October 1976. Richard Dawkins’s debut hit the shelves. Fifty years later it’s still selling. In over 30 languages, too. For a book about genes, that’s insane. Usually this stuff gathers dust. Or at least, it did until then.
It started cold. February. I was a commissioning edit at the OUP, reading a scrawl from a physicist named Roger Elliott. One of their own academics, a Dr. Dawkins. Writing a popular book. Titled The Selfish Gene.
“I have no idea whether he or it any good but it might worth looking into.”
Two weeks. That’s how long I waited. Then I started the drafts. The first page grabbed me by the coat. Really grabbed me. I didn’t need the second page. Or the third.
I was done for.
An editor’s intoxicating moment. You know the feeling. It hits your gut before your brain catches up. I was certain. Waves were coming. It would sell. Hard.
I wired the branch managers. Globally. Urgency is a powerful thing. My pitch? Forget “science.” Forget “popular.” It’s a page turner. A thriller. I bet you anything, read this. Try stopping. Accountants? They’ll read it. Packer’s on the floor? They’ll devour it. Secretaries. Salesmen. The whole damn office.
“Forget about science, popular, otherwise. Think this book. Readable. Gripping.”
The title nearly killed it.
I loved it. From Elliott’s note, The Selfish Gene. Singular. Problem? Critics argued. Singular implies a rogue. One bad actor in a field of normals. A mistake. Suggest they went with Our Selfish Genes. Dawkins said no. Would have settled for plural, The Selfish Genes. But he wanted singular.
Then there was Desmond Morris. He of the Naked Ape. He pushed The Gene Machine.
I hated it.
The Gene Machine. Sterile. Cold. Neutral. It hides the truth. The point isn’t the machine. It’s the selfishness. The behavior. The machine doesn’t tell you why the pieces grind each other down. It just describes the gears.
Later, in 2013, Dawkins got nostalgic. An Appetite for Wonder. He writes about meeting Tom Maschler, publisher. Jonathan Cape. Maschler read the chapters. Liked the meat. Didn’t like the name.
“‘Selfish,’ he explained me, down word. Why not Immortal Gene? Hindsight, was very right.”
Dawkins agrees with Maschler. Thinks he should have listened. The Immortal Gene. Sounds safe. Sounds respectful. Sounds boring.
I’m saying this with zero hesitation: Richard is wrong.
Immortality isn’t the story. Selfishness is. The shock. The sting. You remember it.
