Title: Huxley and education - Address at the Opening of the College Year, Columbia University, September 28, 1910
Author: Osborn, Henry Fairfield
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.


*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Huxley and education - Address at the Opening of the College Year, Columbia University, September 28, 1910" ***


generously made available by Internet Archive/American Libraries
(https://archive.org/details/americana)



Note: Images of the original pages are available through
      Internet Archive/American Libraries. See
      https://archive.org/details/huxleyandeducat01osbogoog



HUXLEY AND EDUCATION

Address at the Opening of the College Year
Columbia University
September 28, 1910

by

HENRY FAIRFIELD OSBORN
LL.D., Hon. D.Sc, Camb.
Da Costa Professor of Zoology



New York
Charles Scribner's Sons
1910

Copyright, 1910
By Henry Fairfield Osborn

The De Vinne Press



HUXLEY AND EDUCATION

     "The stars come nightly to the sky;
     The tidal wave comes to the sea;
     Nor time, nor space, nor deep, nor high
     Can keep my own away from me."

                          --BURROUGHS.


The most sanguine day of the college year is the opening one: the
student has not yet faced the impossible task annually presented of
embracing the modern world of knowledge; his errors and failures of
earlier years are forgotten; he faces the coming months full of new
hope.

How would my old master, Huxley, address you if he were to find you in
this felicitous frame of mind, sharpening your wits and your pencils for
the contest which will begin to-morrow morning in every hall and
laboratory of this great University? May I speak for him as I heard him
during the winter of 1879-80 from his lecture desk and as he kindly in
conversation gave me of his stores of wisdom and experience? May I add
from his truly brilliant essays entitled "Science and Education,"
delivered between 1874 and 1887? May I contribute also from my own
thirty-seven years of life as a student and teacher, beginning in 1873
and reaching a turning point in 1910 when Columbia enrolled me among its
research professors? It was Huxley's life, his example, the tone of his
writings, rather than his actual precepts which most influenced me, for
in 1879 he was so intensely absorbed in public work and administration,
as well as in research and teaching, that little opportunity remained
for laboratory conferences with his students. How I happened to go to
him was as follows:

Unlucky--as they appeared to me at the time, but lucky as I look back
upon them--were my own early flounderings and blunderings in seeking the
true method of education. Huxley has observed of his "Voyage of the
Rattlesnake" that it is a good thing to get down to the bare bones of
existence. The same is true of self-education. As compared with the
hosts of to-day, few men in 1877 knew how to guide the graduate youth;
the Johns Hopkins was still nascent; the creative force of Louis Agassiz
had spent itself in producing the first school of naturalists, including
the genius, William James. One learnt one's errors through falling into
pitfalls. With two companions I was guided by a sort of blind instinct
to feel that the most important thing in life was to make a discovery of
some kind. On consulting one of our most forceful and genial professors
his advice was negative and discouraging: "Young men," he said, "go on
with your studies for ten or twelve years until you have covered the
whole subject; you will then be ready for research of your own." There
appeared to be something wrong about this, although we did not know
exactly what. We disregarded the advice, left the laboratory of this
professor, and at the end of the year did succeed in writing a paper
which subsequently attracted the attention of Huxley and was the
indirect means of an introduction to Darwin. It was a lame product, but
it was ours, and in looking back upon it, one feels with Touchstone in
his comment upon Audrey:


     "A poor virgin, Sir,
     An ill favored thing, Sir,
     But mine own."


I shall present in this brief address only one idea, namely, the lesson
of Huxley's life and the result of my own experience is that _productive
thinking_ is the chief _means_ as well as the chief _end_ of education,
and that the natural evolution of education will be to develop this kind
of thinking earlier and earlier in the life of the student.

One of the most marvelous of the manifold laws of evolution is what is
called '_acceleration_.' By this law the beginning of an important organ
like the eye of the chick, for example, is thrust forward into a very
early stage of embryonic development. This is, first, because the eye
is a very complex organ and needs a long time for development, and
second because the fully formed eye of most animals is needed
immediately at birth. I predict that the analogy in the evolution of
education will be very close. Productive thinking may be compared to the
eye; it is needed by the student the moment he graduates, or is hatched,
so to speak; it is now developed only in the graduate schools. It is
such an integral and essential part of education that the spirit of it
is destined to be 'accelerated,' or thrust forward into the opening and
preparatory years.

If the lines of one's life were to be cast afresh, if by some
metempsychosis one were moulded into what is known as a "great
educator," a man of conventions and platforms, and were suddenly to
become more or less responsible for 3,000 minds and souls, productive
thinking, or the "centrifugal method" of teaching, would not be
postponed to graduation or thereafter, but would begin with the
Freshman, yes, among these humble men of low estate! It may be _apropos_
to recall a story told of President McCosh of Princeton, a man who
inspired all his students to production and enlivened them with a
constant flow of humor. On one occasion he invited his predecessor,
ex-President McLean, to offer prayers in the College Chapel. Dr.
McLean's prayer was at once all embracing and reminiscent; it descended
from the foreign powers to the heads of the United States government, to
the State of New Jersey, through the Trustees, the Faculty, and, in a
perfectly logical manner, finally reached the entering class. This
naturally raised a great disturbance among the Sophomores, who were
evidently jealous of the divine blessing. The disturbance brought the
prayer to an abrupt close, and Dr. McCosh was heard to remark: "I should
think that Dr. McLean would have more sense than to pray for the
Freshmen."

As regards the raw material into which 'productive thinking' is to be
instilled, I am an optimist. I do not belong to the 'despair school' of
educators, and have no sympathy with the army of editorial writers and
prigs who are depreciating the American student. The chief trouble lies
not with our youth, nor with our schools, but with our adults. How can
springs rise higher than their sources? On the whole, you students are
very much above the average American. You are not driven to these doors;
certainly in these days of youthful freedom and choice you came of your
own free will. The very fact of your coming raises you above the general
level, and while you are here you will be living in a world of
ideas,--the only kind of a world at all worth living in. You are
temporarily cut off more or less from the world of dollars and cents,
shillings and pence. Here Huxley helps you in extolling the sheer sense
of joy in thinking truer and straighter than others, a kind of
superiority which does not mean conceit, the possession of something
which is denied the man in the street. You redound with original
impulses and creative energy, which must find expression somehow or
somewhere; if not under the prevailing incurrent, or 'centripetal
system' of academic instruction, it must let itself out in
extra-academic activities, in your sports, your societies, your
committees, your organizations, your dramatics, all good things and
having the highest educational value in so far as they represent your
output, your outflow, your centrifugal force.

You are, in fact, in a contest with your intellectual environment
outside of these walls. Morally, according to Ferrero, politically,
according to Bryce, and economically, according to Carnegie, you are in
the midst of a 'triumphant democracy.' But in the world of ideas such as
sways Italy, Germany, England, and in the highest degree France, you are
in the midst of a 'triumphant mediocrity.' Paris is a city where
_ideas_ are at a premium and money values count for very little in
public estimation. The whole public waits breathless upon the production
of 'Chanticleer.' That Walhalla of French ambition, 'la Gloire,' may be
reached by men of ideas, but not by men of the marts. Is it conceivable
that the police of New York should assemble to fight a mob gathered to
break up the opera of a certain composer? Is it conceivable that you
students should crowd into this theatre to prevent a speaker being
heard, as those of the Sorbonne did some years ago in the case of
Brunetière? If you should, no one in this city would understand you, and
the authorities would be called on promptly to interfere.

A fair measure of the culture of your environment is the depth to which
your morning paper prostitutes itself for the dollar, its shades of
yellowness, its frivolity or its unscrupulousness, or both. I sometimes
think it would be better not to read the newspapers at all, even when
they are conscientious, because of their lack of a sense of proportion,
in the news columns at least, of the really important things in American
life. Our most serious evening mentor of student manners and morals
gives six columns to a football game and six lines to a great
intercollegiate debate. Such is the difference between precept and
practice. American laurels are for the giant captain of industry; when
his life is threatened or taken away acres of beautiful forest are cut
down to procure the paper pulp necessary to set forth his achievements,
while our greatest astronomer and mathematician passes away and perhaps
the pulp of a single tree will suffice for the brief, inconspicuous
paragraphs which record his illness and death.

Your British cousin is in a far more favorable atmosphere, beginning
with his morning paper and ending with the conversation of his seniors
over the evening cigar. As a Cambridge man, having spent two years in
London and the university, I would not describe the life so much as
serious as _worth while_. There are humor and the pleasures of life in
abundance, but what is done, is done thoroughly well. Contrast the
comments of the British and American press on such a light subject as
international polo; the former alone are well worth reading, written by
experts and adding something to our knowledge of the game. In the more
novel subject of aviation we look in vain in our press for any solid
information about construction. Or take the practical subject of
politics; the British student finds every great speech delivered in
every part of the Empire published in full in his morning paper; as an
elector he gets his evidence at first hand instead of through the medium
of the editor.

I believe the greatest fault of the American student lies in the
over-development of one of his greatest virtues, namely, his
collectivism. His strong _esprit de corps_ patterns and moulds him too
far. The rewards are for the 'lock-step' type of man who conforms to the
prevailing ideals of his college. He must parade, he must cheer, to
order. Individualism is at a discount; it debars a man from the social
rewards of college life. In my last address to Columbia students on the
life of Darwin,[1] I asked what would be thought of that peculiar,
ungainly, beetle collector if he were to enter one of our colleges
to-day? He would be lampooned and laughed out of the exercise of his
preferences and predispositions. The mother of a very talented young
honor man recently confessed to me that she never spoke of her son's
rank because she found it was considered "queer." This is not what young
America generates, but what it borrows or reflects from the environment
of its elders.

Thus the young American is not lifted up by the example of his seniors,
he has to lift it up. If he is a student and has serious ambitions he
represents the young salt of his nation, and the college brotherhood in
general is a light shining in the darkness. Thus stumbling, groping,
often misled by his natural leaders, he does somehow or other, through
sheer force, acquire an education, and is just as surely coming to the
front in the leadership of the American nation as the Oxford or
Cambridge man is leading the British nation.

Our student body is as fine as can be, it represents the best blood and
the best impulses of the country; but there may be something wrong, some
loss, some delay, some misdirection of educational energy.

Bad as the British university system may be, and it has been vastly
improved by the influence of Huxley, it is more effective than ours
because more centrifugal. English lads are taught to compose, even to
speak in Latin and Greek. The Greek play is an anomaly here, it is an
annual affair at Cambridge. There are not one but many active and
successful debating clubs in Cambridge.

The faults with our educational design are to be discovered through
study of the lives of great men and through one's own hard and stony
experience. The best text-books for the nurture of the mind are these
very lives, and they are not found in the lists of the pedagogues.
Consult your Froebel, if you will, but follow the actual steps to
Parnassus of the men whose political, literary, scientific, or
professional career you expect to follow. If you would be a missionary,
take the lives of Patterson and Livingstone; if an engineer, 'The Lives
of Engineers;' if a physician, study that of Pasteur, which I consider
by far the noblest scientific life of the nineteenth century; if you
would be a man of science, study the recently published lives and
letters of Darwin, Spencer, Kelvin, and of our prototype Huxley.

Here you may discover the secret of greatness, which is, first, to be
born great, unfortunately a difficult and often impossible task; second,
to possess the _instinct of self-education_. You will find that every
one of these masters while more or less influenced by their tutors and
governors was led far more by a sort of internal, instinctive feeling
that they must do certain things and learn certain things. They may
fight the battle royal with parents, teachers, and professors, they may
be as rebellious as ducklings amidst broods of chickens and give as much
concern to the mother fowls, but without exception from a very early age
they do their own thinking and revolt against having it done for them,
and they seek their own mode of learning. The boy Kelvin is taken to
Germany by his father to study the mathematics of Kelland; he slips down
into the cellar to the French of Fourier, and at the age of fifteen
publishes his first paper to demonstrate that Fourier is right and
Kelland is wrong. Pasteur's first research in crystallography is so
brilliant that his professor urges him to devote himself to this branch
of science, but Pasteur insists upon continuing for five years longer
his general studies in chemistry and physics.

This is the true empirical, or laboratory method of getting at the
trouble, if trouble there be in the American _modus operandi_; but a
generation of our great educators have gone into the question as if no
experiments had ever been made. In the last thirty years one has seen
rise up a series of 'healers,' trying to locate the supposed weakness in
the American student: one finds it in the classic tongues and
substitutes the modern; one in the required system and substitutes the
elective; one in the lack of contact between teacher and student and
brings in preceptors, under whom the patient shows a slight improvement.
Now the kind of diagnosis which comes from examining such a life as that
of Huxley shows that the real trouble lies in the prolongation to mature
years of what may be styled the 'centripetal system,' namely, that
afferent, or inflowing mediæval and oriental kind of instruction in
which the student is rarely if ever forced to do his own thinking.

You will perceive by this that I am altogether on your side, an
insurgent in education, altogether against most of my profession,
altogether in sympathy with the over-fed student, and altogether against
the prevailing system of overfeeding, which stuffs, crams, pours in,
spoon-feeds, and as a sort of deathbed repentance institutes creative
work after graduation.

How do you yourself stand on this question? Is your idea of a good
student that of a good 'receptacle'? Do you regard your instructors as
useful grain hoppers whose duty it is to gather kernels of wisdom from
all sources and direct them into your receptive minds? Are you content
to be a sort of psychic _Sacculina_, a vegetative animal, your mind a
vast sack with two systems, one for the incurrent, the other for the
outcurrent of predigested ideas? If so, all your mental organs of combat
and locomotion will atrophy. Do you put your faith in reading, or in
book knowledge? If so, you should know that not a five foot shelf of
books, not even the ardent reading of a fifty foot shelf aided by
prodigious memory will give you that enviable thing called culture,
because the yardstick of this precious quality is not what you take in
but what you give out, and this from the subtle chemistry of your brain
must have passed through a mental metabolism of your own so that you
have lent something to it. To be a man of culture you need not be a man
of creative power, because such men are few, they are born not made; but
you must be a man of some degree of centrifugal force, of individuality,
of critical opinion, who must make over what is read into conversation
and into life. Yes, one little idea of your own well expressed has a
greater cultural value than one hundred ideas you absorb; one page that
you produce, finely written, new to science or to letters and really
worth reading, outweighs for your own purposes the five foot shelf. On
graduation, _presto_, all changes, then of necessity must your life be
independent and centrifugal; and just in so far as it has these powers
will it be successful; just in so far as it is merely imitative will it
be a failure.

There is no revolution in the contrary, or outflowing design. Like all
else in the world of thought it is, in the germ at least, as old as the
Greeks and its illustrious pioneer was Socrates (469-399 B. C.), who led
the approach to truth not by laying down the law himself but by means of
answers required of his students. The efferent outflowing principle,
moreover, is in the program of the British mathematician, Perry and many
other reformers to-day.

Against the centripetal theory of acquiring culture Huxley revolted with
all his might. His daily training in the centrifugal school was in the
genesis of opinion; and he incessantly practiced the precept that
forming one's own opinion is infinitely better than borrowing one. Our
sophisticated age discourages originality of view because of the
plenitude of a ready-made supply of editorials, of reviews, of reviews
of reviews, of critiques, comments, translations and cribs. Study
political speeches, not editorials about them; read original debates,
speeches, and reports. If you purpose to be a naturalist get as soon as
you can at the objects themselves; if you would be an artist, go to your
models; if a writer, on the same principle take your authors at first
hand, and, after you have wrestled with the texts, and reached the full
length of your own fathom line, then take the fathom line of the critic
and reviewer. Do not trust to mental peptones. Carry the independent,
inquisitive, skeptical and even rebellious spirit of the graduate school
well down into undergraduate life, and even into school life. If you are
a student force yourself to think independently; if a teacher compel
your youth to express their own minds. In listening to a lecture weigh
the evidence as presented, cultivate a polite skepticism, not affected
but genuine, keep a running fire of interrogation marks in your mind,
and you will finally develop a mind of your own. Do not climb that
mountain of learning in the hope that when you reach the summit you will
be able to think for yourself; think for yourself while you are
climbing.

In studying the lives of your great men you will find certain of them
were veritable storehouses of facts, but Darwin, the greatest of them
all in the last century, depended largely upon his inveterate and
voluminous powers of note-taking. Thus you may pray for the daily bread
of real mental growth, for the future paradise is a state of mind and
not a state of memory. The line of thought is the line of greatest
resistance; the line of memory is the line of least resistance; in
itself it is purely imitative, like the gold or silver electroplating
process which lends a superficial coating of brilliancy or polish to
what may be a shallow mind.

The case is deliberately overstated to give it emphasis.

True, the accumulated knowledge of what has been thought and said,
serves as the gravity law which will keep you from flying off at a
tangent. But no warning signals are needed, there is not the least
danger that constructive thinking will drive you away from learning; it
will much more surely drive you to it, with a deeply intensified
reverence for your intellectual forebears; in fact, the eldest
offspring of centrifugal education is that keen and fresh appetite for
knowledge which springs only from trying to add your own mite to it. How
your Maxwell, Herz, Röntgen, Curie, with their world-invigorating
discoveries among the laws of radiant matter, begin to soar in your
estimation when you yourself wrest one single new fact from the
reluctant world of atoms! How your modern poets, Maeterlinck and
Rostand, take on the air of inspiration when you would add a line of
prose verse to what they are delving for in this mysterious human
faculty of ours. Regard Voltaire at the age of ten in 'Louis-le-Grand,'
the Eton of France, already producing bad verses, but with a passionate
voracity for poetry and the drama. Regard the youthful Huxley returning
from his voyage of the 'Rattlesnake' and laying out for himself a ten
years' course in search of pure information.

This route of your own to opinions, ideas, and the discovery of new
facts or principles brings you back again to Huxley as the man who
always had something of his own to say and labored to say it in such a
way as to force people to listen to him. His wondrous style did not come
easily to him; he himself told me it cost him years of effort, and I
consider his advice about style far wiser than that of Herbert Spencer.
Why forego pleasures, turn your back on the world, the flesh, and the
devil, and devote your life to erudition, observation, and the pen if
you remain unimpressive, if you cannot get an audience, if no one cares
to read what you write? This moral is one of the first that Huxley has
impressed upon you, namely, _write to be read_; if necessary "stoop to
conquer," employ all your arts and wiles to get an audience in science,
in literature, in the arts, in politics. Get an audience you must,
otherwise you will be a cipher and not a force.

Pursuant of the constructive design, the measure of the teacher's
success is the degree in which ideas come not from him but from his
pupils. A brilliant address may produce a temporary emotion of
admiration, a dry lecture may produce a permanent productive impulse in
the hearers. One may compare some who are popularly known as gifted
teachers to expert swimmers who sit on the bank and talk inspiringly on
analyses of strokes; the centrifugal teacher takes the pupils into the
water with him, he may even pretend to drown and call for a rescue. In
football parlance the coach must get into the scrimmage with the team.
This was the lesson taught me by the great embryologist Francis Balfour
of Cambridge, who was singularly noted for doing joint papers with his
men. An experiment I have tried with marked success in order to
cultivate centrifugal power and expression at the same time is to get
out of the lecture chair and make my students in turn lecture to me.
This is virtually the famous method of teaching law re-discovered by the
educational genius of Langdell; the students do all the lecturing and
discoursing, the professor lolls quietly in his chair and makes his
comments; the stimulus upon ambition and competition is fairly magical;
there is in the classroom the real intellectual struggle for existence
which one meets in the world of affairs. I would apply this very
Socratic principle in every branch of instruction, early and late, and
thus obey the 'acceleration' law in education which I have spoken of
above as bringing into earlier and earlier stages those powers which are
to be actually of service in after life.

There is then no mystery about education if we plan it along the actual
lines of self-development followed by these great leaders and shape its
deep under-current principles after our own needs and experience. Look
early at the desired goal and work toward it from the very beginning.
The proof that the secret does not lie in subject, or language, but in
preparation for the living productive principle is found in the fact
that there have been _relatively_ educated men in every stage of
history. The wall painters in the Magdalenian caves were the producers
and hence the educated men of their day. This goal of production was
sought even earlier by the leaders of Eolithic men 200,000 years ago and
is equally magnetic for the men of dirigible balloons and aeroplanes of
our day. It is, to follow in mind-culture the principle of addition and
accretion characteristic of all living things, namely, to develop the
highest degree of productive power, centrifugal force, original,
creative, individual efficiency. Through this the world advances; the
Neolithic man with his invention of polished implements succeeds the
Palæolithic, and the man of books and printing replaces the savage.

The standards of a liberal mind are and always have been the same,
namely, the sense of Truth and Beauty, both of which are again in
conformity with Nature.


     "Beauty is truth, truth beauty, that is all
     Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."

                KEATS' _Ode on a Grecian Urn_.


The sources of our facts are and always have been the same, namely, the
learning of what men before you have observed and recorded, and the
advance only through the observation of new truth, that is, old to
nature but new to man. The handling of this knowledge has always been
the same, namely, through human reason. The giving forth of this
knowledge and thus the furthering of ideas and customs has and always
will be the same, namely, through expression, vocal, written, or manual,
that is, in symbols and in design.

It follows that the all round liberally educated man, from Palæolithic
times to the time when the earth shall become a cold cinder, will always
be the same, namely, _the man who follows his standards of truth and
beauty, who employs his learning and observation, his reason, his
expression, for purposes of production, that is, to add something of his
own to the stock of the world's ideas_. This is the author's conception
of a liberal education.

One cannot too often quote the rugged insistence of Carlyle: "Produce!
Produce! Were it but the pitifullest infinitesimal fraction of a
product, produce it in God's name! 'Tis the utmost thou hast in thee:
out with it, then."

Now note that whereas there are the above six powers, namely, truth and
beauty, learning and observation, reason, and expression, which
subserve the seventh, production or constructive thinking, and whereas
the giving out of ideas is the object to be attained, only one power
figures prominently in our modern system of college and school
education, namely, the learning of facts and the memory thereof. It is
no exaggeration to say that this makes up 95% of modern education. Who
are the meteors of school and college days? For the most part those with
precocious or well trained memories. Why do so many of these meteors
flash out of existence at graduation? The answer is simple if you accept
my conception of education. Whereas it takes six powers to make a
liberally educated man or woman, and seven to make a productive man or
woman, only one power has been cultivated assiduously in the
'centripetal' education; whereas there are two great gateways of
knowledge, learning and observation, only one has been continuously
passed through; whereas there are two universal standards of truth and
beauty, only truth has constantly been held up to you, and that in
precept rather than in practice. For nothing is surer than this, that
the sense of truth must come as a daily personal experience in the life
of the student through testing values for himself, as it does in the
life of the scientist, the artist, the physician, the engineer, the
merchant. Note that whereas you are powerless unless you can by the
metabolism of logic make the sum of acquired and observed knowledge your
own, that kind of work-a-day efficient logic has never been forced upon
you and you are daily, perhaps hourly, guilty of the _non sequitur_,
the _post hoc ergo propter hoc_, the 'undistributed middle,' and all
those innocent sins against truth which come through the illogical mind.

"That man," says Huxley, "has had a liberal education ... whose
intellect is a clear, cold, logic engine, with all its parts of equal
strength, and in smooth working order; ready, like a steam-engine, to be
turned to any kind of work, and spin the gossamers as well as forge the
anchors of the mind."

Note that whereas you are a useless member of society unless you can
give forth something of what you know and feel in writing, speaking, or
design, your expressive powers may have been atrophied through
insufficient use. In brief, you may have shunned individual opinion,
observation, logic, expression, because they are each and every one on
the lines of greatest resistance. And your teachers not only allowed you
but actually encouraged and rewarded you for following the lines of
least resistance in the accurate reproduction, in examination papers and
marking systems, of their own ideas and those you found in books.

May you, therefore, write down these seven words and read them over
every morning: Truth, Beauty, Learning, Observation, Reason, Expression,
Production.

In the wondrous old quilt work of inherited, or ancestral
predispositions which make your being you may be gifted with all these
seven powers in equal and well balanced degree; if you are so blessed
you have a great career before you. If, as is more likely, you have in
full measure only a part of each, or some in large measure, some in
small, keep on the daily examination of your chart as giving you the
canons of a liberal education and of a productive mind.

Remember that as regards the somewhat overworked word 'service' every
addition in every conceivable department of human activity which is
constructive of society is service; that the spirit of science is to
transfer something of value from the unknown into the realm of the
known, and is, therefore, identical with the spirit of literature; that
the moral test of every advance is whether or not it is constructive,
for whatever is constructive is moral.

I would not for a moment take advantage of the present opportunity to
discourage the study of human nature and of the humanities, but for what
is called the best opening for a constructive career let it be Nature.

The ground for my preference is that human nature is an exhaustible
fountain of research; Homer understood it well; Solomon fathomed it;
Shakespeare divined it, both normal and abnormal; the modernists have
been squeezing out the last drops of abnormality.

Nature, studied since Aristotle's time, is still full to the brim; no
perceptible falling of its tides is evident from any point at which it
is attacked, from nebulæ to protoplasm; it is always wholesome,
refreshing, and invigorating. Of the two creative literary artists of
our time, Maeterlinck, jaded with human abnormality, comes back to the
bee and the flowers and the 'blue bird,' with a delicious renewal of
youth, while Rostand turns to the barnyard.

FOOTNOTE:

[1] Life and Works of Darwin. Pop. Sci. Monthly, Apr., 1909, pp.
315-340. (Address delivered at Columbia University on the one hundredth
anniversary of Darwin's birth, as the first of a series of nine lectures
on "Charles Darwin and His Influence on Science.")





*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Huxley and education - Address at the Opening of the College Year, Columbia University, September 28, 1910" ***

Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.