Darwin Misunderstood

Abstract

To argue fully Sir Edward Poulton's two main points¹ against my biography—the “fragmentary” nature of Darwin and his “fear” of his father—would take more space than I can ask for. I will only remark on the first point that the term “fragmentary” was intended by me to refer primarily to categories of imaginative and intellectual activity, and that my case is not even touched by the fact that Darwin was, as everyone knows, the best of neighbours and friends; and on the second point that no more is Darwin's alleged “fear” of Robert Darwin disproved by citing his “boundless and most touching reverence,” since—as any psychologist might testify—it is the very “boundlessness” of that reverence which suggests some hidden and contradictory motivation, lying in all probability, I would hazard, below the threshold even of Charles Darwin's own consciousness.