spinofflive
black and white headshot of George Hudson with a clock and praying mantis, over a sunset sky
Thank you for your service, George Hudson (Image: The Spinoff)

SocietyApril 5, 2025

The local bug enthusiast who invented Daylight Saving

black and white headshot of George Hudson with a clock and praying mantis, over a sunset sky
Thank you for your service, George Hudson (Image: The Spinoff)

As Daylight Saving comes to an end, let us remember the local naturalist who came up with the idea so he could spend more time searching for insects in the Karori Bush.

Here in the south, the signs are everywhere. Beanies are creeping onto heads and people are starting to murmur about lighting their fires. The skies dim as we savour the last crunchy cucumbers and juicy tomatoes from the garden and forage for twigs and branches like little church mice. But it is this Sunday that will bring the most concrete signifier of the changing seasons when we all, in the words of Jon Toogood, put our clocks back for the winter. 

While many New Zealanders credit “The Shihad Method” with reminding them how Daylight Saving works, and everyone knows about Māui slowing the sun to make the days longer, less are aware that the modern concept of changing the clocks was invented by a local nature-lover named George Hudson. Moving from London to New Zealand as a bug-obsessed teen in 1881, Hudson “never lost any available opportunity to enjoy his hobby”, his obituary reads.

Working shifts as a post officer, Hudson spent all his spare time outdoors amassing what would become the largest personal collection of New Zealand insects. “He was intolerant of ‘armchair naturalists’ but believed in going in the field in search of nature,” the obituary continues. “He made many excursions into the virgin country of New Zealand, collecting and observing.” Even when indoors he’d bring the nature to him, going so far as to rear glowworms in his kitchen. 

Dr Julia Kasper, lead curator of invertebrates at Te Papa. (Image: Supplied)

Dr Julia Kasper, lead curator of invertebrates at Te Papa, is a big Hudson fan. “He’s a bit of a hero,” she says. “He was a very interesting character, but he was also very humble.” Distancing himself from the snooty scientific community, she says he was much more interested in sharing his findings with the public. Over the course of his life, he published seven books about insects, including three volumes on butterflies and moths with over 2,500 colour illustrations. 

Along with his love of insects, Hudson also had a passion for astronomy and eventually discovered a new star, Nova Aquilae, in 1918. “He was a man of many talents,” laughs Kasper. “It was always secondary to insects, but he was so knowledgeable about the stars, planets and time.” In 1895, these hobbies collided when Hudson presented a paper – ‘On Seasonal Time Adjustment in Countries South of Latitude 30′ – to the Wellington Philosophical Society. 

A published abstract of the presentation lays it all out: “The author proposed to alter the time of the clock at the equinoxes so as to bring the working hours of the day within the period of daylight and, by utilising the early morning, so to reduce the excessive use of artificial light.” Or, as he would later rephrase it, “a long period of daylight leisure would be made available in the evening for cricket, gardening, cycling or any other outdoor pursuit desired.” 

Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New Zealand, Volume 28, 1895, Page 734

Hudson’s pitch did not go down well with the Dragon’s Den of the time. “The paper evoked a storm of derision,” writes his grandson George Gibbs in his biography An Exquisite Legacy. “Criticism ranged from someone who considered humans were not far enough advanced to adopt the plan, to those who claimed his suggestion wholly scientific and impractical. It was out of the question to think of altering a system that had been in use for thousands of years.” 

While it was largely ridiculed, Hudson’s theory did get a surprising groundswell of support in Christchurch, where 1000 copies of his paper were distributed throughout the garden city. “Serious attempts were made by a number of persons to bring about a practical application of the scheme therein suggested,” Hudson noted of Christchurch’s embrace of the concept. “I should state that these steps were taken entirely independently of any action on my part.”

Hudson would give his pitch another go two years later in front of the Royal Society of New Zealand in 1898. “I am convinced that all those who believe an abundance of outdoor recreation is the most effective means of securing human health and happiness should support this scheme,” he said, later pointing out that both breadwinners and school students are forced to “remain indoors during the very season when the beauties of nature are at their best.” 

Original hand painted plate for the Manual of New Zealand Entomology by George Hudson. (Image: Te Papa)

Still, Hudson’s idea failed to get any traction here. A decade later in the UK, a builder named William Willett presented a similar pitch and, by 1916, Germany and the UK had adopted the time-shifting measure to save fuel on lighting during the war. It wasn’t until 1927 that New Zealand first observed an extra hour of daylight saving time, shrinking to a half hour in 1928, extending it for all of 1941 during WWII, discontinuing it in 1946, and reintroducing it in 1975. 

Hudson received a T.K. Sidey medal for his pioneering idea in 1934, but his legacy extends far beyond long, light summer nights. His insect collection, now in Te Papa and still in its original kauri cabinetry, is one of the most scientifically valuable private collections in New Zealand, Kasper tells me. “Multiple research projects still use the collection to this day,” she explains. “The specimens are always being used for active research to find and describe new species.” 

Another enormous project has been decoding the screeds of information associated with his collection, which Hudson recorded in the pages of a post office register. “It was a bit unusual because he gave every insect a little code written in that book, and then the code contained information as to when and where he found it.” A team of volunteers around the country have worked to decipher the information over several years, and now it is available to search digitally. 

“Now we have a database that we can ask to show all the specimens of certain species that have been found, for example, in 1922 in Karori,” Kasper says. “And we can compare our data set with his old data set to see what has changed in different populations.” It also means that his work continues to raise awareness and strengthen our understanding of wildlife to this day. “We think this is something Hudson would have wanted, because he was so keen to communicate with the public.” 

So as we all prepare to turn our clocks back, Kasper hopes Aotearoa keeps the “very cool” Hudson in their minds. “He was curious, he was determined, and he always went out and observed. These days everyone just spends all their time on devices, when we should all go out and look,” she says. “Bellyflop into vegetation and observe what happens in the microcosmos, look at mating ladybirds for an hour, just see what’s out there.” While it’s still light out, of course. 

‘If you regularly enjoy The Spinoff, and want it to continue, become a member today.’
Toby Manhire
— Editor-at-large
Keep going!
rjcc6pFI-HMH_FeatureImage-4.png

SocietyApril 3, 2025

Help Me Hera: Nobody is ever good enough for me

rjcc6pFI-HMH_FeatureImage-4.png

I don’t want my neuroses about someone being ‘good enough’ to keep me from finding love. But choosing to be with someone who isn’t quite right seems like a death sentence.

Want Hera’s help? Email your problem to helpme@thespinoff.co.nz

Dear Hera,

I’m a straight single woman in my late 20s who is dating in a medium-sized European city. The only thing is that I can’t shake the awful feeling that no-one is ever good enough for me. I’ve followed advice to list what I want in a partner, which runs the gamut of “intelligent” to “has a decent job” to “if balding looks OK in a hat,” but it feels like I can never find someone who fulfils all of these briefs in some capacity. If he’s intelligent, it’ll eventually be revealed that he’s mired in debt; if he’s creative, he’ll also have a taste for synthetic drugs; if he’s got a good job, the main hobby he’ll have is posting on Reddit.

I feel ashamed about the feeling that no one can quite measure up to what I want: after all, I have friends who are in loving, long-term relationships with people who would fail my criteria. I’ve also passed on men who I know really liked me, but I felt like they weren’t as ambitious as me or their lifestyles didn’t complement mine. Equally, I’ve dated shiftless men for periods, because I felt that my cohort of artsy liberals would judge me for turning down someone who might just have been fucked by the capitalist system, man! 

As a result, I’ve been very much single for most of my adult life. Sometimes I wish I had a parent or guardian to help me sift through my Hinge matches to tell me if potential suitors are good enough for their little girl. 

The world is so disorientating at the moment, and my anxieties aren’t helped by a strong sense that it could all burn down next week. I don’t want my neuroses about someone being “good enough” to keep me from finding love. But choosing to be with someone who isn’t quite right seems like a death sentence.

Should I throw my list in the bin and give up on my standards?

Yours sincerely, 

Picky & perturbed

Dear Picky,

The problem with picking out a partner as if you’re choosing a piece of Scandinavian furniture for a difficult corner is that you can spend so much time focusing on your wish list that you neglect the most important criteria, which is first and foremost, a deep and genuine connection to another person. 

The thing I noticed most about your letter was the complete lack of emotion. There’s no sense that you’ve ever fallen catastrophically in love. Maybe you’ve never experienced that type of chemistry. Maybe you have, and it all went horribly wrong, and now you’re trying to be a little more discerning. But it does feel to me like you’re going about things in the wrong order.

Nobody likes being spoken about like an inferior brand of wheelbarrow. And yet the way we date seems to increasingly pander to a home shopping network mindset. I’m not saying the traditional method of choosing the most attractive person in your populationally stunted backwater is necessarily a better system. But I do think we’re so overwhelmed with choice that it’s easy to forget what makes romance romantic. 

I’m not saying you should lower your standards because it’s the enlightened or ethical thing to do. It’s genuinely nobody else’s business who you choose to date, and what yardstick you choose to measure them by. Fairness has nothing to do with it. But I do think that your stringent criteria could be preventing you from experiencing one of the best feelings life has to offer.

‘Love The Spinoff? Its future depends on your support. Become a member today.’
Madeleine Chapman
— Editor

Perfect people don’t exist, and even if they did, it would be hideous to be in a relationship with one, because to be able to love someone despite their flaws and have them offer you the same grace is a lot more powerful and transformative than trying to find a perfect, lab grown specimen. 

It’s also worth pointing out that people change, and that it’s possible for two people to uplift and transform one another. I’m not suggesting taking on someone as a “fixer-upper.” But things like jobs and debt and hobbies are not permanent states of being. Healthy people get sick. Financially secure people lose their jobs. Everything in life is subject to change, for better and worse, so it makes sense to find someone you’re willing to meet those changes with. 

I don’t think it’s wrong to have a few dealbreakers. But you should save them for the things that really matter to you. Settling doesn’t mean lowering your standards. Sometimes, it means compromising on a few things you thought mattered and getting a whole lot of other extra stuff you didn’t even know you wanted or needed in return. 

It seems to me that all your objections are proof of the fact that you haven’t felt strongly enough about someone to override your initial reservations, and that’s the main issue here, rather than an inherent pickiness. If you can find someone who brings you joy, that’s 75% of the battle. When you meet someone you’re crazy about, the minor stuff that would ordinarily have given you the “ick” is not only irrelevant, but can actually become paradoxically attractive. 

So how do you find someone who gives you that feeling? There is no easy way. But in your case, I wonder if it means starting from a place of curiosity and trying to be more alert to how people make you feel rather than what they bring to the table. It means trusting your heart and gut as well as your intellect. It means trying to date for the spark. With the right person, you can eat a rotisserie chicken beside a dumpster and feel at peace, whereas the wrong person will make a five-course degustation menu feel like a living nightmare. 

I’m not saying it’s easy. But I think you’re so worried about making bad decisions that you’ve stopped paying attention to how you feel, which is surely the whole point.

It’s entirely possible that nobody will ever be good enough for you. On the other hand, nobody is really good enough for anyone, and we should all be grateful for that. Over time, you begin to understand what a privilege it is to be invited into someone’s life, to witness them at their best and worst.  

If you find yourself struggling to make that connection, don’t force it. It’s a thousand times better to be happy and single than to shoehorn yourself into a miserable relationship and eat corned beef in silence until you die.

But if you want the real thing, I suggest setting aside your checklist and paying closer attention to your instincts. You might not get exactly what you thought you wanted, but sometimes, getting exactly what you want isn’t all that satisfying or interesting. Hopefully, you find something deeper and more profound along the way.