Skip to main content

The Curies – Denis Brian ****

The Curies’ story is one that many thought they knew, so the subtitle of Denis Brain’s book, “A Biography of the Most Controversial Family in Science”, is one that inspires interest. What was so controversial? Let’s see…
What’s without doubt is that this is both a fascinating and important story, that Brian tells in detail with obvious affection for his subjects. Part of the Curie story, their huge effort working through tonnes of pitchblende in their shed of a laboratory, exposed to deadly radiation as they attempted to isolate radium is very well known, but this has already happened before page 100 of a 400+ page book. In fact Pierre Curie dies in a tragic traffic accident on page 100 – but the Curie family story is only just beginning. There comes the bizarre public obsession with Mme Curie’s possible affair with fellow scientist Paul Langevin (even leading to a number of duels, though no one was killed) and the increasing role of her daughter Irene, later to form her own Nobel-winning partnership with Pierre Joliot. Equal coverage goes to Marie’s other daughter, Eve, not a scientist but her mother’s biographer. That’s the key to the book’s fascination: it’s not a biography of an individual so much as of a dynasty.
The Curies is thorough and goes into a lot of detail. It has a slightly old fashioned feel when compared with a biography of a more modern scientist (or even with most biographies of Einstein, for instance). It’s hard to pin down exactly what gives this old fashioned aspect – perhaps a certain reverence for the subject, when we’re used to more warts and all approaches, combined with a lack of sensationalism. But this shouldn’t be interpreted as dullness – I really did want to keep turning the page and find out more.
One criticism – early on we learn a little of Pierre’s grandfather, a French army surgeon, who moved the London to practice homeopathy. This is described as “a natural pharmaceutical science that made use of plants and minerals to stimulate the sick person’s natural defenses. He gave his patients small doses of a medicine…” Brian’s description of homeopathy lacks the sort of rigour you would expect in a popular science book. It’s doubtful that homeopathy can be described as a science, given the suspicion with which the vast majority of scientists treat it, and it’s just not true that homeopaths give small doses of a “medicine” – they give water, which once contained a small amount of poison (not medicine), that has been diluted until only the water remains. There are other hints that Brian knows more about the people than the science, most obviously when he falls for the old chestnut of using a light year as a unit of time.
The book could also benefit from some more careful editing. There’s a distinct tendency to say the same thing several times – easily enough done by an author in full flow, but it ought to be picked up in the editing process. For instance we learn on page 130 that “Le Petit Journal got an interview with Langevin’s wife, which was hardly surprising. Her brother-in-law, Henri Bourgeois was one of its editors.” A nice little twist. Or at least it would be if we hadn’t already heard “Mme Langevin’s brother-in-law, Henri Bourgeois, a newspaper editor for Le Petit Journal” on page 126, “despite the dangers of Mme Langevin exposing the affair – especially as her brother-in-law was a newspaper editor” on page 122 and “Perrin… met with Mme Langevin’s brother-in-law, Henri Bourgeois, an editor of the disreputable Petit Journal” on page 120. There are also simple errors of fact that should have been picked up. At one point we read “…would supply Joliot’s laboratory with five tons of uranium oxide, the first five thousand kilograms of which arrived on June 1, 1939.” Erm, Five thousand kilogrammes is five tonnes.
That is just a minor irritation, though. It is still a thoughtful and in-depth look at the Curies as people, and as such is a biography that is very welcome. As for the controversy – there was Marie’s reputed affair, but this was never proved and hardly earth shattering. Joliot could have been said to collaborate with the Germans during the occupation of France – but all the evidence is that he was not a collaborator. He also was a communist in later life, which caused the French government some embarrassment when he headed their nuclear programme. Perhaps this was the controversy Brian had in mind. In the end, it doesn’t really matter. Appreciate an interesting collection of lives.

Paperback:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...