Subscribe now

Life

David Attenborough: Animals are a source of infinite fascination

By Rowan Hooper

23 January 2013

David Attenborough

imageBROKER / Alamy Stock Photo

What is your secret? It’s amazing that your passion is still there after 60 years in TV.
It’s amazing, frankly, that I’m vertical.

Well, you could be forgiven for saying, I’ve done my bit, and now I want a quiet life.
Yes. I want to go and sit and dribble in a corner.

So… what is the theme of the new series, Natural Curiosities?
It is interesting stories about interesting animals. They are a source of infinite fascination – historical, scientific, mythological.

A lot of things made me interested in animals as a kid – why has the elephant got a trunk? Were there really mermaids? There was no place on TV for them. What is nice about this series is that you can take a little subject and explore it.

Is it aimed at a younger audience?
No. The beauty of natural history programmes is that you can be straightforward and fascinate the 7s and the 70s. If you just present it as it is, all kinds of people of all ages and all educational backgrounds love it. That’s the joy of natural history… it’s a godsend for blokes like me.

You focus on 10 animals with distinctive evolutionary quirks. Zebras, the chameleon, the giraffe, the platypus…
And the narwhal. Narwhal tusks are interesting, historically. It’s all about Captain Frobisher and Queen Elizabeth I.

Didn’t Frobisher sell a narwhal tusk to the queen, pretending it was a unicorn horn?
Yes. He flogged it for £1000 or something. “I found a tusk, got it for you, ma’am. But I’m afraid it’s going to cost you.” It’s romantic. It’s fun.

This is a different sort of show from most of those you have done in the past.
We’ve done all these other shows about going off into the wild and wrestling things to the ground. But there is still so much more to these creatures.

Do we need to do more to prioritise animals and the environment over human activity?
Yes, we have to. There are whole areas – the rainforest, for example – that have to be protected for the animals and for the whole of the climate of the planet. That’s a priority if ever there was one.

Do you think in 50 years’ time people will look back and say, what were they doing?
We’re suffocating ourselves by cutting things down. And the awful thing is that the knowledge is there. Fifty years ago when we exterminated things, we did it without realising. Now there’s plenty of evidence of what it is we’re doing, and yet we keep on doing it.

Of course, there is no such thing as “we”. That’s what is unfortunate. How can you speak about Africa or China or India? They all have different agendas and understandings. The richest nation in the world still doesn’t believe in climate change!

What is it going to take? More devastation like that caused by superstorm Sandy?
Yes. But then people’s memories are so short.

Topics:

Sign up to our weekly newsletter

Receive a weekly dose of discovery in your inbox! We'll also keep you up to date with New Scientist events and special offers.

Sign up