First the only reason there is a star off is because of the Victorian prose. I just can barely stand it. However the arguments presented are well done and given plenty of evidence. Many a creationist seems to believe that Darwin pulled his theory out of thin air. He on the other hand did an amazing amount of research and while on a few things he was ignorant about (genetics, and molecular biology) for the most part he was dead on. Its not the easiest book to read and I will reread it again in the future for further study. To see how things have advanced I'd suggest a follow up read of [b:The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution|6117055|The Greatest Show on Earth The Evidence for Evolution|Richard Dawkins|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1302127919s/6117055.jpg|6295163] or [b:Why Evolution Is True|4005310|Why Evolution Is True|Jerry A. Coyne|http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1347362408s/4005310.jpg|4051626]. Both books give a great update and give more evidence to why evolution is a fact and act of nature.

this was his hyperfixation

I read this several times the last reading being some time in 2020. I am going just drop Abigail Thorn's take here and will write a review when I pick it up again which no doubt I will.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfYvLlbXj_8

required viewing before reaching for Evolutionary psychology arguments.

Update 6/16/2021 Okay the argument of the population with variations and reproduction being an exponential process of growth with a culling due to limited resources generates forms that survive well ending up doing better than varieties at a disadvantaged. It is a brutal and ugly process with some beautiful products like the nineteenth-century Britain of the industrial revolution. It is interesting that Darwin and Wallace are both products of a brutal society producing fine things on an industrial scale making huge amounts of goods and impoverishing the weak. Darwin looms large then and reflects some beautiful theories written in bloody conflict. Darwin was a naturalist but for good and bad his idea had legs.

For a Victorian man to see the minute patterns of change over time is a pretty remarkable feat for someone living in an age when Darwin was fully aware of the religious backlash that such a discovery would generate. Not all of his theories have been proven accurate (which doesn't make him wrong), but he is solely responsible for his ground-breaking work on the evolution of plants, evolutionary biology, the formation of coral reefs and atolls and for changing Western thought and ideologies–particularly those entrenched in mythology, mysticism or just plain nonsense.

Still extremely relevant. Darwins writing style is engaging and approachable. Yhe inner struggle between his scientific thoughts and religion is human and palpable.

This has to be the greatest called shot in the history of writing:

"When the views entertained in this volume on the origin of species, or when analogous views are generally admitted, we can dimly foresee that there will be a considerable revolution in natural history."

It's not boasting when you're right. Damn, Charles.

First off, full disclaimer, as usual I didn't read the book, I listened to it. Also, I did not necessarily listen to this version. This version was the most popular one on Goodreads, that definitively identified itself as being the 6th edition that [a:Darwin|12793|Charles Darwin|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1398693802p2/12793.jpg] wrote. Most versions out there are probably the same, but I wanted to pinpoint it for sure.
I listened to the LibriVox version of this book, which was a reading of the public domain version of the book. Also, even though some poor schmuck read Chapter 16: Glossary, I did not listen to it.
This book is a classic work in science that I have intended to read for some time. I originally became very interested in creationism versus evolution the summer after my freshman year of high school. I have always felt that it is better to "know your enemy" and so back then when I still believed in a hard-line, literal, young-Earth, 6-day creation I felt that I should read it. Of course that was almost two decades ago, and it took me this long to pick it up. There of course, have been opportunities to read it, but I have always preferred to listen to it. The former biology teacher I worked with, now my principal, had told me that she had never read it, and that Darwin was very poetic when he wrote. I determined none-the-less a few summers ago when I read [b:The God Delusion|14743|The God Delusion|Richard Dawkins|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1347220693s/14743.jpg|3044365] by [a:Richard Dawkins|1194|Richard Dawkins|https://d.gr-assets.com/authors/1377030297p2/1194.jpg] finally that I would read [b:The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection (or On the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life)|22463|The Origin of Species|Charles Darwin|https://d.gr-assets.com/books/1298417570s/22463.jpg|481941]. I stumbled across the LibriVox version about that time, and have simply been waiting to get around to it. I'll admit that I let other classics [like The Great Gatsby and Pride & Prejudice] get in the way, but finally it was On the Origin's time.
First, I am no longer a staunch Creationist. I think however, I'll save that discussion for another time. Also, I don't think Darwin was very poetic- wordy and repetitive yes, but poetic not really. There were a few times when he did wax poetic, but overall he was fairly straightforward with his prose. As I read, I kept trying to put myself back into the past when Darwin wrote this and to think about how groundbreaking of an idea it was. Furthermore, I was surprised that most arguments I've heard against Darwinism and evolution were preemptively addressed by Darwin, or discussed in later editions [specifically the added Chapter VII to the 6th edition to address criticisms. It is frustrating to me that I had the wool pulled over my eyes, like there were valid arguments against evolution and for the Creationist perspective that the scientific community had not addressed, when in reality they were addressed by the founder of this idea. Darwin was very methodical in laying out his case, in pointing out its shortcomings, in citing the experiments he or others had conducted to support his theory, and in showing what was left to be figured out [or even what experiments could prove him wrong].
In fact, I was surprised at how differently science was done in the past. As a naturalist Darwin and his peers did not seem to specialize as much as happens today. Darwin kept up regular correspondences to collect and share data. He was even a member of a birding society in London so that he would have a way to get a lot of breeding and inheritance data without having to go through the hassle of raising so many birds. I particularly enjoyed the descriptions of floating and eaten seeds and how successful they were at growing after being subjected to harsh conditions. This kind of work showed that Darwin didn't just propose a theory, he thought long and hard about its implications and what must occur for it to be correct.
However, I laughed several times when the development of other scientific theories paled in comparison to where they stand today. He, and others at the time, seemed so close to proposing the idea of continental drift, and yet he drew short. He, of course, relied on Lord Kelvin's [or someone following a similar line of reasoning] for the age of the Earth. These shortcomings are not his fault, but still they amused me.
Several times as I was reading the book, I thought about how I'd use it if I was a biology teacher and although the text is probably a little advanced for most high schoolers, it could easily be used in upper-level classes or have snippets given to lower grades. In fact, the summaries at the end of most Chapters [some chapters follow such a common theme that two are summarized together] could be read and appreciated without too much confusion or additional guidance being needed. I also thought that it would make a great class project to create an illustrated edition. This has been done of course, but since the work is in the public domain it would be great to make a public illustrated version using public domain images.
The only real complaint I have it how repetitive Darwin was at times. The book probably could have lost and 1/8th to a 1/6th if he had been more brief. Also, as ground breaking as it was at the time, it doesn't carry the same weight as now when the concept is so accepted and prevalent.

Endless forms most beautiful, indeed.
A pivotal publication hewing to the the basic foundation tying all of biology together. A must read for biology geeks such as me, and I finally read it.