Skip to main content

A Sonnet to Science - Sam Illingworth ***

In this book, Sam Illingworth is on a mission - to 'present an aspirational account of how the two disciplines [of science and poetry] can work together.' He does this by presenting shortish biographies of six scientists (one of whom isn't) who wrote poetry, showing how the two aspects of their life were intertwined. I confess my immediate reaction to this was a Spock-style raised eyebrow: I'm not a great fan of poetry, and it seemed suspiciously like the kind of arty-sciency crossover that wouldn't help either side of the C. P. Snowian divide. However, I was genuinely prepared to be persuaded otherwise, and entered into the six biographies (Davy, Lovelace, Maxwell, Ross, Holub and Elson) with an open mind. I don't know if it's intentional, but the mix of relatively well-known and distinctly obscure names was part of the attraction.

Humphry Davy is a familiar enough individual, but his biographical details tend to come in as a side dish to the greater Michael Faraday, so it was good to see more on his background (though he doesn't come across as a very likeable character). I found his poetry stodgy (not entirely surprising given the writing style of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century).

Next comes Ada King, Countess of Lovelace. She is a fascinating character, but to call an amateur mathematician who wrote a single document on Babbage's work a scientist stretches the term to breaking point. As Illingworth acknowledges, Lovelace's contribution is disputed. He clearly comes down on the side that makes her work 'the first computer program and Lovelace the first computer programmer', despite significant concern among some historians of science about this. There is no doubt that Lovelace's commentary on a paper by Menabrea on Babbage's Analytical Engine contains interesting work, though. Oddly, and perhaps reflecting a relatively small output in poetry as well, this section has more poetry by her father than by Lovelace herself.

Next we get onto the only truly great scientist covered here, James Clerk Maxwell. Maxwell was a towering genius of a physicist, and his life and work is well summarised in the pocket biography. Maxwell also wrote far more approachable poetry than either of the two earlier names - partly because of changing fashion, but also because his verse was often comic. This doesn't come across strongly enough in Illingworth's assessment, as he is trying to give the poetry a serious role in the scientist's life - so, for example, he doesn't mention the delightful The Song of the Atlantic Telegraph Company that Maxwell wrote for his friend Thomson (later Lord Kelvin), who at the time was having problems with the transatlantic cable, a poem that makes use of the shorthand 2(U) 'to avoid vain repetitions', representing the phrase 'Under the sea' twice in a row.

The remaining three biographies are less of notable scientists who wrote poetry than notable poets who worked in medicine and astronomy. Admittedly Ronald Ross won one of the earliest Nobel Prizes in medicine for his work on the cause and transmission of malaria, but he's hardly a household name - and comes across as an extremely unpleasant individual. In the case of Miroslav Holub it's certainly his poetry and his life through the various sufferings of his country that make the story (interestingly, in his online biography he's listed as a poet who happened to do immunology). Finally there's Rebecca Elson who studied galaxy formation and globular clusters. She died sadly just 39 - there's more a balance of work and poetry here, though as Illingworth notes, there is very limited information on her life and work.

All in all, I can't say the experience converted me to the joys of poetry, or made me think that poetry has anything useful to offer to the communication of science. If you have an interest in both science and poetry, though, this is definitely a book for you - as it will be if you're only interested in poetry and feel it has a role in making scientists more cultured.
Hardback 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A (Very) Short History of Life on Earth - Henry Gee *****

In writing this book, Henry Gee had a lot to live up to. His earlier title  The Accidental Species was a superbly readable and fascinating description of the evolutionary process leading to Homo sapiens . It seemed hard to beat - but he has succeeded with what is inevitably going to be described as a tour-de-force. As is promised on the cover, we are taken through nearly 4.6 billion years of life on Earth (actually rather more, as I'll cover below). It's a mark of Gee's skill that what could have ended up feeling like an interminable list of different organisms comes across instead as something of a pager turner. This is helped by the structuring - within those promised twelve chapters everything is divided up into handy bite-sized chunks. And although there certainly are very many species mentioned as we pass through the years, rather than feeling overwhelming, Gee's friendly prose and careful timing made the approach come across as natural and organic.  There was a w

On the Fringe - Michael Gordin *****

This little book is a pleasant surprise. That word 'little', by the way, is not intended as an insult, but a compliment. Kudos to OUP for realising that a book doesn't have to be three inches thick to be interesting. It's just 101 pages before you get to the notes - and that's plenty. The topic is fringe science or pseudoscience: it could be heavy going in a condensed form, but in fact Michael Gordin keeps the tone light and readable. In some ways, the most interesting bit is when Gordin plunges into just what pseudoscience actually is. As he points out, there are elements of subjectivity to this. For example, some would say that string theory is pseudoscience, even though many real scientists have dedicated their careers to it. Gordin also points out that, outside of denial (more on this a moment), many supporters of what most of us label pseudoscience do use the scientific method and see themselves as doing actual science. Gordin breaks pseudoscience down into a n

Michael D. Gordin - Four Way Interview

Michael D. Gordin is a historian of modern science and a professor at Princeton University, with particular interests in the physical sciences and in science in Russia and the Soviet Union. He is the author of six books, ranging from the periodic table to early nuclear weapons to the history of scientific languages. His most recent book is On the Fringe: Where Science Meets Pseudoscience (Oxford University Press). Why history of science? The history of science grabbed me long before I knew that there were actual historians of science out there. I entered college committed to becoming a physicist, drawn in by the deep intellectual puzzles of entropy, quantum theory, and relativity. When I started taking courses, I came to understand that what really interested me about those puzzles were not so much their solutions — still replete with paradoxes — but rather the rich debates and even the dead-ends that scientists had taken to trying to resolve them. At first, I thought this fell under