bluegargantua (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
bluegargantua) wrote2008-12-22 09:54 pm
bluegargantua) wrote2008-12-22 09:54 pm
Entry tags:
A Trying Review
Hey,
Yesterday I also finished up Trying Leviathan: The Nineteenth-Century New York Court Case That Put the Whale on Trial and Challenged the Order of Nature by D. Graham Burnett.
So you probably don't think of the whale as a fish. A whale is a sea-going mammal, not a fish. At least, that's the way we think of it today. In the early 1800's, however, the question was a lot more important. Most people divided animals biblically into those that swim, those that fly and those that walk the earth. Most methods of scientific classification followed suit although whales, bats and men occupied odd "edge cases" that proved thorny. In the late 1700's a new system, one based on comparative anatomy became popular and it declared whale to be mammals, just like men or dogs.
The new science would go on trial in New York. A law was enacted that created a "fish oil" inspector whose job it was to go around and measure and certify the quantity and quality of fish oil. For this, the fish oil dealer would pay a fee to the inspector. In New York, a dealer in whale oil refused to pay for an inspection because whale oil was not fish oil. So for a $75 fine, the case went to court.
This book has a lot of potential. A wide range of people, scientific luminaries, whalers, businessmen, politicians, all marched through the courtroom to testify on whether or not a whale was a fish (or whether whale oil was fish oil). There was a lot of good stuff to work with here. Sadly, most of it is in the footnotes. This really has the feel of someone's thesis regurgitated into hardback. The research is impressive and could've built a much more compelling narrative, but it just sort of meanders.
The author wanted to touch on the idea of "what did people from different walks of life think on the question of how a whale should be classified" and there were clear expansions into "how much authority do we lend to scientific experts" and "is there a place for unscientific folk knowledge" all of this got covered, but the trial itself is depicted only in snapshots throughout the book and it seems that the most compelling part of the whole story is brushed aside.
Still, despite being a little flat and disjoint, there are a lot of little windows into people's thinking about animals and their relation to them in the book. I just wish it'd all been tied together a bit better.
later
Tom
Yesterday I also finished up Trying Leviathan: The Nineteenth-Century New York Court Case That Put the Whale on Trial and Challenged the Order of Nature by D. Graham Burnett.
So you probably don't think of the whale as a fish. A whale is a sea-going mammal, not a fish. At least, that's the way we think of it today. In the early 1800's, however, the question was a lot more important. Most people divided animals biblically into those that swim, those that fly and those that walk the earth. Most methods of scientific classification followed suit although whales, bats and men occupied odd "edge cases" that proved thorny. In the late 1700's a new system, one based on comparative anatomy became popular and it declared whale to be mammals, just like men or dogs.
The new science would go on trial in New York. A law was enacted that created a "fish oil" inspector whose job it was to go around and measure and certify the quantity and quality of fish oil. For this, the fish oil dealer would pay a fee to the inspector. In New York, a dealer in whale oil refused to pay for an inspection because whale oil was not fish oil. So for a $75 fine, the case went to court.
This book has a lot of potential. A wide range of people, scientific luminaries, whalers, businessmen, politicians, all marched through the courtroom to testify on whether or not a whale was a fish (or whether whale oil was fish oil). There was a lot of good stuff to work with here. Sadly, most of it is in the footnotes. This really has the feel of someone's thesis regurgitated into hardback. The research is impressive and could've built a much more compelling narrative, but it just sort of meanders.
The author wanted to touch on the idea of "what did people from different walks of life think on the question of how a whale should be classified" and there were clear expansions into "how much authority do we lend to scientific experts" and "is there a place for unscientific folk knowledge" all of this got covered, but the trial itself is depicted only in snapshots throughout the book and it seems that the most compelling part of the whole story is brushed aside.
Still, despite being a little flat and disjoint, there are a lot of little windows into people's thinking about animals and their relation to them in the book. I just wish it'd all been tied together a bit better.
later
Tom