1799), and burst out all over the world in a 

 frenzy of discussion during the 1890s. 



The 1890s version displays the clearest 

 division of high versus vernacular culture. 

 A few high-culture sources did line up be- 

 hind the pop favorite of 1899-1900. 

 Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany officially 

 stated that the twentieth century had 

 begun on January 1, 1900. A few barons 

 of scholarship, including such unlikely 

 bedfellows as Sigmund Freud and Lord 

 Kelvin, agreed. But high culture over- 

 whelmingly preferred the Dionysian im- 

 perative of 1900-1901. An assiduous sur- 

 vey showed that the presidents of Harvard, 

 Yale, Princeton, Cornell, Columbia, Dart- 

 mouth, Brown, and the University of 

 Pennsylvania all favored 1900-1901 — 

 and with the entire Ivy League so firmly 

 behind Dionysius, why worry about a 

 mere Kaiser (even though the king of 

 Sweden rallied to Wilhelm's defense). 



In any case, 1900-1901 won decisively 

 in the two forums that really matter Virtu- 

 ally every important public celebration of 

 the new century throughout the world (and 

 even in Germany) occurred from Decem- 

 ber 31, 1900, into January 1, 1901. More- 

 over, essentially every major newspaper 

 and magazine officially welcomed the 

 new century with their first issue of Janu- 

 ary 1901. I made a survey of principal 

 sources and could find no exceptions. The 

 Nineteenth Century, a leading British peri- 

 odical, changed its name to The Nine- 

 teenth Century and After, but only with the 

 January 1901 issue, which also featured a 

 new logo of bifaced Janus, with an old, 

 bearded man looking down and left into 



the nineteenth century, and a bright youth 

 looking right up into the twentieth. Such 

 reliable standards as the Farmer's Al- 

 manack and the Tribune Almanac de- 

 clared their volumes for 1901 as "first 

 number of the twentieth century." On De- 

 cember 31, 1899, the New York Times 

 began a story on The Nineteenth Century 

 by noting: 'Tomorrow we enter upon the 

 last year of a century that is marked by 

 greater progress in all that pertains to the 

 material well-being and enlightenment of 

 mankind than all the previous history of 

 the race." On January 1, 1901, the lead 

 headline proclaimed "Twentieth Century's 

 Triumphant Entry" and described the fes- 

 tivities in New York City: "The lights 

 flashed, the crowds sang, the sirens of craft 

 in the harbor screeched and roared, bells 

 pealed, bombs thundered, rockets blasted 

 skyward, and the new century made its tri- 

 umphant entry." Meanwhile, poor Carry 

 Nation never got to watch the fireworks, or 

 even to raise a glass, for a small story on 

 the same first page announced "Mrs. Na- 

 tion Quarantined — smallpox in jail where 

 Kansas saloon wrecker is held — says she 

 can stand it." 



So high culture still held the reins of 

 opinion last time around — even in such 

 organs of pop culture as the Farmer's Al- 

 manack, no doubt pubUshed by men who 

 considered themselves among the elite. 

 But consider the difference as we ap- 

 proach this millennium — for who can 

 doubt that pop culture will win decisively 

 on this most important replay. Arthur C. 

 Clarke and Stanley Kubrick stood by 

 Dionysius in book and film versions of 



7.C.VE) 



2001, but I can hardly think of another 

 source that does not specify the inception 

 of 2000 as the great moment of transition. 

 All book titles of our burgeoning Uterature 

 honor pop culture's version of maximal 

 numerical shift — including Ben Bova's 

 Millennium: A Novel about People and 

 Politics in the Year 1999; J. G. de Beus's 

 Shall We Make the Year 2000; Raymond 

 Williams's The Year 2000; and even 

 Richard Nixon's 7999.- Victory Without 

 War. Prince's album and lead song "1999" 

 cite the same date from this ne plus ultra 

 of pop sources. 



Cultural historians have often remarked 

 that expansion of pop culture, including 

 both respect for its ways and means and 

 diffusion of its influence, marks a major 

 trend of the twentieth century. Musicians 

 from Benny Goodman to Wynton Mar- 

 salis play their instruments in jazz bands 

 and classical orchestras. The MetropoUtan 

 Opera has finally performed Porgy and 

 Bess — and bravo for them. Scholars write 

 the most damnedly learned articles about 

 Mickey Mouse. 



This remarkable change has been weU 

 documented and much discussed, but 

 commentary has so far missed the impor- 

 tance of this example for the great century 

 debate. This distinction stiU mattered in 

 1900, and high culture won decisively by 

 imposing January 1, 1901, as the inception 

 of the twentieth century. Pop culture (or 

 the amalgam of its diffusion into courts of 

 decision makers) may already declare 

 clear victory for the miUennium, which 

 win occur at the beginning of the year 

 2000 because most people so feel it in 

 their bones, Dionysius notwithstanding — 

 and again I say bravo. My young friend 

 wanted to resolve the debate by granting 

 the first century only ninety-nine years; 

 now ordinary humanity has spoken for the 

 other end — and the transition from high- 

 culture dominance to pop-culture diffu- 

 sion may resolve this issue of the ages by 

 granting the twentieth century but ninety- 

 nine years! 



How lovely — for eternal debates about 

 the unresolvable really do waste a great 

 deal of time, put us in bad humor, and sap 

 our energy from truly important pursuits. 

 Let us, instead, save our mental fight — not 

 to establish the blessed millennium (for I 

 doubt that humans are capable of such per- 

 fection), but at least to build Jerusalem 

 upon our planet's green and pleasant land. 



Stephen Jay Gould teaches biology, geol- 

 ogy, and the history of science at Harvard 

 University. 



12 Natural History 4/94 



