The name Charles Darwin is immediately recognizable to anyone who has ever taken a rudimentary biology class. He is well known to be the father of evolutionary theory. His 1859 work, on the Origin of Species, is still the basis for most theories within the field of biology. At the time of the publication of this work, it was widely considered to be the field of theology in which the origin of species would be determined. It was widely believed that the earth was created in the image of god, and that animals which displayed interesting of confusing characteristics could be explained by the brilliance of god. His work turned the current base of knowledge on its head. His hypothesis was unable to be proven at the time that he wrote it, and thus he was chastised by many for challenging the work of god, and the believe in the divine drawing of the earth. He is one of the classic examples of innovators in his field who have risen in prominence and respect as their work has aged. He is the quintessential example for the argument that all great discoveries in history have been met by adversity. As I have found with many of these lectures, I leave with more questions than when I arrive. Having known very little about the origin of anything from the universe to Italian Poetry or Novel Writing, I am repeatedly exposed to a new corner of the world which I know little to nothing about. In the brief time, it is impossible to learn the origins of anything to a satisfactory level. However, opening up these corners of the world, and shedding a bit of light on them makes me more curious, and I find myself wondering about the finer points of origins often. Can we prove an origin, or separate it from an evolution? If we can prove that it happened, but we can’t prove how or why, then is this finding really significant? Does investigating this idea bring us more answers or will it lead to more questions, as the brief lecture on it has for me? How is is possible to define the first novel except by the definition used at the time when it was written? It was fascinating to learn so much about both a topic that I was previously very uninformed about. The cartoon drawings of Darwin are evidence enough of the way that the world viewed him at the time of his work. His face is often depicted on the body of an ape. This image takes a jab at the idea of a common ancestor and that humans are genealogically related to apes. The cartoons from his voyage on the Beagle also show him as a silly civilian, looking for many different things without any reason. Even within the environment of his own research, he was viewed as a bit of an outcast, and the other passengers on the ship are depicted as rolling their eyes in unison at Darwin.