In the second of what I suspect will be a scattered series of posts on Darwin–I’m TAing a class on him this semester–I bring you some facepalm-worthy news on this godless Sunday morning. The UK’s Telegraph reports that a new drama about the life and times of Charles Darwin has recently made its premier at the Toronto Film Festival to much acclaim. The film–which, judging by the trailer, looks quite good–is titled Creation, and is apparently centered around a portrayal of Darwin as a father, husband, naturalist, and human (rather than as an almost legendary scientific figure); it seeks to depict Darwin’s “struggle between faith and reason” as he wrote the Origin of Species, and throughout his life. The producers have had no trouble finding distributors for the film in most of the world, but have been unable to find a single distribution company willing to take the film on in the United States. The reason? The film’s central topic–evolution–has been deemed too controversial in the United States.
As shocking as this might seem, I suppose the distribution companies are on firm statistical ground here: a Gallup poll conducted in February (to mark Darwin’s 200th birthday) found that fewer than 40% of Americans endorse the theory of evolution even in the broad strokes, and the number falls to just 24% if only those who regularly attend religious services are considered. That makes for some reasonably fierce opposition to the topic of Creation, and perhaps some good reason to think that the film might struggle to find a wide audience in the United States. Even still, though, I find it hard to believe that there’s no audience here at all: Bill Maher’s Religulous, after all, was able to find enough of an audience for a release, so it can’t just be that Creation offends America’s religious sensibilities. Is there a deeper opposition at work? Perhaps. Much of US culture is profoundly anti-scientific and anti-intellectual, so perhaps the fact that Creation is about science (or, rather, about a scientist) is as off-putting as the fact that it covers evolution specifically.
Whatever the reason, I hope that the film’s producers are able to strike a deal soon: this looks like a really entertaining and well-done look at Darwin the man. I was happy to see hints at the inner turmoil he must have experienced as he pushed his theory to its limits and yet still tried to maintain a close relationship with his highly religious wife Emma, for whom he cared a great deal. It also seems to deal with the tragedy that was the death of Annie Darwin, the scientist’s favored daughter, at age 10–the event was to haunt Charles for the rest of his life, and may well have helped shape his waning religious sensibilities as well. Non-American atheists can expect to see the film soon; my fellow Yankees and I may have to wait a bit longer. Still, I suspect it will find its way here eventually.
Loading ...
if the the people of the united states take religion over science, then what can i say were fucked. srry fo the language but its true unless we all come together amd leave religion an ancient of “goverment” used to keep our ancestors in line then we won’t progress towards the future.