The Signature of All Things discussion

It turns out that what Alma calls "the Prudence problem" troubled Darwin, too. If life is a struggle for survival, why do some people make sacrifices for others? If you want to hear a fascinating radio show on this subject, try: http://www.radiolab.org/story/103951-...

I thought Prudence was an awesome character. You can see the self-interest in a beautiful woman dressing down as much as she did, but her sacrifice regarding George?!! Another reviewer said she wanted to know more about the abolitionist school. I tweeted Elizabeth Gilbert, asking if there would be a Prudence sequel. She favorited the tweet, but didn't give an answer.

I found Prudence too good to be true - felt that she was put there to be able to bring in the abolitionist story, also "the Prudence problem", but was hard to believe and take as an individual.

Yeah, that's a point.

Yes, that is the obvious point, which is why I could not stand her as a character, and the whole "Prudence Problem" wasn't really a problem. Was Alma really of such a scientific mind that she couldn't comprehend that humans are elevated above apes, call it a soul if you will, even after all she had been through?

I think she could comprehend it, but it does blow a hole in the theory of evolution because not everything is self-interest. The theory of evolution doesn't seem to accept the existence of souls.

Here's some food for thought on "group selection" and how altruism fits in: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_se...

I theorize that what goes around comes around, explaining that, indirectly, altruism reflects back advantageously on oneself. It enriches that person's life, with them gaining satisfaction in exhibiting compassion and in sacrificing something or themselves for someone or some cause. It gives meaning to life, and such meaning sustains life, hence its purpose in survival of the species for the sacrificing person and for the one directly benefiting from the sacrifice.

Nicely said!

I think Gilbert needed Prudence because she needed someone who cared about people. Gilbert referred to Prudence in an interview as a "conscience-driven" person. Alma was a plant person which is fine, but a novel needs a people person. And Alma showed that she was invested in people to a degree when she sacrificed most of her legacy to Prudence's cause.

Donna wrote: "I theorize that what goes around comes around, explaining that, indirectly, altruism reflects back advantageously on oneself. It enriches that person's life, with them gaining satisfaction in exhib..."

Just finished reading this novel, and I completely agree! I love that you said that altruism gives meaning to life--that's something that science can't really account for, I feel. Which is always why I got so frustrated when Alma struggled so much to tie this idea into the theory of evolution...was it that she hadn't considered just how much humans could have evolved, even beyond the theory? Or she was such a perfectionist that she wanted a whole, complete theory?

I think we could speculate forever on why Alma couldn't connect altruism with the survival of the species, but I don't think that it matters. Gilbert wanted to show that even though Alma never published her paper, that she was content--that she didn't need fame and public recognition, although she enjoyed being validated by her hero, Wallace. I think the most important theory in The Signature of All Things is "Less is more." Alma didn't have the stereotypical successful life. No marriage, no children, and a career that gave her contentment but not fame or riches. But she realized in the end that her life had been fulfilling and this was what mattered. Gilbert said in an interview with Kelly Corrigan that Alma didn't have to be a botanist--that she could have had another vocation--just as long as it was her passion.

Altruism matters because as individuals, alone, people are quite helpless. Maybe less so on a small tropical island (think of the self-sufficient Hiro contingent), but living such a wild existence doesn't allow for any accumulation of knowledge. A large society does. It is no longer possible for any individual to learn all there is to know within one lifetime. Knowledge is fragmented, spread out over many individuals. Altruism can help to enlarge that pool of knowledge, especially if it means emancipating a great amount of people (which is exactly what Prudence is trying to accomplish.)
Humanity would benefit from adding people other than the white man to the pool of those retaining and refining knowledge. Clearly, that also goes for women.

Good ideas on altruism, Barbara, but I meant that in the case of Elizabeth Gilbert, she was focusing more on feminism. She was determined to show an independent woman. She said in the interview with Kelly Corrigan that she knows a nun who works and lives with the homeless. She deeply admires such altruism but she could not imagine herself being that type of humanitarian. It seems that Gilbert sees herself more like Alma rather than Prudence.

Thank you, Hilary. Coincidentally, I had to go to Amsterdam for work yesterday, and I managed to steal a moment to visit the botanical garden there. It was absolutely wonderful to walk there, days after finishing the novel.
Anyway, I pondered what you said during my trip. Alma is a magnificent character, and it did indeed feel like the writer identifies with her. But Alma wouldn't be Alma without her greatest flaw (sometimes also an asset), which is her competetive nature. It defines her relationship with Prudence, and her work as well. Gilbert says so in the novel: "Life might have been pleasanter for the Whittaker girls if - like the blind and the lame - they had learned how to aid each other, filling in each other's weaknesses." (near the end of chapter 6) I suppose that cooperation is just as imporant a force of nature (human and otherwise) as competition, but Alma doesn't see it. What Prudence thinks remains a mystery. Maybe she does understand, and sacrifices her love because of that, or not, hard to say.

Wow, Barbara, truly amazing that you actually got to visit the botanical garden just days after finishing the novel. Gilbert certainly leaves some questions unanswered. But I do believe that Prudence was supposed to be a person to whom unselfishness came naturally and this is the reason for her incredible sacrifice. I thought that Alma's gift of a large portion of her legacy was a great thing and would have been even greater if I believed that money was important to Alma. But even so, she did a good thing, and I was happy to see Prudence's gratitude--the only part of the book which brought a tear to my eye. I think I would have had a good cry if the sisters had visited at least one more time and we could have seen the good that Alma's sacrifice and Prudence's work were doing for the Negro cause. I believe that Gilbert didn't want Alma's accomplishments to be overshadowed by Prudence's cause and so they were never to meet again. It would be interesting to get Gilbert's take on all our unanswered questions. I understood why the two girls didn't click as children. This is common. But once they'd established a connection, it would have been nice to have seen them meet again. That's my take anyway. But then I have three brothers and no sisters!