Island life
Islands are places apart. They breed special species of their own. And they encourage people, too, to go their own ways, fostering secrets unknown to strangers; isolation provides natural sustenance for cultures as much as creatures. Islands generate local riches, born in their own worlds of scattered geological fragments: various, hidden and often marvellous. Islands are fecund and creative.
Islands are - by definition - insular. Isolation often gives rise
to endemic oddities. It may even narrow the mind to the bounds of
one small rock in a boundless ocean; suspicion of strangers
grows with unbroken loneliness. Islands can be shelters from the
hard currency of natural selection that drives evolution and
culture on a continental scale. Even if there are no actual
chimeras, strange organisms still dwell in island redoubts,
sequestered places safe for hopeful monsters.
Then again islands are a dream for billions of people who live in
crowded lands. Who has not fantasised while stuck, bored, in a
queue of traffic, of some place away from it all, where
self-sufficiency is practical under a warm sky? A paradise, we
would say - but more, an Island Paradise. The rich demonstrate
their material independence by purchasing whole islands, buying
their way into that dream and usually fencing the dream off from
others. Mustique and mystique are first cousins in more than name.
But the simple act of purchase is itself a contradiction of
'paradise'; in some ways, such an island becomes no different from
a gated community, keeping outside all that does not conform
to the paradisiacal.
It could be claimed that islands carry these various signals
uneasily. Tension between one meaning and another lies at odds
with the notion of islands as unsullied places, where nature
prevails. The history of islands is almost always one of ruination,
and the human species is usually the guilty intruder. And who, one
might ask, can truly 'own' an island? There are conflicting claims
on ownership, each prompted by a different vision of what is most
important about the place. An island exists as much in the heads of
the interested parties as it does alone in the sea, in more or less
glorious isolation.
Geologically, oceanic islands are young, created from erupted
lavas and built up from the sea floor. They are the tops of huge
mountains, and like all mountains they will be eroded away, and
they will eventually disappear back beneath the waves. Fresh made,
such islands are black, because the volcanic rock, basalt, is
black. They are pimples on the face of the planet, created by the
slow march of the plates. Each one is a tabula rasa to be written on by
time and evolution. Islands lying off continents can be much more
complex and ancient, but they are still mortal in a way that
continents are not. Whatever their origin, islands make for 'oases'
in the wide seas. Fish throng around them and coral reefs encircle
them at tropical latitudes. There is a living to be made on
islands, an invitation to settle and prosper.
The Galápagos could be the archetype of a remote island group.
These particular islands are hugely important to biologists because
of their isolation, which makes them a natural evolutionary
laboratory. They are holy places dedicated to Saint Charles Darwin
(if secular saints were permissible he would surely be top of the
list). Since knowledge of organic evolution, conceived on these
islands, transformed the way we humans understood our place in
nature, it would not be exaggerating to describe the Galápagos as
the most pressing priority for conservation in the biological
world. Indeed, many scientists would be convinced that they 'own'
the Galápagos. They want to protect it in its original state as far
as possible, although quinine plants and brambles have already
desecrated its insularity. These vulgar, vigorous interlopers have
already stamped their personality on San Cristóbal and Santa Cruz.
But what remains on the other islands is still the great testing
ground for the natural selection that Darwin recognised. The
Grants, husband and wife biologists from Princeton University, have
been studying with unremitting fervour for decades the finches
famous for their adaptations to special diets on the different
islands, noting down change after change. Surely an investigation
that will never come to an end, always yielding something new,
justifies that feeling of ownership, the conviction that these
islands belong to the whole scientific world.
Doubtless, the Government of Ecuador would disagree. Sovereignty
overrules the demands of mere scientists, and the magic of the
Galápagos name alone guarantees the attention of tourists in
search of that pristine island ideal. To have gone to these islands
is something of a status symbol, a badge of intrepidity. Some might
even argue that it is unrealistic to try to wind back time, to hold
off a world full of curiosity. The scientific lessons have been
learned, they might say, and the Islands are passing into a new
phase: time to leave Darwin behind. After all, the history of
Hawaii has shown us that island species are particularly vulnerable
to extinction - and they would eventually die out anyway when
their habitat foundered or eroded away. All we are doing is
speeding up the clock. Some of the people living on the Islands
might well agree with this. Why should marine iguanas and boobies
take precedence over evolution's allegedly supreme creation, Homo sapiens? Who are these
bespectacled people with their computers and callipers who place
small brown birds above human necessity? Surely ownership
derives first from occupation, and these scraps of oceanic
basalt must 'belong' to islanders first, not academics from
universities around the world.
Conflict, riches, ownership, politics, wilderness, paradise
(and paradise lost): these are the kind of issues wrapped up
in the status of islands. Such ambiguous stuff makes strange
country for a scientist: it's so unclean-cut, so resistant to
simple experiment. But it is familiar territory for the artist.
From artist-naturalists like Sydney Parkinson who accompanied
Joseph Banks around the Pacific Ocean, recording fauna and flora
for the delight of Georgian society, to French artist Paul
Gauguin's always respectful and often mysterious portraits of
Tahiti and its women, there seems to be some kind of affinity
between artists and island dwellers. Maybe it is because the
successful artist is always apart: a certain distance from the
mainland of humanity drives their originality. More simply, it
could be because the strangeness or unexpectedness of islands
sparks the creative process. Whatever the cause, you may be certain
that an artist will root out unanticipated creations from the soil
of islands. Those isolated warts that poke up above the ocean floor
in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans will attract experiments from
artists as much as documentation by scientists. Does an artist
imagine themselves as a kind of Prospero, conjuring up an isolated
and magical world? It could be that the difficult questions of
'ownership' are best explored through art because it can refract
the complex truth in more ways than political posturing or even
scientific analysis. We all wish to make islands our own, but there
is no arbitration on the truth of possession.
Here I ought to come clean on my own view of island life,
although I also find myself tortured by ambiguity.
I am a scientist, and a rational approach is important to me.
I have to accept that, rather like virginity, when the virtue
of a remote island is penetrated there really is no return to the
innocent state. The annals of extinction are filling out as one
remote island after another is changed forever by the introduction
of rats, dogs or cats. Every number of Birds, the magazine of the Royal
Society for the Protection of Birds, features some delightful,
small, feathered creature whose continued existence is in peril
somewhere in the world. There is no question that human
interference is accelerating the decay of what time has stitched
together in remote places. Our arrival always seems to oust the
special things from special places. Perhaps we should simply bow to
the inevitable - at least some part of my scientific self might
make such a supposition.
Yet when I was researching my book Survivors, about organisms that had
come through from deep geological time, I learned about a small
midwife toad called the ferreret living on the holiday island of
Mallorca. It had been known as a fossil before it was found still
alive, clinging on in limestone mountains living in remote pools.
Was it doomed, I wondered, like so many island endemics? After I
visited it in its redoubt and learned about its complex and
intriguing biology from a student who had devoted years to its
study, I became acutely aware of the individuality of this particular
living fossil. I found myself caring acutely about its continued
survival. Then I realised that every species has a narrative of its
own, a biography. The loss of a species is not just one lower point
on the graph of biodiversity - it is also the loss of a unique
story. So the scientific counting of loss, the mere statistic,
becomes immediately much more complicated. What right does our
particular species have to impose obliteration on other creatures
which have not even had time to tell their particular tales? We
cannot 'own' the narrative of a species, nor can we condemn it to
an early obliteration without diminishing the richness of the whole
biosphere. There have to be moral issues to do with the rights for
the continuing existence of biological species wrapped up in the
stories of what we humans do to islands that are not the business
of a scientist, but which might well concern an artist or a
philosopher. When that is intertwined with the all-too-human
narratives of the island dwellers themselves, we have a mixture
that is as fraught with issues as any scenario coming from an inner
city. That island paradise begins to seem more and more
illusory.
Yet there remains something oddly wonderful about approaching an
island from the sea for the first time. There lingers still the
promise of some kind of Eden. I imagine that special feeling is
hard-wired into us all, perhaps an atavistic longing for an
unsullied hunting ground, or the intimation that, as that
inveterate traveller Robert Louis Stephenson put it: 'to travel
hopefully is a better thing than to arrive.' It is part of our
nature to explore, probe and lift up stones to see what lies
beneath. It is one small step further to become a naturalist,
geologist or, come to that, an artist. But it remains true that the
mere fact of our arrival already seals the Fall from
Paradise.
Richard Fortey is Honorary Research
Associate at the Natural History Museum, where he was a senior
palaeontologist for several decades. He is an authority on
trilobites. His parallel career as a writer has produced seven
books, including those shortlisted for the Aventis and Samuel
Johnson Awards. For his work on science communication he has been
awarded the Lewis Thomas Prize from Rockefeller University and the
Michael Faraday Award of the Royal Society. He is a Fellow both of
the Royal Society and the Royal Society of Literature. His BBC
television series Survivors: Nature's Indestructible
Creatures was broadcast in
2012.