Last night (or, to be more precise, early this morning) I found myself watching Mistress of the Apes. The plot is rather silly. Beautiful young anthropologist in labor falls victim to crazed druggies raiding the hospital for drugs and the baby is stillborn. Meanwhile, her husband has gone missing in the Congo. An expedition is organized, they tangle with poachers, the rich friend organizing everything turns out to be the chief villain (which, considering he spends the lead-up to his revelation as the heavy trying to jump every female he encounters, with the notable exception of his wife, and shooting everything in sight, shouldn't be that surprising), and the anthropologist discovers a tribe of Homo habilis living in the remote jungle, befriends them, and ends up knocked up by one of them. Happy endings all around, and weirdness predominates. The lead, Jenny Neumann, never appears in that outfit, by the way. The Boris Vallejo poster art does do a fairly good job of depicting the "ape-men."
So much for the movie. It's typical late 1970's semi-exploitation, with acting ranging from fairly good to awful, and a lot of violence and a little nudity. What I have a problem with is the premise. Homo habilis lived about a million and half to two million years ago. The plot of this movie has at least a few of them living now (or, in 1979, anyway).
Now, these "ape-men" do not, in fact, look that much like what any scientific reconstruction of actual Homo habilis skulls would seem to suggest. The genuine article bore nearly as strong a resemblance to chimps as to modern humans, though the two lines had split five or six million years earlier. They were tool users—that's where the scientific name, which translates as "handy man"—comes from. But they were more ape-like in general appearance, including having shorter legs in proportion to their bodies.
The actors playing the ape-men in the movie, of course, look like physically well-developed modern men wearing a lot of prosthetic makeup. They're also at least a foot too tall. What they most strongly resemble, and what would have made more sense in the context, are Neanderthals. Neanderthals became extinct only in the last twenty to fifty thousand years. Recently enough that surviving pockets would be at least within the realm of possibility.
What would a surviving band of Homo habilis look like if they had survived into the modern period? They might look like us, because, of course, from an evolutionary standpoint they are probably what we evolved from. It's rather silly to presume that an isolated band would simply stop evolving. They also might look significantly different. Just because certain features were selected for once, doesn't mean it would happen again.
Another problem pops up towards the end of the movie. The anthropologist, having mated with one of the ape-men, becomes pregnant. Presented with this, it's hard not to wonder if this would even be possible. While Homo sapiens and Homo habilis belong to the same genus, we are different species, separated by more than a million years of evolution. Mating would certainly be possible—you can physically mate with anything that has compatible genitalia, as the occasional bestiality prosecution makes clear—but the likelihood of producing viable offspring would be extremely low, and the likelihood of producing fertile offspring even lower. You might get something like a mule, the offspring of a mare and a donkey, having some characteristics of both, but completely incapable of reproducing. The most likely outcome, though, would be no pregnancy at all.
Just because Homo habilis, so far as we can tell, evolved into us, that doesn't mean an isolated population would do the same thing. A physical resemblance would be fairly likely. Genetic compatibility is another thing entirely. This would not, after all, be a modern human trying to mate with an original Homo habilis, but of a modern human trying to mate with an ancestral species that had, itself, undergone over a million years of further evolution.
If this group had somehow not evolved, it's likely the initial meeting with the pretty young anthropologist would have had a different outcome, most probably involving her ending up as the entree. The band would have just identified her as some unrelated primate species, like a chimp or gorilla, and added her to the menu. It's not technically cannibalism if it's a different species. Modern humans eat chimpanzees from time to time, which is unfortunate for both species, as this is probably how HIV jumped the chimp/human barrier.
I can see some religious types liking this movie because it implies that species are stable, and evolution doesn't occur. They'd likely dislike it because of the nudity, of course. They'd also dislike it because it suggests that the world is somewhere around its actual age, and not the 6,000 or so years that creationists delude themselves into believing.
Looking to more current entertainment, the audiobook version of Returning was released today. The audio version is narrated by British actress Bridget Thomas. I wanted a woman for this book, given the predominance of women among the most important characters (captain, navigating officer, Marine detachment commander, Marine company commander, and so forth). This unabridged reading runs just under eight hours.
As of now, the audio version is available at Audible.com and Amazon.com. And, of course, if you prefer to read it yourself, you can find it on Amazon in both print and Kindle editions.
Recent Comments