Friday, May 16, 2008 | Reason : In the News | print version

Print | Comments |

The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing, ed. Richard Dawkins

by Independent UK

Thanks to SPS for the link.

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/the-oxford-book-of-modern-science-writing-ed-richard-dawkins-828939.html

The Oxford Book of Modern Science Writing, ed. Richard Dawkins

A fine workout for agile minds

Reviewed by Peter Forbes

Richard Dawkins's profile has morphed in recent years: from the most lucid science writer of our time, the man who makes his readers feel smarter than they really are, to the Chief Pastor of World Atheism Inc. Despite the astonishing sales of The God Delusion, there has been some loss. His new role has made his job of evolution's champion harder because the religious right in the US has always sought to tarnish evolution by association with atheism, communism and a declension of debaucheries. Happily, in this book, the evangelising is confined to the celebration of good science writing.

This isn't Dawkins as the centre of attention but as a benign and generous guide to the best science writing, with commentaries by the master. His brief is fairly rigorous: it is 20th century, by practising scientists only, and all originally in English, bar Primo Levi, who was too important to leave out and whose work, in any case, reads beautifully in translation.

A few difficult pieces throw into relief the excellence and clarity of writers such as Steve Jones, Jared Diamond, Matt Ridley and Dawkins himself. Sidney Brenner's "Theoretical Biology in the Third Millennium" is not over-technical by the standards of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, for whom it was written, but you can tell that he is speaking to scientists. In contrast, Matt Ridley imaginatively evokes the wonder of the discovery of DNA's structure by focusing on 1943, 10 years before the event, as threads lead towards the denouement.

The anthology proves that there is a canon of science literature and that the best science writers are prose stylists of the highest order. Every major field has great writers who can render the developing stories as real narratives: Dawkins, Jones and Ridley in biology, Jared Diamond in demography, Steven Pinker in linguistics and psychology; Steven Weinberg in cosmology; Roald Hoffman (not included) and Pete Atkins in chemistry.

Strangely, or perhaps not, this genius doesn't stretch to poetry. Dawkins admits this but includes three poems anyway. Scientists are ineluctably attracted to facetious light verse the way heavy sediments drain to the bottom of the centrifuge. JBS Haldane's "Cancer is a funny thing" deserves its place as a characteristic expression of a remarkable personality ("I wish I had the muse of Homer/ To sing of rectal carcinoma"); Barbara and George Gamow's "Said Ryle to Hoyle" should never have got any further than the lab noticeboard. Julian Huxley's "God and Man" is a surprise: recognisably a poem and not mere verse. There are some lapses of literary judgement. The book begins with cosmology's interwar pundit, James Jeans, peddling clichés such as "a grain of sand", "twinkling of an eye": nebulosities that should have been allowed to drift into the cosmic recycling bin.

Readers who think of Dawkins as a writer on biology might be surprised by the number of mathematical, physical and cosmological entries. But attentive readers will have noticed his love of computing and jeux d'esprit and will know that intellectual puzzles tickle him more than lyrical evocations of the spirit of nature, although there are some of those. His pantheon includes Douglas Hofstadter of G�del, Escher, Bach fame, and the long-time games columnist from Scientific American, Martin Gardner.

Dawkins is, above all, a thinker with a logician's mind. So we have two pieces featuring Achilles and the tortoise (one mathematical, one philosophical); the solitaire game "Life" in which interesting recurring patterns evolve in a board game that follows simple iterative rules; and why prey when threatened always tend to end up in clumps, thus offering an easy target en masse.

If it's lyricism you're after, Rachel Carson's long prose poem to the oceans is outstanding. The grandeur and nobility of the scientific quest are most eloquent in Carl Sagan, who gets the last word, a plea to "preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known". Every reader is likely to make a discovery or two. For me, it was that the intricate cryptic crosswords we enjoy would not be possible without the 50 percent redundancy of the English language. As Dawkins himself once said, as he embarked on a difficult passage in The Blind Watchmaker, it will help to bring your "mental running shoes".

Peter Forbes's 'The Gecko's Foot' is published by HarperPerennial

Posted: Friday, May 16, 2008 | Permalink

Comments 1 - 48 of 48 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #180942 by Aegisofreason on May 16, 2008 at 7:34 am

First post!

Other Comments by Aegisofreason

2. Comment #180946 by Sally Luxmoore on May 16, 2008 at 7:38 am

Since when was atheism a "tarnish" or a "debauchery"?

Bias?

I have this book on order from Amazon and am waiting impatiently for its arrival.

Other Comments by Sally Luxmoore

3. Comment #180947 by Jiten on May 16, 2008 at 7:39 am

Yeah,this is a good review of a good book.But I can't wait for Dawkins's own next book.

Other Comments by Jiten

4. Comment #180950 by SteveN on May 16, 2008 at 7:41 am

I'm about half-way through this book at the moment and am enjoying it thoroughly. Richard's introductions are short and to the point, and the selected passages are also relatively short (usually one or two pages). I'm steadily making a list of authors whose books I must now read in full.

Other Comments by SteveN

5. Comment #180951 by Jiten on May 16, 2008 at 7:41 am

Aegisofreason Yeah and what did you do with it you cretin?

Other Comments by Jiten

6. Comment #180955 by Apathy personified on May 16, 2008 at 7:46 am

I have this book, on the bookcase, just waiting for my finals to be over (3rd year physics....don't ask), i really can't wait.

Now, now Jiten, play nice, they are new to the site

Other Comments by Apathy personified

7. Comment #180956 by Lu Castro on May 16, 2008 at 7:48 am

I suppose it's a decent review, but of course he can't manage to get through it without characterizing Dawkins as "the Chief Pastor of World Atheism Inc." and eluding to the idea that Dawkins' recent work has been a type of "evangelising". It took one paragraph for Forbes to expose himself as a delicate ego, unable to get through a review of Dawkins' work without sticking a few jabs to someone who may have offended his sky god.

These cheap comparisons likening Dawkins to a hapless, drunken preacher are insulting to anyone who appreciates him for the contributions he's made to modern science.

I don't think we needed his critique to trust that Richard would produce anything unworthy of our attention.

Other Comments by Lu Castro

8. Comment #180958 by j.mills on May 16, 2008 at 7:55 am

I found it an elegant and interesting book, though oddly structured in having mostly biology in the first half and much more emphasis on hard sciences in the second. Didn't actually learn a great deal (or if I did I've forgotten it all!), but it's very enjoyable.

Other Comments by j.mills

9. Comment #180961 by T4Baxter on May 16, 2008 at 7:56 am

This could be the book for the next generation of children to refer to in the search for truth. An, introduction, effort of a science bible! I live in hopelessly optimistic hope.

Other Comments by T4Baxter

10. Comment #180962 by BigJohn on May 16, 2008 at 7:57 am

Could someone please explain to me what it is about 'first post' that is so exciting to some? I can't imagine that all 'first posters' are pre-teens or are mentally retarded, so, there must be some other reason for the unbridled excitement.

Other Comments by BigJohn

11. Comment #180964 by Matt H. on May 16, 2008 at 8:00 am

Yeah,this is a good review of a good book.But I can't wait for Dawkins's own next book.

That's funny, I thought it was a rather bad review of a good book. Using terms like 'pastor', 'debauchery' and 'evangelising' when referring to atheism is usually a telltale sign.

Other Comments by Matt H.

12. Comment #180967 by SteveN on May 16, 2008 at 8:05 am

Jiten said "But I can't wait for Dawkins's own next book."

I agree. As much as I have been so thoroughly pleased with events since Richard released "The God Delusion", it's his popular science writing that I enjoy the most. Does he have such a book in progress, does anyone know?

Other Comments by SteveN

13. Comment #180971 by SteveN on May 16, 2008 at 8:13 am

j.mills wrote

...in having mostly biology in the first half and much more emphasis on hard sciences in the second

Now wait just one doggoned minute there JM! Are you implying that we biologists are a bunch of softies or that biology is a cushy number compared with physics? I'll be sending round the boys with the baseball bats if Richard doesn't get you first ;-)

Other Comments by SteveN

14. Comment #180974 by Tezcatlipoca on May 16, 2008 at 8:18 am

Would those be wooden baseball bats made from trees SteveN?

Other Comments by Tezcatlipoca

15. Comment #180976 by SteveN on May 16, 2008 at 8:22 am

Tezcatlipoca asked:

Would those be wooden baseball bats made from trees SteveN?

When I can tear myself away from doing evil experminents in my dungeon, I mean laboratory, I actually spend my time woodturning, i.e. the art of turning large trees into small useless items. Wooden baseball bats are therefore a distinct possibility!

Other Comments by SteveN

16. Comment #180981 by Tezcatlipoca on May 16, 2008 at 8:30 am

I'm glad to hear it. I don't really like the sound when a metal bat makes contact...*crack, crack* rather than *gong, crack*

Other Comments by Tezcatlipoca

17. Comment #180987 by Ygern on May 16, 2008 at 8:41 am

BigJohn wrote:

Could someone please explain to me what it is about 'first post' that is so exciting to some? I can't imagine that all 'first posters' are pre-teens or are mentally retarded...

Maybe not, but that sure seems to be the impression they want to leave.
Can I raise a motion that anyone who does this in future gets pelted with rotten fruit?

Back on topic, its quite a nice review once it gets going, but there does seem to be a little resentment simmering under the surface there.

Still. All hail to thee O 'Chief Pastor of World Atheism Inc'

/sarcasm

Other Comments by Ygern

18. Comment #180989 by Alfrescoid on May 16, 2008 at 8:46 am

BigJohn...looks to me like it's a primal and vestigial (in most of us, anyway) response to the "look at me" principle of passing on your genes. Being seen has potential beneficial possibility of attracting a mate.

I think Monty Python had it right though...NOT being seen seems to be the way to go...fewer explosions :)

It's probably a mostly-bred-out characteristic of Homo Sapiens, but obviously there are still pockets...

Other Comments by Alfrescoid

19. Comment #181021 by happyatheist on May 16, 2008 at 10:00 am

I pre-ordered this book from Amazon when I first read about it here many months ago. I live in the States and wasn't supposed to receive it til sometime this week...but I was overjoyed when Amazon sent it to me in early April. :) Good reading. :)

Other Comments by happyatheist

20. Comment #181025 by rgpratt on May 16, 2008 at 10:05 am

SteveN:

Jiten said "But I can't wait for Dawkins's own next book."

I agree. As much as I have been so thoroughly pleased with events since Richard released "The God Delusion", it's his popular science writing that I enjoy the most. Does he have such a book in progress, does anyone know?

According to this article http://www.observer.com/2008/richard-dawkins-follow-god-delusion-sold-free-press-3-5-million Richard is to be paid $3.5 million for a book on the evidence for evolution. It has a great title: Only a theory? (read it aloud as a question). The question mark is the key, and of course William Dembski completely misses the point in his sneering blog here: http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/dawkins-cashes-in-on-darwins-upcoming-bicentennial/

Other Comments by rgpratt

21. Comment #181062 by Jack Rawlinson on May 16, 2008 at 11:21 am

Why do some people feel compelled to comment on the fact that they're making the first post on a thread? What is that? I mean, so what? Does it make you a better person? What do you want - a cookie?

I can't understand such quirks at all.

Other Comments by Jack Rawlinson

22. Comment #181068 by Raiko on May 16, 2008 at 11:34 am

One day, I shall make scientific poetry worth reading!

Other Comments by Raiko

23. Comment #181072 by mordacious1 on May 16, 2008 at 11:41 am

I posted this somewhere before, but... 50% off at Amazon UK, 32% at Amazon US . Is this an example of sticking it to the yanks? You guys really have to get over that 1776 thing. Yes, I know, "but your gas is so much cheaper".

Other Comments by mordacious1

24. Comment #181083 by HourglassMemory on May 16, 2008 at 12:06 pm

I hate it that I have have to wait this book to either be put on sale in my country, in english, or be translated and be put on sale in some obscure corner of the bookstore.
My parents aren't very persuaded by the whole online buying thing.

Other Comments by HourglassMemory

25. Comment #181105 by Geodesic17 on May 16, 2008 at 12:35 pm

Since when was atheism a "tarnish" or a "debauchery"?

There are some that perpetuate a stereotype of atheists. It helps with converting people to their cause.

Other Comments by Geodesic17

26. Comment #181132 by the great teapot on May 16, 2008 at 1:11 pm

Yeah
Most recent post!
Eat my shorts.

Other Comments by the great teapot

27. Comment #181149 by carbonman on May 16, 2008 at 1:23 pm

Took 6 weeks for Amazon to get the book past customs in this crazy place. They'd refunded me when it finally got here, and I've just asked them to re-charge me. About to start reading.

Other Comments by carbonman

28. Comment #181157 by the great teapot on May 16, 2008 at 1:38 pm

Carbonman
You asked them to recharge you?Where do you get such moral values from?
You been reading the buybull on the sly?

Other Comments by the great teapot

29. Comment #181161 by SteveN on May 16, 2008 at 1:43 pm

rgpratt, thanks for the information and the link (#20): that is really kewl. Sounds like it's going to be lots of science specifically directed at debunking the creos. Excellent!

Other Comments by SteveN

30. Comment #181213 by Mister Griswold on May 16, 2008 at 4:19 pm

Bought it. Love it.

Other Comments by Mister Griswold

31. Comment #181224 by Homo economicus on May 16, 2008 at 5:08 pm

Have enjoyed the book - and we had it in the UK before the USA! (This is unusual in the media scheme of things).

The scientific version of "The Portable Atheist"

Other Comments by Homo economicus

32. Comment #181229 by 10 on May 16, 2008 at 5:16 pm

First post!

Is it the same mentality that leads people to only post something along the lines of:
(mental/psycho/retarded)fuck them (IDiots/tards)

I've been trying to come up with a logical reason why some of the posters do either of those things.
I guess "hey look, it's Me!" could explain both.

Perhaps from now on I'll just pretend it's an acronym "Frustratingly Uninformed on Common Knowledge" though that would render "fucktard" repetitive ...back to the drawing board.

Is there such a number that cold be defined as "to many good books to read" ?
I'm thinking my current total of "5 unread-but-owned" is a bit much, but Steven Brust has a new book coming out ...

(edit: forgot to close block)

Other Comments by 10

33. Comment #181279 by StephenH on May 16, 2008 at 8:33 pm

Quick side comment

I frequent a few Games Forums.

People often respond to a new message thread with
"First", "second" etc etc - without saying anything else

Must be some kind of trend that's doing the circles amongst younger people. Don't understand it myself, but there you go (Perhaps they are brushing up on their maths skills) ;-)

Other Comments by StephenH

34. Comment #181327 by Vadjong on May 17, 2008 at 12:27 am

I love the book, even though I just manage a couple of pages per week :-( (I'll bring it to the baseball game this afternoon, maybe that'll help).

However, it reads like a sort of remix by DJ RD. With this title, a legitimate highbrow case may be made for it, but I fear lesser DJ's may start pumping out similar sample based dreck like the music industry (Ice, Ice , Baby !), not bringing anything new to the "field of human discourse".
In stead of one or two quotes at the start of a chapter, we'll get a short intro to a chapter made up of quotes. And before you know it nobody will know how to write anything anymore.

Note to self: Now, stop lurking and start reading !

(Aegisofreason : why don't you go put Last Post under all old threads ? You'll have the final word each time! [That may keep'm busy for a while.])

Other Comments by Vadjong

35. Comment #181400 by Geoff on May 17, 2008 at 6:27 am

35th post!

Other Comments by Geoff

36. Comment #181551 by carbonman on May 17, 2008 at 12:21 pm

Great Teapot said

You asked them to recharge you?Where do you get such moral values from?
You been reading the buybull on the sly?

LOL
Sshhh... it's a cunning plan to trick the theists into thinking we have morals after all.

Other Comments by carbonman

37. Comment #181560 by Blake C. Stacey on May 17, 2008 at 1:07 pm

Oxford UP graciously sent me a review copy, and I wrote about it at somewhat greater length than Peter Forbes did, here:

http://www.sunclipse.org/?p=680

This concludes today's installment of Blatant Self-Promotion. We now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

Other Comments by Blake C. Stacey

38. Comment #181582 by Layla Nasreddin on May 17, 2008 at 3:01 pm

...and the long-time games columnist from Scientific American, Martin Gardner.

Martin Gardner? I used to check out his books (multiple times!) out of the library at university. I'll have check this book out.

Other Comments by Layla Nasreddin

39. Comment #181704 by ADParker on May 18, 2008 at 2:43 am

SteveN wrote:
According to this article http://www.observer.com/2008/richard-dawkins-follow-god-delusion-sold-free-press-3-5-million Richard is to be paid $3.5 million for a book on the evidence for evolution. It has a great title: Only a theory? (read it aloud as a question).

As I understand it Richard Dawkins has yet to give that book a title; "Just a Theory? is the working title, but he doesn't like it as it has been used before. In the last interview I saw of his he was still calling it as "yet to be named".
There is even a thread on this forum asking for serious suggestion for a title.

Oh, and it was his publisher who pushed him to write it to commemorate the 150th anniversary of The Origin of Species and the 200th of Charles Darwin's birth - he wanted to write that children's book he has long been thinking about, so if anyone is "trying to cash in"...it's his publisher.

Other Comments by ADParker

40. Comment #181780 by SteveN on May 18, 2008 at 8:43 am

To ADParker: Actually, it was rgpratt who wrote, in answer to my question, what you quoted in post #39.

I must admit that I'm rather grateful, in a totally selfish sort of way, that Richard has been coerced to first write a book for adults rather than for children.

Other Comments by SteveN

41. Comment #181982 by Duff on May 19, 2008 at 2:58 am

Look, I'm the 41st poster!!

Other Comments by Duff

42. Comment #181996 by Johnny O on May 19, 2008 at 4:53 am

Why is everyone getting so touchy about the "Chief Pastor of World Atheism Inc" comment?

He's just saying what a lot of people, myself included believe. It's a shame after all RD's wonderful books that he is most known for The God Delusion and for arguing for atheism.

and Sally...

That is terrible paraphrasing. The authour isn't saying that, he said.

the religious right in the US has always sought to tarnish evolution by association with atheism, communism and a declension of debaucheries.

Something he clearly doesn't believe himself

Other Comments by Johnny O

43. Comment #182010 by huxley_leopard on May 19, 2008 at 5:38 am

ADParker - if RD is writing a children's book, my vote goes to Quentin Blake to do the illustrations! And maybe he can ask Michael Rosen to help with the text?

http://www.quentinblake.com/index.html

http://www.michaelrosen.co.uk/

Other Comments by huxley_leopard

44. Comment #182034 by ~manic-depressive on May 19, 2008 at 6:25 am

44th post!

I have posted elsewhere my *rationalization* for writing "first post".

Come on people, in this "veil of tears", why deny ourselves a little infantile pleasure?

"Quid opus est partes deflere? Tota flebilis vita est." Seneca

Come on people, don't deny me the infantile pleasure of showing off the only Latin quotation I know!

Other Comments by ~manic-depressive

45. Comment #182690 by Rob3fm on May 20, 2008 at 9:24 pm

Wow, some of you are pretty rough on that first-poster. Seemed harmless to me.

Other Comments by Rob3fm

46. Comment #184673 by hairy evolutionist on May 26, 2008 at 12:30 am

Looking at that picture of an ape further up, made me wonder. Can anybody explain the evolution of human hair? Doesn't make much sense to. Why don't we have fur like all the other mammals?

Other Comments by hairy evolutionist

47. Comment #184677 by mordacious1 on May 26, 2008 at 12:51 am

Wouldn't mind the "First Post" if there was a comment on the article included too.

If Richard wants to make some real money from his books, he'll have to become an American like Hitch did. Saves on taxes you know. Just kidding Richard, although you have been spending a lot of time over here lately...plus, if you're going to fight the devil, you have to go where he hangs out. Buy a house in Kansas maybe...

Other Comments by mordacious1

48. Comment #187030 by edwaltthespisactor on June 1, 2008 at 6:33 am

Richard insisted on not having any articles in the collection. I admire his constant attempts to avoid hubristic immodesty.

The slightly less self restrained reviewer from the Sindependant seems to have missed this rather obvious facet to the book.

I have the book. It makes outstanding bathroom reading.

Nice one RD.

Other Comments by edwaltthespisactor

Reload Comments | Back to Top