Back in 2015, I gave this 5 stars. While Gilgamesh is without question my very favorite character to play Civ 6 with, I got so tired of the uber exploBack in 2015, I gave this 5 stars. While Gilgamesh is without question my very favorite character to play Civ 6 with, I got so tired of the uber exploitation of women. How could this not have bothered me the first time around? I love this book because it is ancient, because I LOVE the story of how it was discovered (see David Damrosch's The Buried Book for that wonderful story), but I really hate the story itself. No thanks. Find me some story, any story, or a female who was able to overcome her circumstance of being held down and being held back by men like Gilgamesh, and, against all odds, made something of her life. Now that would be a story worth reading. ...more
This book gave me a feeling similar to when I read Swerve by Greenblatt. Damrosch took me back to the Kingdom of Nineveh and King Ashurbanipal who hadThis book gave me a feeling similar to when I read Swerve by Greenblatt. Damrosch took me back to the Kingdom of Nineveh and King Ashurbanipal who had the largest and first systematically organized library in all the world. Most Kings had no use for reading. Their scribes would, of course, read for them. But King Ashurbanipal was wonderfully curious and seemed, by Damrosch's account, to be very proud of his ability to read and was driven to learn everything he could about the world through books. I am currently reading a book about Hypatia of Alexandria who calls books, "paper ships," because they bring to the reader an entire world of knowledge. You don't even have to leave your own land to discover other lands, other cultures, other civilization's advanced knowledge about the world and universe around you. It was wonderful to read two books at the same time that were so focused on the love of books, specifically because books take general knowledge, package it, and preserve it so that people can ingest all this knowledge and, so often, escape into the fantasy and entertainment of various authors' imaginations.
Ashurbanipal's library held the most complete copy of the epic of Gilgamesh, which I read alongside this book. David Damrosh's painstaking account of how the tale of Gilgamesh was found, translated, and brought to the public was breathtaking. The average rating for this book is 3.6, far from my rating of a solid 5. It might be an acquired taste? Maybe it has too much detail or moves too slowly? In my estimation, this book is a really rare investigation of how an ancient book came to exist. Imagine the stone tablets, which lay hidden for 2000 years, being uncovered by archeologists ***only to sit undeciphered for another 25 years!** The tablets eventually made their way to a museum in the 1870s that did not have electricity yet and relied on sunlight or gas lamps. In the dim light of foggy England, and in said museum, George Smith had to wait for sunny days to try to figure out the language and decode the stones. The story of this alone made this a treasured book for me to read in 2021, while I was listening to my copy of Gilgamesh, which I had read in print while in high school and again in college, in an audio version. It all felt too marvelous! In addition to relating all of that, David Damrosch detailed many unsettling inequalities associated with bringing Gilgamesh to light. The racism and classism played a huge part in who was allowed to participate in this venture. Damrosch also related a really nice story about one king who was educated and could read. He, unlike other kings, prized his intelligence over his brawn. To see if they should go into battle or to answer other questions, people would ask the oracle or sacrifice sheep and then examine the sheep's innards. They would read all sorts of meanings into the random differences of the markings on the sheep's organs. The king said we should actually record these findings. meaning, if the markings predicted this outcome, how often was that true? He was creating statistical methods, 2000 years ago!!, to see if consulting a sheep's organs was a good predictor of the sought outcome. How amazing! This book was filled with lots of little gems....more
What does a CV/resume from the 1500s look like? Well if you are Sofonisba Anguissola, it looks like this:
[image]
This book, along with the artwork of SWhat does a CV/resume from the 1500s look like? Well if you are Sofonisba Anguissola, it looks like this:
[image]
This book, along with the artwork of Sofonisba Anguissola, have impacted me deeply and, I think, permanently. In a time when women were not allowed to be educated, not allowed to paint, and not allowed to do anything that tied them to the wider world, there existed a girl who would break so many rules and leave her mark upon the world.
The above painting by Sofonisba Anguissola was sent to Michelangelo, in the hopes he would give her some pointers. In contrast to paintings of women at this time, and for hundreds of years to come, Anguissola painted herself as serious, capable, passionate, and driven. Michelangelo indeed thought her talented. He challenged her to paint a weeping boy and gave her some notes on painting techniques. She was of course rejected often and ridiculed for being a female who dared to paint, but eventually Anguissola was appointed a court portraitist in Spain for Philip II and Elisabeth of Valois (de' Medici). Some of her paintings were attributed to men, including the one she did of King Philip himself, an injustice that was not corrected until the 1990s! Just decades ago, museums finally displayed her paintings under the correct name of the artist, Sofonisba Anguissola.
Weirdly enough, I came first across an Anguissola painting while playing Civ 6. I was playing as Hammurabi (my very favorite character) and while collecting art, I ended up with this painting of *women* playing chess. It said, "Anguissola," and incorrectly reported that it was from the 1800s., even though it was painted in the 1500s.
[image]
After seeing the Chess painting, I wanted to know who Anguissola was and I HAD to own a print of this painting, as well as the self portrait she sent to Michelangelo. Finding out that Civ 6 had mislabeled it, and that in fact it was women playing chess in the 1500s and not the 1800s, I grew more curious still. I had to know what artist painted women as objects possessing intellect and curiosity and not as mere sex objects. Discovering that Anguissola was a woman, that she exploded the glass ceiling by painting at a time when it was absolutely not allowed, made me so curious about her. I found this book and looked at her works of art as I read about her life. Anguissola's father was a tireless champion of her painting. He suffered insults but did not care. He got her a painting tutor, unthinkable to get a female a painting instructor. It just...was....not...done.
In addition to being revolutionary for simply painting as a woman, Sofonisba Anguissola was an extremely progressive painter. Adding to what I already mentioned about how she portrayed women differently, she also was an out of the box type of thinker and it reflected in her art. Pictured below is a painting that blew the minds of humans back in the 1500s. Anguissola painted her instructor, painting her. This is an easy concept for us to understand in 2021. However, back in the 1500s, people were like, "Wait a minute! Are you telling me that the person who painted this is the very person who is sitting in the chair? She painted her instructor painting her? How is this even possible?" To them, it seemed like a magic trick. It was so inventive!
[image]
In her life at Court, Sofonisba Anguissola became a close friend and confidant of the Queen, who died young in childbirth. She helped raise the royal daughters and taught them how to paint. I don't want to say too much more about her life, because it's a far better experience to just cuddle up with this book and a laptop, so that you can look at each work of art as it's discussed. There were so many aspects to this book that seemed exaggerated or made up. How could a woman in the 1500s accomplish this much and be this close in proximity to the leaders of countries? And yet, I looked it all up and verified the information I was reading, and, if anything, DiGiuseppe unplayed so much of it. I cannot recommend this book highly enough. Thank you DiGiuseppe for bringing to life this incredibly important and immensely talented artist.
One last note, if you want to be extremely disappointed in humanity, feel free to look up a WaPo article/ art review from 1995 in which Paul Richard, self important art critic, played down the importance of finally giving Anguissola her due and compared her unfavorably to Cezanne, who lived hundreds of years after Anguissola, centuries in which techniques had been tested and developed. I like Cezanne, but I encourage you to look at his artwork side by side with Anguissola, who painted hundred of years before he did. Her work definitely holds its own. In my estimation, it's far better in every way except for use of color. The sexism and arrogance that dripped from every paragraph of this article made me feel really sad because Anguissola's works waited 400 years to be correctly attributed to her, a fact that made me feel a a profound sense of joy and relief upon learning it, and Paul Richard simply dismissed her, as so many had during her time and in the more than 400 years since. What a shame that he was the voice of The Washington Post's art page.
This book was surprisingly fantastic! I assumed I was simply getting a tour of Green Book sites, coupled with a history of what it was like for Black This book was surprisingly fantastic! I assumed I was simply getting a tour of Green Book sites, coupled with a history of what it was like for Black Americans to travel during Jim Crow. This book is that and so much more. Candacy Taylor , Smithsonian Curator and Harvard Fellow, took her reader on several journeys at once; a personal one that slowly and beautifully told the story of her dark skinned step father Ron and his experiences growing up in Jim Crow, a historical one that painstakingly detailed the average (and still shocking) experiences of everyday Black Americans who had to take extreme precautions to navigate the dangerous obstacle course of driving along the roads of America that purport to be housed in the 'home of the free" and provide "liberty and justice for all," and a journey that detailed the current conditions of inequality in America today. If you want to understand the lines of the past that connect to the unacceptable conditions still operating in America today, I recommend reading this book. I borrowed it for free from hoopla but decided to purchase a copy because it will serve as a reference source that I will return to time and time again.
When Taylor first began her discussion of her Stepfather Ron, I actually felt as if the book could do without it and thought, wrongly, that it was that standard attempt authors often make to try to connect better with their audience by adding stories about their own kids or some other personal connection. I had no idea at the outset that Ron's story would fit so perfectly with her tour of the Overground Railroad. By the end, I was tearing up when thinking about Ron and felt connected to him and his experiences, and I realized how much richer it made my own experience while taking that imaginary tour. Even more powerful though, Taylor detailed the past and current conditions of each place on the Green Book tour. She had to carry some weaponry to make sure she was safe. At the same time, she was able to do the necessary work of dispelling the very false and damaging stereotypes of scary Black men and address the conditions that made those places less safe. It is the conditions that have done violence to the people who have been marginalized to those spaces. It's time we stop focusing on "scary" or "violent" Black people and start acknowledging the extreme and constant violence done *to* Black Americans from the time white people kidnapped, chained them, enslaved and raped them, and then "freed" them only to lynch them, imprison them, and construct inhumane Jim Crow laws against them. (I keep using the word them, which feels wrong. I would actually appreciate suggestions on how to better write about the black experience as a white person.)
Another thing Taylor did to make this book noteworthy was to draw attention to Michelle Alexander's book The New Jim Crow. Taylor not only paid homage to Alexander, she provided a top notch summary of some of the most important content Alexander included in her book.
I am following this book up by reading Isabella Wilkerson's Caste. The two books compliment each other very well. I am happy that white people are reading books about racial issues in America. However, I was pretty disappointed that a white woman's book (Robin DiAngelo's White Fragility) was the book that made it to the best seller list after the death of George Floyd. As white people, the least we can do is read about the Black experience from people who actually live the Black experience and stop lining the pockets of the White Americans who keep profiting from the Black experience. I mean, if you are white, you don't actually have to live with the daily discrimination that robs far too many Black Americans of educational and job opportunities, fair and safe housing conditions, inequality in the justice system that locks up Black Americans for the same crimes white Americans commit but are punished less often. So if you are white, you might wonder how to make reparations for all the centuries of harm done to Black Americans. Education is more segregated today than in Jim Crow. White Americans refuse to fix this. Black Americans are still being rejected if the name on their resume sounds Black. Black Americans are being locked in cages, literal cages, for the *same* crimes that white people are either not even charged for (and get to live free in the world) or get probation for (still fairly free in the world), or spend less time in a cage for. It would be great to address reparations for these things, but if history is any indicator, I seriously doubt that will happen any time soon. As white Americans, the least, the very least, we can do is support Black owned business, Black authors, and movements that try to address inequality in America. ...more
This is an incredibly important book, for academics and non academics alike.
If you want to understand how effectively women around the world can be oThis is an incredibly important book, for academics and non academics alike.
If you want to understand how effectively women around the world can be oppressed, controlled, and even advocate for and choose their own oppression, this seems like an important book to read. Rachel Jeffs gives an account of being raised on a steady diet of religious ideology that taught her, from the day she was born, about her place in society. It didn't matter that outside her tiny, local environment lay a much bigger world, with options aplenty for women to be their own agents, develop their own identities and careers. Her tiny world was the whole world. It was all that mattered, and it taught her that females live to serve a god -- and therefore a human male prophet-- who makes all the rules and decrees, in absolute terms, that women should be extremely obedient; should not be educated; should sew, cook, clean, care for children; and above all serve as a mere body with which to reproduce children and serve the sexual needs of powerful men. At the same time, they must keep sweet and chaste. Good luck figuring out how that mindfuck, of completely opposite directives, can exist within a single brain.
Rachel Jeffs is the daughter of the self proclaimed prophet Warren Jeffs, who married and had sex with girls as young as 12. He sexually abused his own daughters who were even younger than that. Warren, like his father before him, was extremely effective at controlling the thoughts and actions of everyone around him. His number one tool, used by men all over the world to control the women and, to a much lesser extent, the other men in their groups, was religion. It's no surprise that Warren could convince so many to behave in extremely (read the book to find out how extreme) controlled ways -- such as only eating a severely limited type of food, marrying who you are told to marry (even if you are 12 and they are 50), have sex with only one man (even though he is married to and fucking many other women, confessing to thoughts that no one could possible know you think if you don't tell them, policing other around you who take the tiniest step out of line, and so on. Religion is super useful for generating this type of control over people. It has been for thousands of years. So, while interesting, it wasn't nearly as enlightening as the other mechanisms employed by Warren to so completely dominate the lives of others and bend them to his own personal will, for his own personal benefit.
Warren acted exactly like the alpha gorillas, described so eloquently in Frans deWaal's book. Frans deWaal is himself extremely sexist, so I really dislike having to cite him here, but the parallels can't be dismissed. deWaal's alpha gorilla took great pains to keep the males from being able to communicate. It was shocking to me how much time, effort, and energy it took for the alpha male gorilla to make sure the other males could not spend enough time coordinating a plan that would allow them to take his spot as alpha. Warren Jeffs followed that alpha male playbook to the letter. He shuffled his family around so they could not live near each other. He controlled their phone lines and phone use, so they could not even call one another. From hundreds of miles away, Warren could control who spoke to who, what truths got told, and what lies got kept, what information made it to the light of day. He used guards, men he trusted, to act as 24/7 police presence in his communities to make sure everyone was crystal clear on the fact that their every move was monitored. He so effectively isolated people, while at the same time spouting out decree after decree that said, "God has told me that (fill in the blank with the thing that Warren personally wants for himself or personally just gets off on punishing others with). No one questioned the orders given by Warren, no matter how obvious or how absurd they were, that they might not have been orders from God himself. You might wonder how people who join cults as adults can believe such crazy claims by the cult leader, but why the people in the FLDS believe such obviously false claims isn't something you will wonder reading this book. When you can raise humans from the time they are born to believe that they will be punished by an all powerful God if they do not spend their entire lives giving you your way, by cutting them off from the outside world, by filling their head with beliefs that are shared by every single person they interact with, it's the perfect breeding ground for getting hundreds or thousands of people to do whatever you want them to do. As a 50 or 60 year old man, you can fuck 12 year old pussy and call it a religious calling instead of rape or pedophilia. You can have people care for your every need and desire. And, if you are a straight up sadist, like Warren is, you can hand out punishment after punishment and cause great suffering to so very many people and sit back and get off on it. It's a brilliant gig for a psychopath if you can get away with it.
A while ago, I read Prophet's Prey by Sam Brower. Even though I had read about Warren before and followed the news, it was pretty shocking. I wish I had been reading this at the same time. If you are considering which book to read, Brower or Rachel Jeffs, I highly recommend reading both at the same time. R. Jeffs gave the reader a front row seat to what it was like inside that situation. Her writing is fabulous because it is clear to the reader that she is honest, still very naive, yet able to recount accurately the daily (insane) life in the FLDS. It doesn't even matter if she never reaches full awareness of the crimes of her father. She outlines them-- very matter of factly-- with incredible detail. I am sure the average person has many things from their upbringing of which they are unaware and may remain unaware of until they die. It's literally just a condition of being human. But, Rachel is certainly aware enough to be a powerful and credible source to unveil the exact mechanisms that have oppressed and harmed so many people around the world, because no matter where in the world the men who oppress others reside, they use a shocking similar game plan for doing so. I recommend that activists read this as a playbook, so they know what they are up against and know how to counter these unsavory yet effective strategies.
The thing I am most impressed by is the courage displayed by Rachel Jeffs, her sisters, and others who have escaped. It takes courage to speak up against harmful actions, especially when you will be punished in some way. It takes a monumental amount of courage to risk the loss of just about everyone you have known for your entire life, risk severe punishment (which is always looming and always present), risk being stalked, risk possibly being killed (because if someone is willing to stalk you that much, who is to say they won't physically harm or kill you), risk not being able to feed yourself or your children, and risk facing a world in which what you were taught from the time you were born is not reliable. As a result of having authored this book and shared her knowledge with the public, I suspect Rachel Jeffs will be viewed in the future as an important voice in not only the feminist movement, but also in future movements to eradicate the use of religion to control the masses. I cannot recommend this book highly enough.
I fear that some people will see this book as a guilty pleasure, because it is so shocking and salacious, like many true crime books. However, after reading this body of work, I hope it will be viewed by academics as something with which to educate the public about the mechanisms of control in societies. It is worthy of much study and discussion. I also think the audio version is a must. Rachel Jeffs, herself, narrated the book. Hearing her accent, which is clearly FLDS, really added to helping immerse myself in her experience. I wish I had put this at the top of my list a long time ago. ...more
The title of this book is a nod to Richard Feynman, one of Steinhardt's advisors and idols, who would exclaim, "impossible!" when he found a problem iThe title of this book is a nod to Richard Feynman, one of Steinhardt's advisors and idols, who would exclaim, "impossible!" when he found a problem improbable but interesting. Far from boring, Steinhardt himself detailed his thought journey and physical journey that resulted in his co-discovery of quasicrystals. First and foremost, Steinhardt wanted his reader to understand why structure determines function, which is pretty essential to understand any aspect of science. To that end, he included some of the best examples of how different substances can be made from the same exact material but result in very different real world expressions. Such as a hard, clear diamond, when carbon-carbon bonds develop under one pressure, or a soft, easily breakable graphite that allows you to leave pencil marks on a paper. This section of the book kept reminding me of biochem and the lessons I learned about how atoms form specific shapes inside the cell that are truly watertight, and how important that is in allowing the cell to remain active. I remember how that particular lecture just blew my mind and changed the way I thought about life in general. I also remember learning about how proteins denature when exposed to heat, and to this day, whenever I cook an egg, I cannot help but remember that lecture, in basic bio, as well. Steinhardt's section on shape determines function was not as mindblowing, but it was still great. There was a nice section on Penrose in this part of the book as well.
Then, since it is not just enough to know about how temperature and pressure affect the development of elements, Steinhardt took the reader through what now seems like a given: why quasicrystals had to have developed in outer space and could not have developed on our planet, because the temps and pressure are not severe enough to produce such structures. Steinhardt recounted his travels to Russia -- including being scammed!-- in search of what had been only theoretical quasicrystals up to that point, but now could be found in nature. I cannot imagine what it must have felt like to know there was a specimen, which specifically proved you were not insane when you suggested there could be a kind of matter that the majority of your peers said was 'impossible,' and to be part of uncovering how that specimen was made, and more importantly, *where* that specimen was made.
The blurb for the book says, "The underlying science is important, simple, and beautiful—and Steinhardt’s firsthand account is “packed with discovery, disappointment, exhilaration, and persistence...This book is a front-row seat to history as it is made” (Nature)." I feel like that captures the importance of this book. ...more
So many people trace their heritage back to the Saxons, Vikings, and Celts. However, so much of the "evidence" for ancestry came from boasts of victorSo many people trace their heritage back to the Saxons, Vikings, and Celts. However, so much of the "evidence" for ancestry came from boasts of victories and made up or embellished stories about who one's ancestors were. Everyone wants a good origin story. Kings and Queens especially needed a very good origin story, one that would convince their subjects that they were indeed chosen by God to rule over entire kingdoms. Back in the days before genome sequencing, or any real science in general, it was easy to make up these origin stories and have people easily believe them. King Henry II and Eleanor of Aquitaine miraculously found and dug up the bones of King Arthur, long after his death, and claimed him as their ancestor. Other royals, nobles, and common folk alike have bought into these stories. Now we have the technology to sequence people and find out if they have descended from who they think they did or if they will find out that their origin stories are very different from the ones they have been told.
Bryan Sykes deliciously dissected various tales of battle and tested the genetics against the tall tales. Usually when a land is invaded, the conquering men spread their seed among the native population. As a result, genes are changed along with the culture. It was very satisfying to take the trip along various historical routes with Sykes and find out who lied, who told the truth, and what the migration and conquering pattern of people really was. To provide the sweeping narrative of the book, Sykes and other researchers sequenced whole groups of people to trace their true origins. One of the most satisfying aspects of this book were the tales Skyes told of blatant charlatans and the efforts made by them to fool the public. I would like to think I would be too savvy to fall for some of these tricks, but if I were brought up in a time of such ignorance about the world, I might have fallen for it. For example, if someone wrote it down in a book, whether it was true or not, the public saw it as absolute fact. 'It is in a book; therefore it must be true." So an author could say what they wanted. They didn't have to back anything up with actual evidence. There was one scholar who was studying Aryan language and concluded that since there was a pure Aryan language, there must be a pure Aryan race. It was nonsense but history shows us how much people bought into that myth-- and how much far too many people still do buy into it.
Sykes did a great job of presenting various histories of the Saxons, Vikings, and Celts and then confirming or modifying these histories to, for the first time, provide the reader with the most up to date and accurate understanding possible. ...more
This book examined the politics of getting funding, public support, and the right expertise to beat the Russians and send the first human to the moon.This book examined the politics of getting funding, public support, and the right expertise to beat the Russians and send the first human to the moon. The story centers on an unsung hero who chose not to follow the normal chain of command and relentlessly champion his correct idea for how we could safely create a spacecraft that was very small yet could carry a lot of fuel. People were not listening to him, and in fact were chastising him when he tried to discuss his ideas. He sent his ideas the top man in charge and, because of recent political happenings, was able to get his idea fast tracked and that is what helped us got astronauts to the moon in the 1960s. ...more
If you have not read this but are at all interested in the history of medicine, particularly the germ theory, put this book at the very top of your liIf you have not read this but are at all interested in the history of medicine, particularly the germ theory, put this book at the very top of your list. What an absolutely exquisite book that both delivers a thorough history of the life of Joseph Lister and the history of surgical knowledge and technique.
There are many wonderful and informative books that detail the history of medicine, but this was particularly exceptional. Fitzharris taook the reader into early operating rooms where anesthesiology was not yet a thing and the best surgeons were the ones who worked and lightning speed to free patients from their limbs in order to save their lives. The only trouble was, the surgeries themselves ended up killing so many because of subsequent infections. It would be a while before the best surgeons were hailed for their skill in generating the best survival rates.
Then along came humble and curious Joseph Lister, the son of supportive and loving Quaker parents. Lister's parents did everything in their power to help Joseph attain the very best education. Things were not always easy on that front. Lister almost gave up education and devoted himself entirely to the Quaker ministry. His father convinced him to continue his studies, which ended up doing far more for human kind than any act by a preacher from any religion could have done. Lister became obsessed with the high mortality rate after surgical procedures. Along with Louis Pasteur, lister worked diligently to develop the germ theory. They did this in the face of very harsh criticism from doctors who did not want to acknowledge that their own actions were causing the deaths. It's so interesting how much framing could have changed the acceptance of germ theory. Even though the germs doctor's carried on their hands, clothing, and surgical instruments was the cause of infection and death, the doctors had no way of knowing that, since no one had previously seen the germs that were viewable only under the microscope. If only there was a way to have paid homage to the surgeons and educate them at the same time. Perhaps saying how honorable the surgeon is and how as people of science, they are exceptional at synthesizing new scientific evidence into their practice? It's hard to say what might have worked. I often wonder what type of framing might change the Blue Code in which police officers protect the most corrupt among them because they don't want the public to think all officers are corrupt. But by protecting the corrupt ones, they make themselves, as a group, more corrupt. Something similar was happening in the medical field centuries ago.
This book is filled with such a deeply researched portrait of Lister's personal and academic life, as well as a portrait of the politics of innovation. It's interesting to see how one university could be accepting of students from less wealthy backgrounds, while others only accepted very rich white men. Some universities encouraged progressive thinking while others made it seem like any innovation was an insult to the practices of famous and well established doctors.
Lister's ability to employ the scientific method, back in the 1800s showed how ahead of his time he was. His method of studying carbolic acid was fascinating to read about and extremely well written. I particularly liked the story of how Lister operated on his sister. This was one of the best biographies I have ever read. ...more
It is probably far better to get your black history from Shomari Wills than from Netflix. His version of the rivalry between Annie Malone and Madam C.It is probably far better to get your black history from Shomari Wills than from Netflix. His version of the rivalry between Annie Malone and Madam C.J. Walker could not have been more different from Netflix's Self Made, which told a very loose version of the true life of Madam C.J. Walker and her rival Annie Malone. It was Malone, not Walker, who was one of the world's first black female millionaires. Wills story did not try to vilify either Walker or Malone. Rather, Wills focused on the strategies each used to try to secure just some of America's wealth that was usually reserved for white, land owning, men. I found these stories interesting, not only for their depiction of how a few black people managed to grow their wealth, despite the intense racism and lack of resources faced by each millionaire, but also for detailed research into how difficult it was for each to retain their fortunes and their attitude taken when their fortunes were threatened or disappeared. In particular, Mary Ellen Pleasant, who made her fortune during the Gold Rush, lost it when she backed abolitionist John Brown. She seemed wholly unconcerned that the wealth she had accumulated had vanished. It is not surprising that she lost her fortune backing someone as radical as Brown. Kidnapping black people from their homes and forcing them into slavery, beating them, keeping them from marrying, taking away their children, was all called "good business," "Christian," or "normal". But fighting back to free black people was called "radical", "violent", or some other negatively famed name. I mean come on. Who were the real "thugs"? When you back someone who the people in power call "radical", you are bound to lose your money. I am impressed that she felt it such a worthy investment, even after she lost it all. I actually wish this book had been a lot more political. Particularly, I would liked even more detailed discussions of the lynchings of black people who dared to try to gain any of the wealth the American Dream promised. This book told important stories of a few black people who defied great odds and managed to build some wealth, like so many of their white counter parts had, at least for a short time. The story of Hannah Elias was particularly intriguing to me and served as an example of trying to simply live while black in America. It was particularly interesting to read about Harlem in the early days. There was a lot of wonderful history I had not learned about Harlem, which is nicely outlined in the section about Elias. Her story was really interesting. ...more
When I went to California, I visited the Bookbinder museum and they gave me a personal tour of how books were bound throughout history. The entire expWhen I went to California, I visited the Bookbinder museum and they gave me a personal tour of how books were bound throughout history. The entire experience was so much better than I ever would have predicted. I unexpectedly fell absolutely in love with book binding. This book reminded me of much of what I learned at the museum so many years ago. ...more
I had just finished Susan B. Anthony by Teri Kanefield and was inspired to read this. Frazer's book had facts but they were choppy and forced. When reI had just finished Susan B. Anthony by Teri Kanefield and was inspired to read this. Frazer's book had facts but they were choppy and forced. When reading Kanefield's book, I felt as if I was partially living Susan B. Anthony's life along side her. To follow that with this book was a letdown. Despite the very rich material the author had work with, it was just ok....more
This is one of the most beautiful books I have ever had the utmost pleasure to read. How I wish Steven Strogatz had been my calc teacher. A Must Read!
This is one of the most beautiful books I have ever had the utmost pleasure to read. How I wish Steven Strogatz had been my calc teacher. There are authors who let you know that they are smart and there are authors who write with a definite intention to make the readers smart. Strogatz falls into the latter category. He will infuse you with such a love for math, no matter what level of math you have reached in your studies.
Strogatz main message is that calculus extends far beyond what is labeled as Calc I, II, III, or IV. We call all of the other calculus courses by other names because we don't want to just call them calc 1-32. At its essence, Strogatz wants you to know, that calc is utterly obsessed with simplicity. It uses what Strogatz calls the “infinity principle,“ where problems are broken down into tiny parts, which can become infinite parts, and then are fit back together to generate an answer that is easier than trying to answer the original equation. We humans are only as good as our current scientific tools. Once Issac Newton discovered -- or more accurately, allowed the public a reluctant glimpse into his work on-- calculus, life changed in a revolutionary way. In fact, calculus was so revolutionary, Richard Feynman claimed it is indeed the language God speaks. Using calculus as a tool, we humans were able to model an effective treatment for AIDS that stopped the deadly virus from killing a significant portion of our population. We used calculus to listen to unseen objects called black holes. It was the calculus that allowed us to truly hear and see those invisible objects.
Strogatz's introduced his reader to the world of calculus by illustrating some examples that show how math surrounds us humans in nature and is eventually uncovered. For example, music itself is mathematical. Since he chose this subject to draw the reader into the world of maths, it was hard not to fall in love with the book. While I wish he had gone a bit more into the neuroscience of music, math, and the brain, he did a lovely job of helping the reader understand how music can be boiled down to ratios. If you pluck a guitar string at the bottom of the string and then move your hand halfway up the string and pluck again, the new note is exactly half as long as it used to be, a ratio of 1:2, and sounds precisely one octave higher than the original note . If instead the vibrating string is 2/3 of its original length, the note goes up by fifth.
I once had a neuroscience professor, Mike Kaplan, who taught us the neuroscience of music and the brain by delivering the entire lecture by playing a keyboard and singing. It was fucking amazing. I particularly enjoyed the portions of the lecture on how the brain can process and enjoy a little bit of dissonance or can instead be agitated by dissonance. And why? Because the inner ear is basically a calculator and it likes mostly straight math, going up octaves with only a little dissonance. If you use more than a little dissonance, as some artists do, you better do it well or it will be like nails on a chalkboard. The long and short of the neuroscience is getting reward and emotional centers to activate and how it's actually the math sequences that can do that. So, if he updates to a new version of this book someday, I really hope he extends his music and the brain discussion.
Strogatz marveled at the scholars who were obsessed with understanding numbers and shapes. He provided a quick tour of how using numbers came about -- mostly to keep track of livestock. Numbers were mere scratches on an animal bone and let the king know how many cows you owed him. Eventually numbers evolved into the concept of a number line, something we think nothing of as elementary school children today, became a concept. He marveled even more at how Archimedes came to understand the seemingly simple shape of the circle. He derived pi and wondered how many tiny shapes could fit inside a circle. From those ancient studies came todays understanding of pixilation and the achievement of making Shrek's round belly out of 1,000s of tiny little polygons.
I remember reading Clockwork Universe by Edward Dolnick. It is still one of my favorite books. No one, and I mean no one, does a better job of detailing Kepler's maddening obsession with understanding the shape of planetary motion (what would eventually be Kepler's Law of planetary motion). Infinite Powers was every bit as beautiful as Clockwork Universe and did a better job making the math digestible by providing a sweeping and general understanding and then solidifying that understanding with tons of logical and intuitive concrete and local examples of the various forms of calculus (what other authors would call maths related to calculus).
Strogatz painted vivid portraits of Tyco Brahe, Galileo, Kepler, (not as much about Copernicus) Newton, and Leibniz. But what I am most grateful for is Strogatz very clear invitation to women to join the maths by highlighting some very important women who made significant contributions to math. I was surprised not to see Emmy Noether among his examples (maybe because she is known for abstract algebra). Strogatz brought to life stories that literally made my heart flutter with absolute joy. Strogatz, you are the fucking bomb!
As a young girl, Sofya Kovalevskaya -- who eventually became the first woman in the world to obtain a PhD in mathematics in 1874 --had an entire wall of her bedroom wallpapered with the calculus notes from when her father was a student at university. She said when she was about 11, she spent hours just trying to make sense of one line of the equations. She had a predilection for math but it was against the law for her to go to college in Russia. When she entered into an unhappy arranged marriage, the one positive aspect of this union was that it allowed her to travel to Germany where she could finally attend math classes. Germany did not not officially allow her to attend university, but she impressed several professors and was able to unofficially attended classes.
Kovalevskaya arranged to privately study with Karl Weierstrass And he awarded her a PhD for her outstanding workIn analysis, dynamics, and partial differential equation. She eventually got a position teaching at the University of Stockholm and taught there for eight years before dying of Influenza at the age of 41.
French mathematician Sophie Germain never earned a degree. It certainly was not because she didn't earn it. Indeed she did. Germain had to pretend to be a man just so she could sneak into math classes. Her work was significantly better than that of the man she replaced. Because of this, she was called into a meeting with Lagrange. When he found out she was a woman, he took her under his wing and championed her. I love the progressive men of the past who tried their best to help women. She also caught the attention of the famous Gauss, who was so impressed with her work, he engaged in a regular correspondence with her, thinking all the while she was a man. He eventually found out she was a woman (an interesting tale told by Strogatz in this book). For her work on number theory, and Fermat's Last Theorem, Gauss recommended Germain to receive an honorary degree. But, it was not enough pull to earn her the well deserved degree.
Strogatz's awe infused ending to his beautiful book marveled at how, because of the fact that we had calculus as a tool and because we humans and our detectors were listening at the right time, we heard the sound of two black holes colliding. He spoke of how it made him feel when he heard the news. I could not help but tear up because I felt the same way. This book is about the best of what humans can achieve when they uncover the secrets of the world and the universe. I am bursting with love for this book.
There simply is no better discussion of First Life than any discussion given by Eric Smith, be it through his many academic papers, lectures, or this There simply is no better discussion of First Life than any discussion given by Eric Smith, be it through his many academic papers, lectures, or this textbook. Smith is concerned with understanding life as a continuation of a process that emerged on Earth. Meaning, he is not merely looking for the first cell that could replicate, though he is looking into that, he is looking at the process by which the Earth itself provided the energy to make the materials of life. That process, and not merely the living cell made from that process, is what defines life. I am firmly of the belief that is the only way we can talk about the generation of first life.
No matter how we talk about the emergence of life, whether some people subscribe to the RNA world (which is not the same idea as "RNA first"), whether some people want to talk about random activation of enzymes that cross a Erdos Renyi node-edge threshold and create an autocatalytic set, or any other hypothesis, that hypothesis has to account for available free energy. In order to recognize such a source of energy, researchers need to be very aware of how the molecules of life go about ingesting and cycling energy to maintain activity and to replicate. Once we recognize the process, we can better understand how life is constructed and how it survives over generations. Smith is incredibly skilled at detailing this process.
I have to say, Lewis Dartnell's 2007 book Life in the Universe is equally good at detailing this process and pointing out what to look for and was shockingly forward thinking for 2007.
One key point Smith makes is that in order to understand any form of life, you need to understand the citric acid cycle. Forget memorizing it the way you did in school. Know it as an active process because it is the key to understanding what life is and how it came to be.
Smith and Morowitz have put together an extremely important book that is a must read for anyone interested in understanding or studying the origins of life. ...more
Masterfully told history of women who were forced to give up their babies for adoption, mostly during the 1950s and 1960s. I only wish it were twice aMasterfully told history of women who were forced to give up their babies for adoption, mostly during the 1950s and 1960s. I only wish it were twice as long.
There is not much in this book about women who were actually thankful to be able to give away an unwanted child, but that is precisely the point. Fessler's goal in this book was to destroy the old myth that women, in general, wanted to give up their babies and, in a similar vein, didn't mind so much that they were merely baby-making machines for "proper families". In this compulsively readable book, Fessler related story after story of women who were given no choice but to surrender their baby.
The stigma women faced for being unmarried was shocking. It's not that I didn't know that women bore the brunt of the consequences from unwanted babies, and it's not like I didn't know that having babies out of wedlock was stigmatized in the '50s and '60s.... but oh my god, I felt utter shock while reading most of these stories, shocked for what women had to go through, shocked when realizing how much the false narrative affected the children given up, and shocked at my own misconceptions. Despite reading The Lost Child of Philomena Lee after watching the movie, despite watching the Australian series Love Child, and despite hearing so many stories about how women were forced to give up the children they so desperately wanted, I still held plenty of misconceptions. Fessler set me straight.
This book is a must for anyone who was given up for adoption and lived with the agonizing question of why their mother didn't want them. Chances are she did.
It's really hard not to read these stories and see the adoptions of the 1950s and 1960s as one big kidnapping scheme. At the same time, it's easy to see why, with society structured as it was, it was so easy to make women comply with an authoritative structure that did not have their best interests in mind. Sometimes babies were given to families far less fit. Sometimes the families had more money, but the same women who had to give a baby up went on to capably and lovingly raise children, even if their financial circumstances were not as favorable. It seems the thinking at the time supported the idea that it was perfectly fine to use poor or unmarried women to provide children for well-off parents who had trouble having their own babies. The Handmaid's Tale is set in the future, but so much of it is clearly rooted in the past. Some women were just worth more than others.
One of the best things about this book is how well it illustrates the disparity between the males and females who conceived an unwanted baby. Picture pregnant women being kicked out of the Armed Forces while the male who made the baby received a pension he drew on for the rest of his life, women having to literally spend years and even decades paying back the very "charities" that shamed them and took and sold their babies, not to mention suffering the public shame that rarely crippled men's lives. It really makes me think about the injustices that still exist today when it comes to unwanted pregnancies. Women are still suffering far too many of the consequences. Males simply don't share the same burden. To think that women are shamed, have to give up time they could spend growing their careers, have to go through either a procedure to end the pregnancy or the birth process, *still* have to face regulations on their bodies-- it's just astounding.
Finding a book to follow this one is going to be difficult. It was incredibly interesting and addictive.
LEWIS DARTNELL, PLEASE WRITE A POPULAR SCIENCE INTRO TO ASTROBIOLOGY BOOK FOR THE 2020s! This book is just too good not to have an updated version or LEWIS DARTNELL, PLEASE WRITE A POPULAR SCIENCE INTRO TO ASTROBIOLOGY BOOK FOR THE 2020s! This book is just too good not to have an updated version or a to be recycled into a new book, which would be more relevant for this decade.I see a similar book published in 2011, but it looks as if it's not widely available-- there is not even a kindle version. Its title makes it seem less a popular science book than a textbook. This seems like a shame to me because Dartnell's voice seems particularly capable of conveying information for this still burgeoning field.
After finishing Dartnell's books Origins and The Knowledge, he became one of my favorite authors and I was compelled to read anything by him, no matter what year it was published. Despite being published in 2007, and despite the fact that the field of astrobiology is changing so rapidly, this book really stood up to the test of time. In fact, I would suggest that the fact that it was written in 2007 makes this one of the, if not the, best astrobiology pop sci books ever written. It was incredibly forward thinking for the time. Every single chapter set the stage for all the study now happening in that field. This is a truly excellent primer for anyone interested in intros to biochem, organic chem, and astrobiology.
The entire book focused on looking for life on other planets. In order to begin searching for signs of life in the universe, it is important we think of the most relevant questions to ask about life to inform our strategies.
How would we even recognize life if it were out there? Are there laws that govern the emergence of life on any planet? What types of variation might be allowed within possible laws? How is life defined on Earth?How is life different from non life? How does life function and can this tell us something important? Many more
Not only did Dartnell ask the relevant questions, his writing is surprisingly exhaustive in its approach. What I mean by that is that often authors, even authors who are among the best researchers in their field, attempt to define life in order to continue with the argument they are making in their book. Since they cannot come up with a concise and accurate definition of life, because currently no one can, most of the time they opt for the definition that makes the most sense to them. Sean Carroll actually discussed this problem on a recent podcast when interviewing Sara Imari Walker. It's really challenging to try to discuss ideas related to life without defining it, but trying to define it can actually limit us if we choose too narrow a definition. Similarly, definitions of life become meaningless if they are too broad. Dartnell's approach was to thoughtfully and brilliantly go over each important definition. This produced a book that was more of a call for curious minds to figure out what life is, rather than to try to ingrain some subpar definition in his reader's mind. In fact, the entire book was a call to future researchers to help us figure out this challenging problem. Page after page Dartnell detailed the most current information known in 2007, (I would call this cutting edge for 2007, so much so, I think it wasn't even on people's radar as it should have been. I wish it had been on mine. ), simplified it for a general audience with at least some background in science, and detailed the open questions that this information might help answer.
The construction/organization of this book was exceptional. For example, he provided exquisite detail about how life is, and must be, encased in a membrane and how that membrane allowed for the ingestion of energy and the expelling of waste products. In subsequent chapters, he went into equally exquisite detail about how those membranes and the molecules inside them react to extreme conditions. All of this served to understand what constraints were placed on life. But, instead of providing a summary of this, Dartnell did a lot of handholding for people who might not be as familiar with how a cell functions.
I was really struck by how good Dartnell's explanation of redox reactions was. You might not think this is such an accomplishment. After all, you can find a summary of redox reactions in any intro to biology textbook. But, have you really understood why redox reactions are so important when thinking about life on our planet or elsewhere? If you have not thought about that deeply enough, I highly recommend reading Dartnell's version.
He was similarly skilled in discussing the habitable zone of a galaxy or if indeed certain types of galaxies could even serve as a habitable zone. When explaining the difference between archaea, bacteria, and eukaryotes, Dartnell again showed his talents in being extremely concise and making the subject more understandable than many other authors trying to explain the concept.
Interestingly, his last chapter was speculation about how life might emerge on other planets. If you read Dartnell's The Knowledge, you will see the seeds of that entire book packaged into that final chapter of this book.
I really cannot recommend this book highly enough, even if you are reading it in 2020. If you are looking for an intro to astrobiology, it will be harder to do better than this book, because it is so thorough, so readable, and so incredibly informative. ...more
Brilliant! THIS IS THE BOOK I THOUGHT SHOULD HAVE WON Goodreads Best Science Book 2019. I would not recommend getting the Audible version because it dBrilliant! THIS IS THE BOOK I THOUGHT SHOULD HAVE WON Goodreads Best Science Book 2019. I would not recommend getting the Audible version because it does not come with a PDF. In order to truly appreciate this book, you need the PDF or to watch this lecture before you start the book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nn-U3...
In this book Lewis Dartnell followed how the movement of tectonic plates determined where humans migrated, settled, and brought about agriculture and animal husbandry. Their movement even shaped the political landscape and the wars fought on our soil all over the globe. The movement of the plates determined long term weather patterns (climate) that created the very conditions needed for our ancestors to come down from the trees and walk along savanna grasslands on two feet. Once humans were on foot, the moving rocks determined whether an area could provide enough food and water to sustain the hominin species that evolved in Africa. When some of our ancestors were forced to roam the planet in search of better conditions, it was the rocks that shifted to either allow them to walk to the next continent by building land bridges or shifted to fill the land with water, which isolated entire populations of people far from each other.
The shifting of rocks literally determined where cities could emerge. If the rocks shifted to collide into one another and made a mountain and valley, it created the type of condition that could support feeding a population because rain would weather the mountains and rinse new and fertile soil down to the land below. With such nutrient rich soil, humans could grow food and raise livestock that could sustain larger populations of their offspring. When plates crash to make mountains, they also form basins at the base of the mountain. The basin could fill with water and help hominin species survive the dry times.
The beginning of human evolution:So how exactly did the rocks go about changing the environment in the East African Rift to change it from the humid rain forest that supports tree dwelling apes to the drier climates of the savanna grasslands that would eventually support bipedal apes who would descend from the treetops and walk to cover the globe? Long ago, in the area where our species evolved, Earth's crust was stretched and ripped, creating a series of rifts. This allowed magma to bubble up and create new crust of basalt rock, which resulted in nutrient rich soil. Water flooded into one rift creating the Red Sea and into another to create the Gulf of Aden. The Rift Valley itself has protective mountains.
Mountains on either side of the rift serve to do a few important things. Namely, they serve to protect the area from excess moisture, allowing the landscape to change. If you look along the equatorial regions of Earth, it is littered with rain forests -- everywhere that is, except for this one dry spot, which was the birthplace of humans. Importantly, the base of the mountains contained sunken basins that filled with water and became life sustaining lakes. Because of their location, these lakes were particularly sensitive to cosmic cycles, such as the Milankivich cycles. These cycles describe how over 1,000s of years, Earth's orbital motion, its axial tilt, and procession affected Earth's solar radiation (the distribution of its heat) and therefor affected climate.
The Himalayas and Tibetan plateau created a powerful monsoon system over Indian and South East Asia. This huge sucking effect over the Indian Ocean also drew moisture away from East Africa, reducing the rainfall it experienced. So, instead of rain forest conditions experienced around the rest of the equator, East African dried out and the apes who lived there adapted over the generations to that drier environment.
The drier conditions, rich soil, and reservoirs of lake waters went a long way to helping our ancestors survive long enough to keep passing down their genes. But, don't leave with the impression that it wasn't still a very challenging environment. The draining and refilling of lakes, because of their sensitivity to the Milankovitch cycles, made it challenging for the populations who depended on a stable source of water. The take away from this time is that the shifting rocks and subsequent changes in climate in this area eventually created the vast savanna grasslands that served as the starting point for the hominin species as it began the long journey of spreading across the globe.
One really interesting aspect of rock-shifting driven climate changes is the accumulation or melting of ice. During colder periods, huge icebergs formed and sucked up the water in the oceans, allowing our ancestors to traverse the oceans on foot. When icebergs melted and flooded once again during warmer periods, populations were cut off from one another and migration was no longer possible. At this point in the story of human evolution and migration, we can see the rocks shifting, the climate changing, and all of this forcing our ancestors this way of that. What a visual! We don't merely focus on human movement, we look at how Earth moved and changed and how that had a direct effect on where we could evolve, where we could move, what areas had enough nutrients in the soil to allow us to stick around long enough to make cities, to grow food, to raise livestock. It's all just amazing movie to run in your mind! What drove humans to migration across the globe is often attributed to free will and the nature of human spirit, the idea that humans have an internal and insatiable need to explore, or that they simply roamed around in search of food. But the picture is really broader. Spread was not a rapid or directed migration to all corners of the globe, "We must leave Africa and go explore!" In reality, the groups were low population groups who dispersed to avoid cold and drought and seeking more favorable conditions, and were, at every turn, directed by the changes occurring on earth, which were mostly due to the constant slow shifting of its crust.
A part of this book that I didn't love was the speculation that the variability of lake water in the Rift Valley gave rise to human intelligence. Lewis Dartnell included this research in this book, and I have the highest respect for his work (he is now one of the top three living scientists I admire), so he must have good reason for subscribing to this line of thought. I just cannot yet buy it. I am skeptical of the methods by which people came to this conclusion.
The argument goes like this:An increase in brain size (among other things) in hominins, was caused by the filling and draining of the lakes at the base of the mountain along the rift. Because of the position of the Rift Valley, sandwiched in between mountains, the lakes that lay in the basins created by the rock are extra sensitive to the Milankovitch cycles. This means they evaporate and fill, causing instability for the species (hominin and other). The thinking goes sort of like this: Brain size seems to be correlated (some would say caused by) the unstable conditions, because a species has to adapt to these varying conditions, it evolved bigger brains that could solve the problem of adaptation, including working in social groups to problem solve. Neanderthals did not experience these constant adaptation challenges and their smaller brain size reflects this.
The inclusion of Milankovitch cycles in this book was mind blowing good and served to make this book more than a new repackaging of old information. In addition to putting the picture of human evolution together in a whole new way, by really concentrating on the cycles of earth as well as the evolution and migration of hominins, it brought these cycles to the forefront. Personally, I now want to read and entire book on Milankovitch cycles. However, I don't yet know if I believe that they played a key role in the development of larger brains. It would be really interesting if it were true, but I would need a lot of actual evidence to accept this claim. While trying to gather this evidence, I came across a 2013 article from New Scientist that actually outlined the methods used by some researchers to make a brain size -lake connection. The New Scientists articles stated that researchers compared "climate records with the origin and disappearance of species of early humans, and with changes in human brain size.The presence of lakes in the Rift Valley was a better predictor of human evolution than either global or regional climate, they found, with most major evolutionary events happening during times when lakes were coming and going rapidly.In particular, hominin diversity peaks at 6 species about 1.9 million years ago, just when the Rift Valley lakes were at the peak of their flux. This period also marks the first appearance of the genus Homo, and the biggest leap in brain size with the origin of Homo erectus."
I cannot say I am fully satisfied with these methods and do not yet feel convinced that researchers are truly measuring what they think they are measuring -- if brain size is a result of extreme varying conditions/adaptability -- or if they are something else they might not have yet understood. Seems to be a lot of speculation. However, no matter how brain size - lake connection pans out over time, the focus of research included in this book is exactly what we should be looking at if we are going to understand more about how our planet made our species and continued to alter our species. When put together with what we know about how the universe formed our planet and how our planet formed life , we can gain a broader and more complete understanding of how evolution actually works. I would like to have seen some discussion of what role Milankovitch cycles play in the expression of diurnal and annual cycles and internal clocks of species.
For the rest of the book, Dartnell continued to trace the movement of Earth's rocks along with changes in evolution of human political and social systems. Most enjoyable was his discussion of how agriculture developed in the same manner among groups who had no contact, and how the rocks determined, literally dictated, whether agriculture and animal husbandry could emerge. Early hominins migrated to the Americas but were isolated there. The land bridge between Alaska and Siberia was severed, resulting in no land contact with what we call Russia today. Eastern and Western hemispheres were cut off from each other. There were no interactions with Neanderthal or Denisovans, and no interaction with these natives until Columbus sailed to the Americas. Despite being separated, these isolated early human groups developed similar agricultural practices. They were remarkably similar in domestication of crops and livestock and their development of agriculture. This is mainly because the shifting of rocks -- which helped determine things like climate, nutrient quality of soil, how protected areas were to allow humans to settle -- created the very conditions needed for any non migrating society to remain in a stable place that provided enough nutrients to sustain that population over time. All living things need a constant source of energy to survive. If enough nutrients are not available in a specific spot (a city), then the inhabitants will have no choice but to migrate to a different area or to keep migrating, leading a nomadic way of life, in order to continually supply their cells with the energy needed to remain alive.
One thing I the video did better than the book was to show how the Mediterranean Sea came to exist and what that meant to human civilization. The mediterranean sea itself is the remnant, a mere puddle, of the once great Tethys Sea. When plates crash, it can crumpled up a coastline and create natural harbors; islands, coves, and bays. In the North Mediterranean it set humans up to create seafaring societies like the Minoans, Greeks, Etruscans, etc. Because of the way water lies in natural rocks formations in this part of the world, these societies were perfectly set up for trading. The southern half of that plates was not accommodating because the African continent is being destroyed and does not provide natural harbors. The only exception throughout history was the Nile flowing through the desert and Carthage, which did have a natural harbor. If you already studied how the landscape allowed these civilizations and only these, to challenge the Great Romans, then maybe your mind was not as blown as mine was. All of the stories I read about Rome and Carthage, particularly my favorite The Aeneid, rushed back into my mind and I replayed these classics through the lens of the shifting earth that caused the landscape upon which these dramas played out. I love books that make me shift my thinking about everything.
Another magical section for me was Dartnell's exquisite retelling of how the expression volta do mar came about. Compared to Eurasia, Europe was left out of exchanges for centuries. It was excluded from trade along the Silk road, excluded from the exchange of goods and knowledge, excluded from interactions with more and varied types of people, and excluded from the types of cultures these interactions can create. It was only in the 1400s that Portuguese and Spanish sailors started sailing into the vast, stormy ocean, which had been avoided, for good reason. Sailors you could easily leave but then the current would sweep them up, making a return to home impossible. But then they learned about ocean currents and the winds that drive them. They learned more about the workings of their beautiful planet and bam, Volta do mar! That which returns you to from which you came. They learned that if they said away, the winds will take you home. This opened a whole new understanding of the world and gave them access to that world and the other peoples that shared that world with them. They then began exploring and began to discover islands. Then, the rest is history. They became one of the most powerful traders for a time. If this interests you, I suggest reading The Silk Roads (not the new silk roads) by Peter Frankopan.
I loved Dartnell's volta do mar section so much, it inspired me to make a custom Christmas gift for my son. I put the phrase "Volta do mar!" on one side of a mug and the Fourier Series on the other, with a nice tiny picture of Fourier. Volta do mar is about discovering the laws that govern the planet and, in knowing those laws, being able to see the world in an entirely new way that changes everything from that point on. My son is extremely passionate about math and we discussed how Fourier changed the way we see reality. I hope one day, armed with more and more knowledge about how the universe and everything in works, he too might make some exciting discovery. Rest of review in comments section ...more
You know how no one respects women more, while grabbing them by the pussy -- whether they consent or not -- than Trump? Well, no one respects women’s You know how no one respects women more, while grabbing them by the pussy -- whether they consent or not -- than Trump? Well, no one respects women’s Contributions to STEM, while discrediting one woman -- Mlieva Maric, in the harshest terms possible -- than these authors. They want to make sure you never, ever see her as capable of making any contribution, whatsoever, to Einstein's work. In fact, they want to make sure you know she was below average in just about every way, except for her ability to be so emotional that she would not possibly be able to do math or physics.
It's not that their premise was a bad one. In fact, it started out really well. Through gross exaggerations and sheer imagination, many authors and screenwriters have conjured up the image that Mileva Maric was the real genius behind Einstein's ideas leading up to the 1905 papers and was relegated to the dust bin of history, robbing her of her rightful place in the history of physics and the history of women's achievements. These absurd claims, that were put forth without any actual evidence, needed to be challenged. The problem is, these authors are not the right scholars for the job. They, just like the people they criticize in their book, overshoot... by a lot. They excel at identifying original sources that started the myth of Maric as the "real mathematician" in the family and then identify authors who came later and uncritically and gullibly continued to repeat and strengthen this story. These authors provide grades for both Maric and Einstein as well as surviving documentation in the form of letters the couple wrote to each other. These documents demonstrate that Maric was not a superior mathematician and certainly not on par with Marcel Grossman, who Einstein enlisted help from in order to work out some of the maths for his theories. The problem arises when the authors claim that Maric provided *no* assistance. Einstein himself, in his own hand, wrote to Maric of presenting *their* ideas to the world. These authors, who spend an entire book lambasting anyone who didn't strictly govern themselves by evidence alone made myriad assertions that were not in any way tied to evidence. They *assumed* that Einstein was being kind by using the words "our ideas". They said outrageous things that amounted to suggesting that Maric was emotional and pregnant, and therefore obviously could not have done science. WTF? They cherry picked evidence from the past and then explained it away using smarmy lawyer speak. They showed no true understanding for Maric's role in Einstein's life. They showed no true understanding of what it was like for women in general. Sure, they rattled off a list of women such as Emmy Noether (my fave) and Lise Meitner, who had to overcome unbelievable obstacles and still did not receive the recognition they deserved. But, it felt as if they used these women merely as a tool to harm Mileva's reputation instead of a tool to convey to the reader what it was really like to be a woman at that time. No where, in all its pages, do the authors show any understanding of what it was like for Mileva, to have been forced to be the caretaker for children while Einstein continued on his own journey and never looked back. Never do they talk about what that must have been like, other than to say that she didn't have time to have helped him, and therefore doesn't deserve credit. They even had her own words at their disposal, that told them what it was like for her to be stranded. Yet, they could only look at those words through the lens of a lynch mob with one goal in mind, destroying her. The way they talk about Einstein v. the way the talk about Maric is so shockingly different, I felt as if I needed a shower after reading this book. These authors seem to me, to be misogynists who want to put on the mask of enlightened beings. No thanks. We can see through you. Maric's life deserves to be told by a fair author who does not imagine her as some genius who came up with all of Einstein's ideas or imagine her as a stupid, emotional, baby making machine who can't have sex and pop out babies *and* do science at the same time. So many books go to one extreme or the other and this one is no exception. I really hope someone writes Mileva Maric's story, using evidence, and only evidence, and shows her and Einstein both equal consideration, so that we, the public, can finally have a better understanding of this important time in history. Once that book is written, I hope this withers into obscurity, where it belongs. This whole book is built on an absurdly large number of strawman arguments. What a disappointment. ...more
Don't rely on Barr's "summary", which should more accurately be called a severe reframing. Even heavily redacted, the Mueller report is very damning aDon't rely on Barr's "summary", which should more accurately be called a severe reframing. Even heavily redacted, the Mueller report is very damning and needs to be read by every citizen who plans to engage in the voting process. ...more
Loading...
