Popular Science

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Admidst all the heat I generated in Swing That Two Headed Ax!, I think one little interesting chink of light might have escaped. Whilst writing about Chaos, Katie described it as:

well written like a mystery novel

and it's made me think about why and how people read popular science. Now, a fair few of the big popular science hits of recentish years (Chaos, Singh's book on Fermat, Longitude etc) have had definite narrative drives to them and I don't think it would be controversial to suggest that this had a real part to play in their success. Do those of you that do read science whether this storytelling aspect of the books is a big attraction or is it more curiousity about nature that draws you to them? Also, if you read other sorts of academic-ish non-fiction stuff (ie philosophy, lit crit etc) do you read the science in a similar way or treat it more as entertainment?

― RickyT, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

We might as well have the full CoD and SaD treatment here as well.

― RickyT, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

i like it cos of both. Classic when it is well written and, in Douglas Adams' words, like having a light switch flicked on in your mind. Dud when people with theoretical backgrounds look down upon you because it's supposedly selling their subject short, or something. personally i just think that scientists have a vested interest in preserving the mystery of their subject and get ratty when lay people know stuff about it. that's not referring to you BTW rickyT.

― katie, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

is Fermat's Last Theorem any good? more to the point RickyT do you have a copy that i may spank orf of you?

and i'm still gonna read Alice in Wonderland at you tonight, that'll teach you.

― katie, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Must be said, I loved all of those books. Especially Singh's.

― Wil, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Blimey, I really shouldn't cut and paste edit after a few pints. Read 'whether' as 'regard' and the following 'is' as 'as' in the penultimate sentence and it might make a bit more sense.

― RickyT, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I've got Fermat's last thereom somewhere, but somewhere might = in York.

― RickyT, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

I'm v scientifically minded, but I've been reading more popular history than popular science lately. Though I do have "Darwin's Thumb" and the subsequent Stephen Jay Gould book whose name I can't remember in my waiting list on my bookshelf. I'll do a report when I've read them, if you like.

― Mark C, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Its a cool theorem but the book is a bit round the houses.

― Pete, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Who wrote 'Almost Like A Whale'? Any good?

― Will, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

almost like a whale = steve jones. i read it and liked it. it was 'darwin lite' but since i will never read the original despite my best intentions it was good.

i used to read almost nothing but popular science but realised there were only so many times you could read a book on 'oo, isnt quantum physics weird' so i don't bother as much anymore. None of it ever sank in either. Part of this is probably that at one point (ie just after 'a brief history of time') there were many hundreds of popular physics books concentrating on the science whereas now, as RickyT says, the books seem to be much more focused on personality or the story of a discovery. i think this makes them much more readable so yes, i do treat them as entertainment.

― liz, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

it was 'darwin lite' but since i will never read the original

IHIOGA that the Origin of Species is a wonderful read. Not dry or dated at all. Darwin was the original popular scientist. I WILL read it.

― Nick, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

On the other hand it's annoying when a science author uses bawdy, clunky versions of fictional narrative that stick out too much

― maryann, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

WHAT is IHIOGA, if you please?

― Maria, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

There is a standard textbook called Sheodigners Cat (or how ever else you spell his name). Its quite good even if its a textbook.

― Mr Noodles, Friday, 23 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

pop science = pre-manufactured boybandZoR yuk

i'm all abt indie science

― mark s, Saturday, 24 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

Longitude more about class struggle than science.

― Billy Dods, Saturday, 24 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

As with anything popularized -- read into this what you like ;-) -- exactitude and depth of detail are usually, though not always, sacrificed in order to get the message across. Whether or not this causes problems is the sticking point. Me, I don't think so.

― Ned Raggett, Saturday, 24 November 2001 01:00 (twenty-four years ago)

one year passes...

I hate popular science books that include irrelevant detail: "The day I realized the fundamental nature of reality, and proved it in my lab, my car took a while to warm up. Meanwhile, my girlfriend sat next to me still fuming about the date I'd forgotten earlier in the week." I like digressions on possible philosophical implications, as long as they seem at least as intelligent as what I could come up with on my own.

― Rockist Scientist, Saturday, 15 March 2003 20:00 (twenty-three years ago)

eleven years pass...

http://www.futilitycloset.com/2015/02/13/traffic-waves/

― the plight of y0landa (forksclovetofu), Friday, 27 February 2015 03:38 (eleven years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.