Wonderful Life: Burgess Shale and the Nature of History [Paperback]

This fascinating and thought-provoking book has two main stands; a description and (controversial) interpretation of some surprising fossils from the earliest period of multicellular animals, and an appeal to overturn the idea of evolution as a "cone of increasing diversity". Instead, Gould argues, evolution should be thought of as a "copiously branching bush".

All the while, he provides insights into what it is paleontologists actually *do*, and how theories about life and evolution develop and change over time.

Gould never ceases to astound me with his talents. Not only does he have fascinating insights into science, but each of his books is a literary event of exceptional clarity, with elegant yet distinctively quirky prose and humor. Reading his books, I think, is like drinking truly fine wine, each sip to savor and each vintage subtly different. His early death is a great loss.

This book covers a revolution that Gould argues was hidden from the public, that is, the complete reinterpretation of the Burgess Shale, which is the most important Cambrian fossil bed ever to have been found. In my reading, there were two fundamental ideas Gould wanted to get across: 1) that, with explosions of new forms of life that follow grand extinctions or leaps in evolutionary development, there is actually more rather than less diversity in basic forms; 2) this fact flatly contradicts our assumptions that life "progresses" by becoming ever more complex (and to some, evolutionarily superior, culminating in man). What Gould says is that, if you rewound the tape of life through all the contingencies that led to homo sapiens, it is more likely than not that we would never have existed. He would, in other words, remove us from the inevitability of occupying the apex of life's hierarchy.

For anyone familiar with Gould's essays, which I believe rank as works of genius in the genre of science popularization, will recognize these themes. What sets this book apart is his systematic, highly technical argument from the evidence of the re-interpretation. Much of the revolution depends on the numbers of joints in fossil legs, rendering them different than all the insect species that evolved from different ancestors, and other minutiae that Gould describes with peerless elegance. As such, I believe, he has succeeded in producing that most difficult of books: hard science for specialists that is also intended for the interested (and persistent) lay reader. This is a true virtuoso performance that is an incredible pleasure to read. As always, the persona he presents in the book is wonderfully companionable and open-minded.

As a reporter of science, I was surprised to learn that Gould was disdained by many of his colleagues at Harvard and the wider Cambridge area as having fallen behind the more mathematical and progressist-evolutionary approaches that have taken over the field of paleontology and biology. As I understood it - and this does not fully do justice to the objections of these scholars to Gould - they seemed to feel that he was wrong when he argued that many attributes did not have meaning or evolutionary significance and hence all should not be treated as such (i.e. catalogued ad infinitum in a scholastic manner that ignores certain assumptions). Instead, in my reading, Gould argued that, when catastrophic changes in the environment killed off huge numbers of species, the traits that allowed some to survive were usually evolved for other reasons and were perhaps redundant or useless at the time of the event. This book makes the most detailed case for Gould's position on these issues. I happen to believe that Gould is correct and that the vogue may one day shift back in his direction, i.e. become less determinist.

Warmly recommended.

This one really hit the spot!

Excepting the poorly reproduced photos (still, they're better than nothing), this is a well illustrated book (with diagrams of specimens by scientists, and nice line drawn illustrations of reconstructions of the fauna by Marianne Collins), and technical enough to be challenging without being so technical as to completely lose the layman.

Gould is also good on broader contexts, situating the whole story in amongst a biography of Walcott himself, and a portrait of the times, and drawing out how the man and the times conspired to, according to Gould, mis-read the story of the Burgess Shale quite spectacularly. I'm totally with Gould in wondering why knowledge of this episode in evolution isn't more widely discussed and known... it's so incredibly exciting and fascinating.

Gould's another of these science proselytisers that I find very inspiring. Sometimes a bit up himself perhaps (tho' it's a different brand of up himself from Dawkins, who he apparently had something of a tiff with!), but undoubtedly able to tell an interesting story very well, covering much ground and many bases with verve.

Subsequently I've discovered that things have moved on in this area, and Gould's interpretation has itself been called into question. Sadly he's now dead, and can't continue to be involved in this fascinating and ever evolving debate. But his books live on, and make great reading.