Who was Alfred Wallace
To save myself some time, I could describe this peculiar man as “not Charles Darwin” and for all intents and purposes, it’s true. There are, however, some truths worth diving deeper. As the analytic workforce simultaneously grows to be more specialized and generalized, I think an ode to one of the great Renaissance scientists is due. To be clear, Renaissance man is defined as a “person whose expertise spans a significant number of subject areas.”
Alfred Wallace, was an uneducated naturalist who explored and mapped terrain and studied fossils and plants. Atop all these disciplines, he was a thinker. Wallace noticed, about the same time Darwin did, that if given a reason be it sex, environment, or food, a species adapts and the offspring will be more suited to the new world than their parents. Sounds a lot like Darwin? Well, yeah, except for one thing:
Darwin thought that individuals fighting each other drove evolution, while Wallace was of the mind that a species as a group was adapting to broad environmental pressures.
What’s the difference then between these two intellectual giants who published nearly the same work at nearly the same time? While Darwin was born rich, and continued to be wealthy throughout his life, Wallace struggled financially and essentially died living off a stipend. On an aside, Darwin fought for Wallace to be awarded a 200 Pound stipend every year for the rest of his life. These men were very much not competitors but colleagues on the edge of biologic science.
Was it notoriety, or pop culture of the time, or some other potentiality I haven’t thought of? The truth is, in my readings and reflections I can’t pin down why Darwin has been named one of the most influential figures in human history and Wallace has been left to obscurity.
Think of the magnitude of this quote from Wallace:
The action of this principle is exactly like that of the centrifugal governor of the steam engine, which checks and corrects any irregularities almost before they become evident; and in like manner no unbalanced deficiency in the animal kingdom can ever reach any conspicuous magnitude, because it would make itself felt at the very first step, by rendering existence difficult and extinction almost sure soon to follow. [1]
Take a moment to appreciate the magnitude of this statement. Wallace was truly a remarkable gift to humanity and the overall mindfulness of science.
Profound, poignant, and nearly forgotten.
When being a Renaissance man isn’t enough
As our workplace demands more from us and expects us to become experts in diverse fields to help drive capital, understanding how the Greats have failed can offer us a competitive edge. Wallace had all the ingredients to be an essential part of the high school curriculum and yet seems to be forgotten. Before we address why, let’s ask ourselves, did Wallace fail? We’re operating on the assumption he was hoping his work would elevate him to an essential thinker of the time and along with that, financial security. So in that regard, yes, Wallace failed.
Now, how to avoid failing like Wallace?
Having all the right tools and the right thoughts at the right time does not guarantee success.
Wallace published ‘On the Law which has Regulated the Introduction of New Species’ in 1855. Once Darwin read the paper he began working on his own seminal work, ‘The Origin of Species’, which was published four years later in 1859. Wallace even beat Darwin to the punch by several years, gained some notoriety in the process but still failed to reach his deserved appreciation.
I think that to paint the full picture of what happened we need to step back and examine the two. By 1836 Darwin’s father arranged for several investments to fund his son and allow him the life of the “Scientific Gentlemen.” From there he toured Cambridge and London, university after university, building his reputation and expanding the frontier of science in the public’s eye.
In 1836 Wallace was withdrawn from school due to financial difficulty and moved to London to live with his brother who worked as a builder. By the time he was 20 he worked as a surveyor, but this business went under. Without delving too much more into it, I think that it’s clear we are dealing with a complicated socio-economic problem and one that is beyond the scope of this brief.
Networking, marketing and a champion
Wallace failed to become successful because of a complicated and multifaceted storm. Darwin was more well-known and palatable to the public. Darwin also belonged to the social elite, allowing him more gravitas. His college friends and mentors alone gave him huge leverage over Wallace.
So in the end Wallace lost to Darwin just like Tesla lost to Edison; being an outsider without the ‘right people’ on his side.
Social exposure and networking in modern times have been proven to be crucial to success. How many great ideas fade away for failure to network or develop an active user base? Networking and marketing both come at a high financial cost, especially if the essential infrastructure doesn’t already exist.
A champion.
Someone to be the public face of your cause, can have a lasting crucial and positive effect. Wallace further proves to be an example of the importance of using a champion when necessary. When entering an existing competitive market, examine Wallace. Someone who did everything right and died poor, under appreciated, and forgotten.
