It is more likely to be enjoyed by the modern short-attention-spanned society, as the work is a mysterious adventure story with an intriguing plot. “Lay of the Trilobite,” on the other hand, is interesting mostly because it pertains to Darwin’s theory and our acceptance of it. It lacks any sort of adventure or real plot, and those who gain pleasure from it are more likely—because of its topic—to be educated and to already be interested in either literature (like poetry) or science (like Darwin). The Time Machine, on the other hand, is much more readily accessible because of its easily-followed plot, engaging adventure, and even its general idea (as there are now a great deal of stories or movies that deal with the concept of an actual time machine and not just time travel, as Wells made this idea more popular). Accessible and entertaining stories like The Time Machine are more widely accepted today and will likely continue to be so—accessibility, popular ideas, and adventure trumps intellect and aesthetic in terms of enjoyment for many people of today’s world.