Talk:Desmond Morris

Tattoo
Somewhere in one of Desmond Morris' early books he had an illustration of a tattoo - a fox hunt which started on the chest, went down the back and the fox's brush could be seen disappearing down 'the hole'. Does anyone know where this illustration appeared?

Yes, I do. It appeared in "Bodywatching" 1985, p. 179. The picturelist gives Ian Yeomans (Susan Griggs Agency, London) as photographer. Actually, the tattoo is on the back!

Books
Desmond Morris has written more books than listed. Off the top of my head I can think of his early autobiography "Animal Days". Someone might want to add them; they are I believe on his website. For the moment I changed the section title from Books to Selected Books to avoid giving the impression that the current list is complete. Martinp 20:11, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

"'man's other former best friend.'"
Uh, what is this supposed to mean? gohlkus (talk) 09:36, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Since no one has taken responsibility for this strange phrase, or attempted to define it, I changed the description of Horsewatching to the actual subtitle of the book. gohlkus (talk) 07:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Aquatic ape stuff
I removed the following text from the article: "His Savanna Theory has been challenged by Elaine Morgan's aquatic ape hypothesis." I believe it is wrong - in the books of his I've read, he is actually a proponent of the AAH. If his position has changed, that needs to be referenced. The paragraph also gave the impression that he was a pseudoscientist because he supported the savanna theory, which is further incorrect in that savanna theory is the generally accepted theory and the AAH is seen by some in anthropology as being untestable pseudoscience. In any case, neither hypothesis is "his". Matt Deres 02:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Criticism
We're currently very sketchy on what is or was controversial about Morris' writing on humans. I'd like to write something like the following paragraph, but I don't have sources and it would therefore be OR. Besides, it is not NPOV either. Can someone find something comparable or better that is not OR and is NPOV?

Since their publication, some of Morris' theories explaining elements of human behavior via a zoological lens, in particular via naturak evolutionary mechanisms, have been attacked as incomplete, incorrect, or overly simplistic. Some explanations have also been critized for being male-centered or supporting a sexist view of sexual behavior. (Now the heavily OR and POV part:) Nevertheless, they are valued for starting, or at least bringing into mainstream discussion, the approach of applying principles of animal behaviorism to explaining human behavior.

Suggestions? Martinp 23:57, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Not bad. I would suggest that there have also been criticisms that his comments are often untestable, and as a result unscientific (Steven Jay Gould might have called them "just so" stories) -- and that the religious objectors to Darwinism take strong objection to the musings of Morris and those like him, finding it insulting and even immoral to think of humans as dominated by strictly animal instincts.

I would have to think, however, that trying to debate the validity of *that* criticism is asking for trouble! Still, even a neutral POV article on Morris has to acknowledge that his works are controversial, not only outside of the scientific community but within it as well.

Incidentally, the final comment above: "Nevertheless, they are valued for ... " -- can be easily converted to an NPOV statement with a simple change: "His defenders assert that his work is valuable for ... "

MrG

[snip] Since their publication, some of Morris' theories explaining elements of human behavior via a zoological lens, in particular via natural evolutionary mechanisms, have been attacked as incomplete, incorrect, or overly simplistic. [snip]

"Have been attacked"? By whom? By the likes of the Christian Courier(http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/the-ape-wears-versace/Content?oid=1031953)? Admittedly, Morris has critics, some of whom he discusses here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/hardtalk/7242818.stm. But "have been attacked," "have been criticised," etc. is weasel wording (and decidedly non-NPOV) if the attacker is not specifically cited or linked.

Socrates Abroad

Fair enough.

Adam Rutherford "Humanimal: How Homo sapiens Became Nature’s Most Paradoxical Creature" p. 71 "in his enormously popular but scientifically questionable bestseller 'The Naked Ape' the writer Desmond Morris...[commits] the scientific sin of the 'just-so' story -- speculation that sounds appealing but cannot be tested or is devoid of evidence"

The context: this is a criticism of adaptationism in evolutionary biology The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm, not just of Morris.

I suggest adding these. Cloudjpk (talk)

Congo's painting
Nice as it is, I am not sure why we have Congo's painting here. -- Beardo 17:52, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Pleonastic expression
The page contained the phrase "overly simplistic", which, although common, is also pleonastic. The word "simplistic" MEANS "overly simple", and so the phrase "overly simplistic" means "overly overly simple". I have removed the word "overly" in the phrase. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.22.240.9 (talk) 15:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Oxford United and 'The Soccer Tribe'
I am surprised that there is no mention of Desmond Morris having been a director of Oxford United FC (despite him being born near Swindon), as it is notable for his having used it as the basis of his book 'The Soccer Tribe'. On his own website he lists the year of his becoming a director of Oxford United FC as 1977, being elected Vice Chairman the following year. 'The Soccer Tribe' contains some of the 'tribal' chants recorded (not always accurately) by him of fans in the London Road End of Oxford United FC's then stadium (if that isn't too grand a term for it), the Manor Ground. There should also be a wiki entry in its own right for 'The Soccer Tribe' despite it being out of print. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yacht Dance (talk • contribs) 20:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

anthropologist?
Would Desmond Morris be properly termed an anthropologist? This edit removes the qualification "anthropologist". I find this source and this source supporting that Morris would be considered an anthropologist. Our article about his book The Naked Ape also classifies him an anthropologist. Bus stop (talk) 14:18, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * No, Desmond Morris dabbles in anthropology but he is a biologist by training and he does not use anthropological theory, but rather sociobiology which most anthropologists consider anathema to the discipline. An anthropologist is someone who has a degree in anthropology or holds a position that would normally require similar qualifications. Morris does not. We also don't call people zoologists because they've written popular books about animals. Those sources are not reliable for establishing him as an anthropologist. ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 14:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

"socio-biologist"?? That be one of them fancy city slicker words for a flim flammin' showman.220.244.73.170 (talk) 02:44, 9 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Please bring sources. Bus stop (talk) 14:55, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Sources for what? That anthropologists is a profession? ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The subtitle of Naked Ape is "A zoologists study of the human animal" he clearly does not claim to be an anthropologist.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 15:22, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

lifetime of various achievements
The end of the introduction reads like marketing bumph to me: "As displayed throughout his lifetime of various achievements, Desmond Morris is a significant contributor to twentieth century thought." How would you source that? "Footnote 1: See his 'lifetime of various achievements'"? I propose the whole sentence should just be cut. St.Expeditus (talk) 23:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Done.·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Appalling writing style within article
Much of the article dips randomly into and out of the present tense when describing historic events, in a way that has become fashionable amongst some semi-literate journalists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.208.172 (talk • contribs)


 * It's pretty bad for sure. The language is over-embellished, frequently obscure and occasionally archaic. I'll have a quick go at it now, but it needs proper attention. --P LUMBAGO 17:06, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

General comments on article
This was an interesting article, and I am glad it pointed out that Morris is a painter as well as a biologist. I think he wrote "The Book of Ages" but this appears to be missing from his list of books. Vorbee (talk) 08:04, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, there is a review here. Published in 1983. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:25, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Will be adding link to new wiki article "Tie Signs" as part of description of book in which Morris addresses the topic. Link to new article is does not populate link options yetDougok (talk) 00:35, 24 June 2018 (UTC)