Elaine Morgan

Wow. What A Woman we lost yesterday. Why did she affect so many things around her so much? Because she was very spirited and very, very clever. At the age of 84 she still did the crossword in 20-odd minutes. And that would be the Guardian crossword – classy, plus left wing, for Elaine, OBE, Bafta and bar, thank you. And it’s harder than the one in the Times. She felt she had to do it, to know when she was losing it. I don’t think she ever did, at least not prior to her stroke last summer, and I suspect not intellectually after it either.

You can get her basic gen from the BBC page, but you’ll know what kind of person she’d have needed to be to get to Oxford before the war, as a working class girl (I suppose “upper working class” since her dad was in a technical or management place at the pit). She’d originally intended to try to get in for science, but thought it might be easier in English. In the fifties and subsequently, during some very formative years for the BBC she became a very notable scriptwriter: some of Doctor Finlay’s Casebook, a film about Lloyd George, an adaptation of Testament of Youth, and many many others – all done from her home near Pontypridd, near where Tom Jones and David Kelly came from.

She read The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris, and became interested in the idea of a water-side influence on human evolution, and in turn, on the way this and other issues might have had specifically female influences on evolution. Quite soon she became internationally known amongst feminists, and an American bloke bet her a dollar to a doughnut she’d soon move to London. As it was her, she bet him a dollar to a doughnut she wouldn’t – and she didn’t.

When I moved to Wales and found she lived in the next valley, I tried to invite myself round to see her, and she kindly agreed. I wasn’t sure whether the bunch of blue and white freesias I brought her would be to her taste, so I was delighted to see she had in the vase a similar bunch but yellow, that needed replacing. She made us some tea, and made her way unsteadily to the table, where she got rather suspicious about my lines of inquiry. I think she wondered what I was up to – a reporter maybe, preparing a piece for publication without telling her. Actually of course, I was just asking a lot of nosy questions from someone I never expected to meet, but whom I’d long found terribly interesting.

This photo from http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/elaine-morgan-re-learning-ropes-after-2058316 shows her at the same table in the same window where she entertained me.  Not sure about the cat

This photo from http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/local-news/elaine-morgan-re-learning-ropes-after-2058316 shows her at the same table in the same window where she entertained me. Not sure about the cat

Yes, I’m afraid it is true that she tended to place a lot of confidence in beliefs before they quite deserved it. She told me that day that ducks couldn’t take off vertically from water (diving ducks can’t but the ones most commonly seen can when they want to). She also told me that all we had of Proconsul was a tooth, which surprised me but which I subsequently repeated without checking it. Maybe a bit more scientific culture at uni would have helped, but maybe not, since I can assure you that much vertebrate palaeontological orthodoxy consists of beliefs that don’t deserve the confidence they’re granted. It is I think true that aquatic explanations are not really needed to explain our upright posture, nor maybe certain other things it offers explanations for, but I would be very surprised if in a thousand years from now they don’t end up believing some things in us result from the millions of years we spent evolving beside, and so often becoming fossilised in, water. And over forty years ago when I first read her “The Descent of Woman”, the aquatic idea was most certainly worthy of careful detailed consideration. Though it’s true many details don’t quite work out as originally sketched, it’s most certainly true that it and Elaine have got the same kind of unjustified aggression not too dissimilar from that experienced by Julia Gillard. And certainly, evolutionary scientists have a lot of their own mistakes to sort out.

She told me she was finding it hard to get her books published. If someone like that was finding it hard, the time was certainly ripe for old-style publishers to be bypassed and the new Amazon-style self-publishing to be welcomed. She had recently written a book Pinker’s List where she called into question the view she thought Pinker was putting, that humans were essentially aggressive. I read her book, and didn’t find its style too far removed from the sort of things Pinker says in his interviews. Some years later, and Pinker is now known for saying people are rather friendly and civilised after all. Hmm. I really don’t think Pinker’s books deserve to be read so much more widely than that book by Elaine. I now use it to prop up a bookshelf, but note with interest that Amazon offers it new for $208.70 and even used, for $46.35. Oh, and my copy has a dedication from the author! (The book has lots of particularly nice commissioned drawings in it too.)

But she didn’t value my opinion. Prior to its publication I offered to read it through, but she didn’t accept the offer, and when I read the copy she gave me, I found she’d given Elliott Sober an “s” at the end of his name, and lots more things I’d have been happy to adjust. At the end of my second and last visit, she suddenly turned to me and said in that strong deep voice Welsh women keep in reserve for suddenly settling a situation: “And now you can go!”

Well, of course I scurried off pronto. But prior to that I’d had the honour of taking her to a talk by Dan Dennett, which she much enjoyed. We went up to talk to him afterwards, and I noticed he was rather wary of her. She’d already told me Richard Dawkins had gone off her in a big way. Dennet had noticed me pulling a face in the audience when he’d reported that Penrose had claimed quantum effects ere necessary for intelligence (or was it free will?) because it added randomness. He’d immediately gone on to reassure the audience that he disagreed, but he’d already marked me out as a potential problem, so when he asked Elaine about me, he just said “Who’s this?”, not even looking at me. I could have replied all sorts of things but I just smiled enigmatically, and Elaine jumped in and said “A Friend”. 🙂

So I can claim to have been a friend of The Great Elaine! But I wasn’t. She didn’t like me, and when I met her at a talk later, she tried to snub me. I think she considered me uppity. It was just a sense of equality from me really, and in truth I’ve solved more evolutionary mysteries than she did, but there was always much more to her than just that. Until just a few months ago she wrote a rather good regular column in the Western Mail entitled “A Pensioner talks” or some such. It tended to concentrate on things like the consolations of growing old, and how Tony Blair had let down the working class. I felt it was better than the average non-specialist column in better selling newspapers.

I recently heard about her last book, published in 2008, The Naked Darwinist, available free, which summed up the AAT and its mismanagement by science. It was interesting comparing it with my book! She has a Past and Future type chapter, and she comments on the Umbrella Hypothesis nonsense, but offers a different take-down to the one I gave it. Also, she explains why she didn’t like Aaron Filler’s approach. She had though already said how you must take the good bits people offer and chuck the bad, which I did with Aaron but she didn’t. Above all, don’t miss Elaine’s response to Jim Moore. While many simply ignore the AAT, Moore is explicit about his criticisms, but they do really comprise an obsession of hate. Here are some endorsements by her supporters (mostly more prominent than Moore!)

Here’s an engram of Elaine’s mentionings in books, compared to some dinobird palaeontologists:
emengram

…and some well-known evolutionists:
emengram1

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Human evolution, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Elaine Morgan

  1. Mr or Ms.X (I couldn’t find your name), I competely agree, thanks a lot, also for the graphs. AAT today differs from Elaine’s view: it’s not about ‘aquatic apes’ or about something that happened some 6 Ma, but about Pleistocene archaic Homo populations following coasts & rivers (Littoral Theory or Coastal Dispersal Model, google ‘greg laden blog verhaegen’).
    Human Evolution soon publishes the proceedings of the symposium with David Attenborough on human waterside evolution ‘Human Evolution: Past, Present & Future’ in London 8-10 May 2013:
    SPECIAL EDITION PART 1 (end 2013)
    Introduction – Peter Rhys-Evans
    1. Human’s Association with Water Bodies: the ‘Exaggerated Diving Reflex’ and its Relationship with the Evolutionary Allometry of Human Pelvic and Brain Sizes – Stephen Oppenheimer
    2. Human Ecological Breadth: Why Neither Savanna nor Aquatic Hypotheses can Hold Water – JH Langdon
    3. Endurance Running versus Underwater Foraging: an Anatomical and Palaeoecological Perspective – Stephen Munro
    4. Wading Hypotheses of the Origin of Human Bipedalism – Algis Kuliukas
    5. The Aquatic Ape Evolves: Common Misconceptions and Unproven Assumptions about the So-Called Aquatic Ape Hypothesis – Marc Verhaegen
    6. The Epigenetic Emergence of Culture at the Coastline: Interaction of Genes, Nutrition, Environment and Demography – CL Broadhurst & Michael Crawford
    SPECIAL EDITION PART 2 (begin 2014) with 12 contributions.
    –marc verhaegen
    google
    -econiche Homo
    -aquarboreal

  2. Hi Marc! It’s me! I wonder if people notice the name on the book cover near the top right 🙂
    I hadn’t realised things had moved on from Elaine’s position recently. It’s interesting that Jonathan Kingdon wrote quite a few years ago now, about the possibility of littoral distribution.
    It occurred to me the other day that we might get something from the possibility that Georgia was the place where we “made the leap” from Australopithecus type things to erectus type things (if it was). Presumably it was colder there than in Africa, and if so, presumably that wasn’t where we lost our hair. I can’t quite remember what else occurred to me concerning that, but I’m going to do a “Defending David Attenborough” post as soon as I’ve put my self-profile postings up, and dealt once again with Holtz, and finished the 18million to 256 colour reduction algorithm, and given the book the final update, and sued the Inland Revenue, and… !

    I was a bit terse with Sir David (by snailmail) when I thought recently he was about to support the standard dinobird thing unthinkingly, but actually the TV programme advocated Anchiornis as a gliding ancestor of Archaeopteryx – contra the usual crap. So what with that, and the mindless attacks he’s got about the AAT event, I’ll have something to say about how he’s still a better evolutionary scientist than the vast majority.

    I’ll be begging a copy of the conference report! 🙂

  3. I heared this morning that the 2d part of the special edition of Human Evolution, with a lot of (12?) contributions on our semi-aquatic past (see earlier post), just appeared.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s