462 THE STRUCTURE OF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY
theme. Evolutionary biologists should honor world's fairs, despite their hoopla and
crass commercialism—for Goldschmidt's work provides a second example of their
spur to scientific progress. C. O. Whitman presented his most cogent defense of
orthogenesis in pigeons (see pp. 383-394) in an address delivered at a meeting held
in conjunction with the St. Louis fair of 1904 (also the source of the ice cream
cone, several Scott Joplin rags, and the song "Meet me in St. Louis, Louis").
Richard Goldschmidt christened the term "hopeful monster" in an address at the
AAAS meeting of 1933, held in conjunction with Chicago's World's Fair to
celebrate a "century of progress." Goldschmidt, representing the "Kaiser Wilhelm
Institute for Biology, Berlin-Dahlem," spoke on "some aspects of evolution." In his
closing paragraph (1933, p. 547), he coined the fateful term in summarizing his
entire paper:
I chose ... first, an aspect where I had to express skepticism in regard to
well-established beliefs. I tried to show on the basis of large experimental
evidence that the formation of subspecies or geographic races is not a step
towards the formation of species but only a method to allow the spreading
of a species to different environments by forming preadaptational mutations
and combinations of such, which, however, always remain within the
confines of the species. The second aspect, which I discussed, was one
where I felt again optimistic. I tried to emphasize the importance of the
methods of normal embryonic development for an understanding of
possible evolutionary changes. I tried to show that a directed orthogenetic
evolution is a necessary consequence of the embryonic system, which
allows only certain avenues for transformation. I further emphasized the
importance of rare but extremely consequential mutations affecting rates of
decisive embryonic processes, which might give rise to what one might
term hopeful monsters, monsters that could start a new evolutionary line if
fitting into some empty environmental niche.Two features of this citation (and of the whole article) clinch my argument.
First, the article's structure provides an epitome for the book that Goldschmidt
would publish seven years later, and that would seal and symbolize his apostasy.
The Material Basis of Evolution must have been written as an expansion of this
outline—a two-part structure, with the first half (Goldschmidt's self-styled
"skepticism") on the Darwinian character, but macro-evolutionary inefficacy, of
adaptive differentiation within species; and the second half (Goldschmidt's
proclaimed "optimism") on a different style for macroevolution based on
occasional saltation in a rare but viable mode, as embodied in the slightly
whimsical phrase "hopeful monster." Goldschmidt wrote the following statement
in 1933, but he could not have composed better jacket copy for his 1940 book:
At the beginning of this lecture I said that my mind, like that of many
geneticists, is oscillating between skepticism and optimism with regard to
the views on the means of evolution as derived from genetical work. I