While reading Darwin's The Temple of Nature Canto I, I was struck by the language the author uses while writing the poem. Not only does he utilize scientific imagery, as in the stanza about "chemic forms combine;/ or Mucor-stems, a vegetative tribe spread their fine roots," he also makes references to religion: "Imperious man, who rules the bestial crowd, of language, reason, and reflection proud, with brow erect who scorns this earthy sod, and styles himself in the image of his God." Throughout the canto, as well, he utilizes a lot of mythological imagery: "Here young Dione arms her quiver'd Loves, schools her bright Nymphs, and practices her doves."
How does Darwin reconcile these three world-views that don't always necessarily mesh? We know that the dividers between "science" and "religion" are less exact than we may now be accustomed to: how does the interplay between these multiple views seem to inform Darwin's work when you relate them to Zoonomia and the rest of The Origin of Nature?
I found it interesting that in the notes for The Temple of Nature Darwin explains many of his scientific concepts from a social/anthropological knowledge base. Darwin illustrates human improvement over time through their movement from the use of art to depict meaning to the development of a written language. Similarly, he attributes his ideas that all humans come from a common family to the similarity of religions and languages. In using religious and mythological imagery, I think Darwin was merely using the explanatory tools he had available to him, which was knowledge of the humanities. Since religion had long been used to explain human nature, it makes sense that Darwin would attempt to use religion and artistic forms to explain scientific phenomena as well. It is notable, however, that there are inconsistencies even in Darwin's idea of creation, given that he begins sections II of Canto I with the fall from Paradise, but later goes on to speak about geology and fossils and the great amount of time it took for the world to develop. Is Darwin contradicting his own ideas of creation? Or am I misreading the Eden part?
ReplyDeleteI'm glad you brought up Darwin's language and his fusion of science and religion/ the humanities. Considering the modern perception of a divide between science and literature, the fact that Darwin chose to describe his theories through poetry really intrigued me (and made me to imagine how my advisor would react if I chose to write my thesis in verse). We know that Darwin was occasionally criticized for his choice of style, with some claiming that he was merely writing "flashy prose"-- might his views have gained more widespread credibility if they had been presented in the form of a treatise?
ReplyDeleteIt makes me think about how three of our authors- Trembley, Diderot, and Darwin- chose to write about their beliefs in three significantly contrasting ways. Does any one style- be it treatise, dialogue, or poem- offer more flexibility when it comes to combining both scientific and religious concepts? Do any of them hold more or less scientific "weight" in the minds of readers? I'm really not sure.