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

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead . That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes. Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová. T

David Spiegelhalter Five Way interview

Professor Sir David Spiegelhalter FRS OBE is Emeritus Professor of Statistics in the Centre for Mathematical Sciences at the University of Cambridge. He was previously Chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication and has presented the BBC4 documentaries Tails you Win: the Science of Chance, the award-winning Climate Change by Numbers. His bestselling book, The Art of Statistics , was published in March 2019. He was knighted in 2014 for services to medical statistics, was President of the Royal Statistical Society (2017-2018), and became a Non-Executive Director of the UK Statistics Authority in 2020. His latest book is The Art of Uncertainty . Why probability? because I have been fascinated by the idea of probability, and what it might be, for over 50 years. Why is the ‘P’ word missing from the title? That's a good question.  Partly so as not to make it sound like a technical book, but also because I did not want to give the impression that it was yet another book

Everything is Predictable - Tom Chivers *****

There's a stereotype of computer users: Mac users are creative and cool, while PC users are businesslike and unimaginative. Less well-known is that the world of statistics has an equivalent division. Bayesians are the Mac users of the stats world, where frequentists are the PC people. This book sets out to show why Bayesians are not just cool, but also mostly right. Tom Chivers does an excellent job of giving us some historical background, then dives into two key aspects of the use of statistics. These are in science, where the standard approach is frequentist and Bayes only creeps into a few specific applications, such as the accuracy of medical tests, and in decision theory where Bayes is dominant. If this all sounds very dry and unexciting, it's quite the reverse. I admit, I love probability and statistics, and I am something of a closet Bayesian*), but Chivers' light and entertaining style means that what could have been the mathematical equivalent of debating angels on