Author Jared Diamond talks about life after Guns, Germs and Steel

By Adrial Lobelo '02

Jared Diamond, the Pulitzer Prize-winning author of Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies and a UCLA professor of physiology, spoke to a primed Cornell community audience Sept. 25 in Bailey Hall.

UCLA Professor Jared Diamond has a question-and-answer session with Cornell community members in Libe Café of Olin Library, Sept. 26, about his book, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. Diamond lectured the previous evening in Bailey Hall. Robert Krausner/University Photography

Guns, Germs and Steel was required summer reading for incoming Cornell freshman this year. Last winter, Provost Biddy Martin had asked the deans of each of Cornell's undergraduate colleges to read four titles, among them Diamond's book, as possibilities for the requirement. During his introduction of Diamond, President Hunter Rawlings described the deans' selection process as "raising hackles, explanations and educational aspirations." It was this type of deliberation, along with the book's broadly interdisciplinary scope, that prompted the selection of Guns, Germs and Steels as the required book for the Class of 2005.

Initially the reading requirement was met with some negative response, Rawlings said. The Cornell Daily Sun published editorial columns and letters to the editor denouncing the requirement. Some faculty members were also less than supportive. Within a short time, however, attitudes changed as more and more people familiarized themselves with Diamond's book, and the value of the assignment as an intellectually engaging common experience became more clear. By summer, more than 200 faculty members had volunteered to lead discussion sections for students during orientation week.

Guns, Germs and Steel was written to explain "why history [unfolded] the way it did," answered Diamond to a question posed by an audience member. In his book, Diamond explores the early geographical and environmental forces that, he argues, led to the differing rates of technological development among the world's societies and cultures.

Arguing that "we can learn from history," Diamond posed several questions during his lecture. To be more successful, should groups centralize their power? Or should power be diffused? Is one large group better than many subgroups that coexist? Is secrecy a better option than open communication? Are protectionist policies preferable to policies that promote free competition? Can benevolent dictatorships offer more to constituents than traditional democracies? Does a nonfederalist system have any advantages over a federalist system?

Diamond began his multidisciplinary examination ­ which went beyond the historical scope of his book ­ by giving his explanation of how China fell precipitously behind Europe in technological innovation, after having had an early advantage. Long before Europeans had the ability to charter the ocean's waters in search of new worlds, the Chinese had manufactured large ships that dwarfed Columbus' famed fleet. China also led the world in its invention of the seismograph, tea shredder, wheelbarrow, yoke, compass, paper, porcelain, movable type and gunpowder. Despite accomplishing a high number of early technological triumphs, it was China's adoption of isolationism that dramatically slowed technological innovation after 1433. Diamond asserted that, given China's unification under one emperor, there was little chance for diverse innovators to press through with new ideas, especially when the emperor ordered the dismantling of ship yards and limited the operations of sea ports.

Europe, on the other hand, was fragmented, he explained. It consisted of a multitude of states, with numerous ruling authorities governing within those states. When Christopher Columbus' plan to sail to India was rejected by one monarch, he simply proposed his plan to another monarch. Diamond suggested that if Columbus had lived in China during China's isolationist period, his opportunity to discover "new worlds" would have been unlikely to happen.

"Europe's fragmentation has been a source of its strength," said Diamond.

Diamond later compared the German and American beer industries, to make another point.

"The German beer industry is not very successful in the export market because it suffers from small-scale production," Diamond said, comparing it to American's more successful, large-scale breweries. Germany's smaller breweries, catering to local tastes and policies, have hampered the industry's productivity and reach, he said. Diamond used this example to point to human society's trend toward greater globalization.

When asked if he had used any of his findings, combined with his multidisciplinary analysis, to predict the future course of things, Diamond responded, "That's the subject of my next book."