Kathryn Lasky

This book has some minor factual errors here and there. For example, Darwin and Wallace did not write a paper together as the book claims, rather their separate papers were presented together. It also makes the odd claim that Darwin rushed out of an operating room, "unable to stand the sight of blood". But Darwin enjoyed field sports and further on on the same page we learn of his plans to go partridge shooting. Do not bullets draw blood, even from the bodies of mere partridges?

However, the book also has some good properties. The artwork is actually clever, and where the depictions are not strictly accurate, they still convey something useful. For example, Darwin's clothes become obtrusively patched as the voyage wears on. He was probably not quite so unkempt, as he spent most of the voyage on land, and would have been in a position to purchase a new pair of pants and a coat. However, when he gets to London, and becomes suddenly the dapper young gentleman, immaculate in a claret-colored frock coat, that he has been living rough for the past five years is apparent. A few pages later he becomes the country gentleman, in tweeds and a straw hat. The people at the booksellers reading the Origin of Species are unmistakably Thomas Henry Huxley and Bishop Wilberforce. That Darwin's nose is round and Fitzroy's is an enormous beak is probably more or less to the life, and also a reference to the fact that Fitzroy thought he could read character in physiognomy and was initially quite put off by Darwin's snub nose.

Darwin and Fitzroy are presented as arguing frequently. I doubt that all these arguments happened as described, but they are a rhetorical device, to describe prevailing beliefs of the day in an immediate way that is especially suitable for children.

Far better than the other children's biographies of Darwin I have read so far.… (mer)