TAKE THIS FISH AND LOOK
AT IT
Samuel H. Scudder
Most of us tend to look at things without really seeing what is there.
In everyday life this lack of observation may not be noticed, but in science
it would be considered a serious failing. Louis Agassiz (1807-73),
the distinguished Harvard professor of natural history, knew this and used
to subject his students to a rigorous but useful exercise in minute observation.
One of his students was Samuel Scudder, who has left us the following account.
It was more than fifteen years ago that I entered the laboratory of Professor
Agassiz, and told him I had enrolled my name in the Scientific School as
a student of natural history. he asked me a few questions about my
object in coming, my antecedents generally, the mode in which I afterwards
proposed to use the knowledge I might acquire, and, finally, whether I
wished to study any special branch. To the latter I replied that,
while I wished to be well grounded in all departments of zoology, I purposed
to devote myself specially to insects.
"When do you wish to begin?" he asked.
"Now," I replied.
this seemed to please him, and with an energetic "Very well!" he reached
from a shelf a huge jar of specimens in yellow alcohol. "Take this
fish," he said, "and look at it; we call it a haemulon; by and by I will
ask what you have seen."
With that he left me, but in a moment returned with explicit instructions
as to the care of the object entrusted to me.
"No man is fit to be a naturalist," said he, "who does not know how
to take care of specimens."
I was to keep the fish before me in a tin tray, and occasionally moisten
the surface with alcohol from the jar, always taking care to replace the
stopper tightly. Those were not the days of ground-glass stoppers
and elegantly shaped exhibition jars; all the old students will recall
the huge neckless glass bottles with their leaky, wax-besmeared corks,
half eaten by insects, and begrimed with cellar dust. Entomology
was a cleaner science than icthyology, but the example of the Professor,
who had unhesitatingly plunged to the bottom of the jar to produce the
fish, was infectious; and though this alcohol had a "very ancient and fishlike
smell," I really dared not show any aversion within these sacred precincts,
and treated the alcohol as though it were pure water. Still I was
conscious of a passing feeling of disappointment, for gazing at a fish
did not commend itself to an ardent entomologist. My friends at home,
too, were annoyed when they discovered that no amount of eau-de-Cologne
would drown the perfume which haunted me like a shadow.
In ten minutes I had seen all that could be seen in that fish, and
started in search of the Professor--who had, however, left the Museum;
and when I returned, after lingering over some of the odd animals stored
in the upper apartment, my specimen was dry all over. I dashed the
fluid over the fish as if to resuscitate the beast from a fainting fit,
and looked with anxiety for a return of the normal sloppy appearance.
This little excitement over, nothing was to be done but to return to a
steadfast gaze at my mute companion. Half an hour passes--an hour--another
hour; the fish began to look loathsome. I turned it over and around;
looked it in the face--ghastly; from behind, beneath, above, sideways,
at a three-quarters' view--just as ghastly. I was in despair; at
an early hour I concluded that lunch was necessary; so, with infinite relief,
the fish was carefully replaced in the jar, and for an hour I was free.
On my return, I learned that Professor Agassiz had been at the Museum,
but had gone, and would not return for several hours. My fellow-students
were too busy to be disturbed by continued conversation. Slowly I
drew forth that hideous fish, and with a feeling of desperation again looked
at it. I might not use a magnifying-glass; instruments of all kinds
were interdicted. My two hands, my two eyes, and the fish: it seemed
a most limited field. I pushed my finger down its throat to feel
how sharp the teeth were. I began to count the scales in the different
rows, until I was convinced that that was nonsense. At last a happy
thought struck me--I would draw the fish; and now with surprise I began
to discover new features in the creature. Just then the Professor
returned.
"That is right," said he; "a pencil is one of the best of eyes.
I am glad to notice, too, that you keep your specimen wet, and your bottle
corked."
With these encouraging words, he added:
"Well, what is it like?"
He listened attentively to my brief rehearsal of the structure of parts
whose names were still unknowns to me: the fringed gill-arches and movable
operculum; the pores of the head, fleshy lips and lidless eyes; the lateral
line, the spinous fins and forked tail; the compressed and arched body.
When I finished, he waited as if expecting more, and then, with an air
of disappointment:
"You have not looked very carefully; why," he continued more earnestly,
"you haven't even seen one of the most conspicuous features of the animal,
which is a plainly before your eyes as the fish itself; look again, look
again!" and he left me to my misery.
I was piqued; I was mortified. Still more of that wretched fish!
But now I set myself to my tasks with a will, and discovered on new thing
after another, until I saw how just the Professor's criticism had been.
The afternoon passed quickly; and when, towards its close, the Professor
inquired:
"Do you see it yet?"
"No," I replied, "I am certain I do not, but I see how little I was
before."
"That is next best," said he, earnestly, "but I won't hear you now;
put away your fish and go home; perhaps you will be ready with a better
answer in the morning. I will examine you before you look at the
fish."
This was disconcerting. Not only must I think of my fish all
night, studying, without the object before me, what this unknown but most
visible feature might be; but also, without reviewing my discoveries, I
must give an exact account of them the next day. I had a bad memory;
so I walked home by Charles River in a distracted state, with my two perplexities.
The cordial greeting from the Professor the next morning was reassuring;
here was a man who seemed to be quite as anxious as I that I should see
for myself what he saw.
"Do you perhaps mean," I asked, "that the fish has symmetrical sides
with paired organs?"
His thoroughly pleased "Of course! of course!" repaid the wakeful
hours of the previous night. After he had discoursed most happily
and enthusiastically--as he always did--upon the importance of this point,
I ventured to ask what I should do next.
"Oh, look at your fish!" he said, and left me again to my own devices.
In a little more than an hour he returned, and heard my new catalogue.
"That is good, that is good!" he repeated; "but that is not all; go
on"; and so for three long days he placed that fish before my eyes, forbidding
me to look at anything else, or to use any artificial aid. "Look, look,
look," was his repeated injunction.
This was the best entomological lesson I ever had--a lesson whose influence
has extended to the details of every subsequent study; a legacy the Professor
had left to me, as he has left it to many others, of inestimable value,
which we could not buy, with which we cannot part.
A year afterward, some of us were amusing ourselves with chalking outlandish
beasts on the Museum blackboard. We drew prancing starfishes; frogs
in mortal combat; hydra-headed worms; stately crawfishes, standing on their
tails, bearing aloft umbrellas; and grotesque fishes with gaping mouths
and staring eyes. The Professor came in shortly after, and was as
amused as any at our experiments. he looked at the fishes.
"Haemulons, every one of them," he said; "Mr. ---- drew them."
True; and to this day, if I attempt a fish, I can draw nothing but
haemulons.
The fourth day, a second fish of the same group was placed beside the
first, and I was bidden to point out the resemblances and differences between
the two; another and another followed, until the entire family lay before
me, and a whole legion of jars covered the table and surrounding shelves;
the odor had become a pleasant perfume; and even now, the sight of an old,
six-inch, worm-eaten cork brings fragrant memories.
The whole group of haemulons was thus brought in review; and, whether
engaged upon the dissection of the internal organs, the preparation and
examination of the bony framework, or the description of the various parts,
Agassiz's traning in the method of observing facts and their orderly arrangement
was ever accompanied by the urgent exhortation not to be content with them.
"Facts are stupid things," he would say, "until brought into connection
with some general law."
At the end of eight months, it was almost with reluctance that I left
these friends and turned to insects; but what I had gained by this outside
experience has been of greater value than years of later investigation
in my favorite groups.
"Facts are stupid things, until brought into connection with some general
law." That's what this site is all about.
|Watchmaker
Press | Hettinger
Home Page | The Technology
Connection | MoQ
Reflections | Email the Author
|