Advertisement

Journal of the History of Biology

, Volume 44, Issue 4, pp 693–712 | Cite as

Reinventing Richard Goldschmidt: Reputation, Memory, and Biography

  • Michael R. DietrichEmail author
Article

Abstract

Richard Goldschmidt was one of the most controversial biologists of the mid-twentieth century. Rather than fade from view, Goldschmidt’s work and reputation has persisted in the biological community long after he has. Goldschmidt’s longevity is due in large part to how he was represented by Stephen J. Gould. When viewed from the perspective of the biographer, Gould’s revival of Goldschmidt as an evolutionary heretic in the 1970s and 1980s represents a selective reinvention of Goldschmidt that provides a contrast to other kinds of biographical commemorations by scientists.

Keywords

Richard Goldschmidt hopeful monsters evolutionary synthesis Stephen J. Gould punctuated equilibrium biography 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abir-Am, Pnina. 1982. “How Scientists View Their Heroes: Some Remarks on the Mechanism of Myth Construction.” Journal of the History of Biology 15: 281–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abir-Am, Pnina. 1985. “Themes, Genres and Orders of Legitimation in the Consolidation of New Scientific Disciplines: Deconstructing the History of Molecular Biology.” History of Science 23: 75–117.Google Scholar
  3. Abir-Am, Pnina. 1987. “The Biotheoretical Gathering, Transdisciplinary Authority and the Incipient Legitimation of Molecular Biology in the 1930s: New Perspective on the Historical Sociology of Science.” History of Science 25: 1–70.Google Scholar
  4. Abir-Am, Pnina.@ 1999. “The First American and French Commemorations in Molecular Biology: From Collective Memory to Comparative History.” Commemorative Practices in Science: Historical Perspectives on the Politics of Collective Memory, Osiris, 2nd Series 14: 324–372.Google Scholar
  5. Abir-Am, Pnina and Elliot, Clark. 1999. “Commemorative Practices in Science: Historical Perspectives on the Politics of Collective Memory.” Osiris, 2nd Series 14: 37–60.Google Scholar
  6. Browne, Janet. 2010. “Making Darwin: Biography and the Changing Representations of Charles Darwin.” Journal of Interdisciplinary History 40: 347–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bush, Guy. 1982. “Goldschmidt’s Follies.” Paleobiology 8: 463–469.Google Scholar
  8. Cairns, John, Stent, Gunter and Watson, James (eds.). 1966/2007. Phage and the Origins of Molecular Biology. Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cantor, Geoffrey. 1996. “The Scientist as Hero: Public Images of Michael Faraday.” Michael Shortland and Richard Yeo (eds.), Telling Lives Science: Essays on Scientific Biography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Carlson, E. A. 1966. The Gene: A Critical History. Ames: Iowa State University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Charlesworth, Brian, Lande, R. and Slatkin, M. 1982. “A Neo-Darwinian Commentary on Macroevolution.” Evolution 36: 474–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Comfort, Nathaniel. 2008. “Rebellion and Iconoclasm in the Life and Science of Barbara McClintock.” Oren Harman and Michael R. Dietrich (eds.), Rebels, Mavericks, and Heretics in Biology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Creager, Angela. 2010. “The Paradox of the Phage Group: Essay Review.” The Journal of the History of Biology 43: 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis, Gergory K., Dietrich, Michael R. and Jacobs, David. 2009. “Homeotic Mutants and the Assimilation of Developmental Genetics into the Evolutionary Synthesis.” Joe Cain and Michael Ruse (eds.), Descended from Darwin: Insights into American Evolutionary Studies, 1900–1970. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, pp. 133–154.Google Scholar
  15. Dietrich, Michael R. 1995. “Richard Goldschmidt’s “Heresies” and the Evolutionary Synthesis.” Journal of the History of Biology 28: 431–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dietrich, Michael R.@ 1998. “Paradox and Persuasion: Negotiating the Place of Molecular Evolution Within Evolutionary Biology.” Journal of the History of Biology 31: 85–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dietrich, M. R. 2000. “From Hopeful Monsters to Homeotic Effects: Richard Goldschmidt’s Integration of Development, Evolution, and Genetics.” American Zoologist 40: 28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dietrich, Michael R. 2003. “Richard Goldschmidt: Hopeful Monsters and Other “Heresies”.” Nature Reviews Genetics 4: 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dietrich, Michael R. 2008. “Striking the Hornet’s Nest: Richard Goldschmidt’s Rejection of the Particulate Gene.” Oren Harman and Michael R. Dietrich (eds.), Rebels, Mavericks, and Heretics in Biology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, pp. 119–136.Google Scholar
  20. Dietrich, Michael R. 2009. “Microevolution and Macroevolution are Governed by the Same Processes.” Francisco J. Ayala and Robert Arp (eds.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology. New York: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 169–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Dobzhansky, Theodosius. 1937. Genetics and the Origin of Species. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Dobzhansky, Theodosius. 1940. “Catastrophism Versus Evolutionism.” Science 97: 356–358.Google Scholar
  23. Dobzhansky, Theodosius. 1941. Genetics and the Origin of Species, 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Dobzhansky, Theodosius. 1951. Genetics and the Origin of Species, 3rd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Glassberg, David. 1996. “Public History and the Study of Memory.” The Public Historian 18: 7–23.Google Scholar
  26. Goldschmidt, Richard. 1911. “Über die Vererbung der sekundären Geschlechtscharaktere.” Sitzungsberichte der Gesellschaft fÜr Morphologie und Physiologie in MÜnchen 27: 115–118.Google Scholar
  27. Goldschmidt, Richard. 1931. Die sexuellen Zwischenstufen. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Goldschmidt, Richard. 1934. “Lymantria.” Bibliographia Genetica 111: 1–185.Google Scholar
  29. Goldschmidt, Richard. 1938. Physiological Genetics. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  30. Goldschmidt, Richard. 1940. The Material Basis of Evolution. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Goldschmidt, Richard. 1944. On Some Facts Pertinent to the Theory of the Gene. In Science in the University. Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 183–210.Google Scholar
  32. Goldschmidt, R. 1945. “The Structure of Podoptera, a Homeotic Mutant of Drosophila melanogaster.” Journal of Morphology 77: 71–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Goldschmidt, R. 1946. “‘An Empirical Evolutionary Generalization’ Viewed from the Standpoint of Phenogenetics.” American Naturalist 80: 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Goldschmidt, R. 1952a. “Homeotic Mutants and Evolution.” Acta Biotheoretica 10: 87–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Goldschmidt, R. 1952b. “A Further Study of Homeosis in Drosophila melanogaster.” Journal of Experimental Zoology 119: 405–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Goldschmidt, Richard. 1960. In and Out of the Ivory Tower. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
  37. Gould, Stephen J. 1977. “The Return of Hopeful Monsters.” Natural History 86: 22–30.Google Scholar
  38. Gould, Stephen J. 1980. “Is a New and General Theory of Evolution Emerging?” Paleobiology 6: 119–130.Google Scholar
  39. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1981/1994. Evolution as Fact and Theory, from Hen’s Teeth and Horse’s Toes. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, pp. 253–262.Google Scholar
  40. Gould, Stephen J. 1982a. The Uses of Heresy: An Introduction to Richard Goldschmidt’s The Material Basis of Evolution. In The Material Basis of Evolution. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. xiii–xlii.Google Scholar
  41. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1982b. “The Meaning of Punctuated Equilibrium and Its Role in Validating a Hierarchical Approach to Macroevolution.” R. Milkman (ed.), Perspectives on Evolution. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates, pp. 83–104.Google Scholar
  42. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1982c. “Change in Developmental Timing as a Mechanism of Macroevolution.” J. T. Bonner (ed.), Evolution and Development. Berlin: Springer, pp. 333–346.Google Scholar
  43. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1983. “The Hardening of the Modern Synthesis.” Marjorie Grene (ed.), Dimensions of Darwinism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 71–93.Google Scholar
  44. Gould, Stephen Jay. 2002. The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  45. King, M. C. and Wilson, Alan. 1975. “Evolution at Two Levels in Humans and Chimpanzees.” Science 188: 107–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lande, Russ. 1980. “Genetic Variation and Phenotypic Evolution in Allopatric Speciation.” American Naturalist 116: 463–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Muller, H. J., Prokofyeva, A. and Raffel, D. 1935. “Minute Intergenic Rearrangement as a Cause of Apparent ‘Gene Mutation’.” Nature 135: 253–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Olby, Robert. 2009. Francis Crick: Hunter of Life’s Secrets. Cold Spring Harbor: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press.Google Scholar
  49. Raffel, D. and Muller, H. J. 1940. “Position Effect and Gene Divisibility Considered in Connection with Three Strikingly Similar Scute Mutations.” Genetics 25: 541–583.Google Scholar
  50. Richmond, Marsha. 1986. Richard Goldschmidt and Sex Determination: The Growth of German Genetics, 19001935. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Indiana University.Google Scholar
  51. Ronshaugen, M., McGinnis, N. and McGinnis, W. 2002. “Hox Protein Mutation and Macroevolution of the Insect Body Plan.” Nature 415: 914–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sapp, Jan. 1990. “The Nine Lives of Gregor Mendel.” H. E. Le Grand (ed.), Experimental Inquiries. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 137–166.Google Scholar
  53. Sepkoski, David. 2008. “Stephen Jay Gould, Darwinian Iconoclast?” Oren Harman and Michael R. Dietrich (eds.), Rebels, Mavericks, and Heretics in Modern Biology. New Haven: Yale University Press, pp. 321–337.Google Scholar
  54. Sepkoski, David. 2009. “The Emergence of Paleobiology.” D. Sepkoski and M. Ruse (eds.), The Paleobiological Revolution: Essays on the History of Recent Paleontology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 301–325.Google Scholar
  55. Simpson, G. G. 1944. Tempo and Mode in Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Simpson, G. G. 1953. Major Features of Evolution. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Smocovitis, V. B. 1996. Unifying Biology: The Evolutionary Synthesis and Evolutionary Biology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Smocovitis, V. B. 1999. “The 1959 Darwin Centennial Celebration in America.” Commemorative Practices in Science: Historical Perspectives on the Politics of Collective Memory, Osiris, 2nd series 14: 274–323.Google Scholar
  59. Smocovitis, V. B. 2005. “‘It Ain’t over ‘Til It’s over’: Rethinking the Darwinian Revolution.” Journal of the History of Biology 38: 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Stern, Curt. 1980. “Richard B. Goldschmidt (1878–1958): A Biographical Memoir.” L. K. Piternick (ed.), Richard Goldschmidt: Controversial Geneticist and Creative Biologist. Basel: Birkhäuser Verlag, pp. 68–99.Google Scholar
  61. Templeton, Alan. 1982. “Review of the Material Basis of Evolution by R. Goldschmidt.” Paleobiology 8: 474–481.Google Scholar
  62. “The Monster Mutation Theory,” in Creation-Evolution Encylopedia. http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/10mut12.htm. Accessed 21 Apr 2010.
  63. Wright, S. 1941. “The Material Basis of Evolution by R. Goldschmidt (Review).” The Scientific Monthly 53: 165–170.Google Scholar
  64. Wright, S. 1950. “Population Structure as a Factor in Evolution.” H. Grünberg and W. Ulrich (eds.), Moderne Biologie: Festschrift zum 60. Geburtstag von Hans Nachtsheim. Berlin: F. W. Peters, pp. 275–287.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biological SciencesDartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA

Personalised recommendations