The Red Canary by Tim Birkhead, Weidenfeld & Nicolson/Basic Books, 拢16.99, ISBN 0297829963 Reviewed by Anne Kerr
HOW does the apparently gentle world of bird fanciers lead into the darkest corners of the past century? In The Red Canary, (titled A Brand-New Bird in the US) Tim Birkhead traces the life of Hans Duncker (1881-1961), from high-school teacher and bird enthusiast to experimental scientist 鈥� and eugenicist.
First we get the thoughtful details of European bird-keeping, early scientific studies of birdsong and the controversy of the early 20th century between Mendelism and biometry 鈥� the detailed recording of continuous variables. Birkhead gives us rich insights into the competitive world of bird fanciers, and the many ingenious and controversial methods used to produce unusually colourful birds, from red peppers to frog poison, to a kind of fake tan called Carophyll.
Advertisement
But Duncker fails to shape up as a hero, given Birkhead鈥檚 discovery of his Nazi connections, and the way these follow from his obstinate belief in the primacy of genes over environment. Despite the book鈥檚 title, Birkhead concludes that the red canary is ultimately the product of genes and environment together, rather than breeding alone.
Birkhead鈥檚 background in evolutionary psychology, however, gives The Red Canary an unfortunate gloss. Women form a decorative backdrop to his stories of masculine ardour and intellect. They provide beer, statistics and stimulation as appropriate. Female birds are just as insignificant. They are dull in hue and unable to sing: their innate preference for brightly coloured male birds with elaborate song is their most significant attribute.
Drawing analogies between these different types of 鈥渂irds鈥� amuses Birkhead. He compares, for example, the choice of a male finch to mate with a female canary with the choice of 鈥渕en in singles bars whose threshold for what is acceptable in a partner declines rapidly as closing time approaches鈥�.
Birkhead tries to separate Duncker鈥檚 eugenicism and Nazism from his genetic work, and he casts contemporary sociobiology as immune from such extreme political influence because of its balanced approach to nature and nurture. This will no doubt appeal to people who already hold this position, but it will do little to convince the sceptical minority, of which I count myself a part.