Skip to main content

The Science of Breaking Bad - Dave Trumbore and Donna Nelson ***

At first sight I'm probably not the best person to review this book as I have never watched Breaking Bad (apart from repeatedly seeing bits of episode 2 when I played it more than 50 times while battery testing laptops) and have no desire to do so. However, I am very interested in how fiction portrays science and the claim this book makes is that Breaking Bad was uniquely impressive in the amount of real science it contained.

The format of the book is more than a little odd. One of the contributors, Donna Nelson, is a chemistry professor who responded to a call for a science consultant to the show. Each chapter starts with a section of reminiscence from Nelson about the joys and tribulations of the role. That's fine and often gives interesting insights, but for some reason it's printed in tiny text, significantly smaller than the rest of the book. I think the idea is to make it look like an email, but it just makes it hard to read. I remember chatting to a physicist who had just been science consultant on a science fiction movie and he was full of the production team's enthusiasm for science - but the movie was later slated for terrible science content. Nelson seems similarly beguiled by Hollywood and perhaps is a little too starstruck not to over compliment the production team for their dedication to science.

We then get two versions of an explanation from science writer Dave Trumbore of the Breaking Bad science on a particular topic, often focussing on one or two episodes. The first version is a high-level summary, labelled '101' after the odd US way of denoting basic university courses, and the other is 'Advanced'. These are well written and can be quite interesting - for example in the discussion of explosives and of producing a DIY battery. Although Trumbore probably gives the Breaking Bad people more credit than they deserve for being accurate, he is careful to point out where the demands of good storytelling or filming were reasonably thought to outweigh the requirement for scientific accuracy. I did feel, though, that some sections - for example the ones dealing with medical conditions from psychology to oncology - were just there to fill things out and weren't really about the presentation of science in the show.

Overall, despite the odd format, it's quite a good example of the 'science of...' genre. Though not as interesting as, say The Science of Middle Earth (which inevitably was a considerably harder task for the writer), it puts across quite a lot on that under-represented science chemistry - and though occasionally there was a little too much detail for this kind of book, it was generally well presented by Trumbore. There was too much obsession with the drug that was central to the storyline - the reverence the writers of the book had for the TV show occasionally verged on the sickly, and this particularly came across in the word count given over to the creation of the drug.

Realistically, few others will try reading this just for the science content. It will be read by fans of the show - the kind of people who watch the DVD again with the commentary switched on (I don't know if Breaking Bad has this, but other shows with cult followings do) - and such readers will certainly enjoy picking over the fine details of what happened in particular episodes, even if some of the heavier science points perhaps don't interest them. A good effort.
Paperback 

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Patricia Fara - Four Way Interview

Patricia Fara lectures in the history of science at Cambridge University, where she is a Fellow of Clare College. She was the President of the British Society for the History of Science (2016-18) and her prize-winning book, Science: A Four Thousand Year History (OUP, 2009), has been translated into nine languages. An experienced public lecturer, Patricia Fara appears regularly in TV documentaries and radio programmes. She also contributes articles and reviews to many popular magazines and journals, including History Today, BBC History, New Scientist, Nature and the Times Literary SupplementHer new book is Erasmus Darwin.

Why history of science?
I read physics at university, but half-way through the course I realised that had been a big mistake. Although I relished the intellectual challenge, I was bored by the long hours spent lining up recalcitrant instruments in dusty laboratories. Why was nobody encouraging us to think about the big questions – What is gravity? Does quantum mechani…

The Idea of the Brain: Matthew Cobb *****

Matthew Cobb is one of those people that you can’t help but admire but also secretly hate just a little bit for being so awesome. He is professor for zoology at the University of Manchester with a sizable teaching load that he apparently masters with consummate skill. He’s a scientific researcher, who researches the sense of smell of fruit fly maggots; I kid you not!  He’s also an attentive and loving family father but he still finds time and energy to write brilliant history of science books, three to date. His first, The Egg and Sperm Race, describes the search for the secret of human reproduction in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and is one of my favourite history of science books, on the period. His second, Life’s Greatest Secret is a monster, both in scope and detail, description of the hunt to decipher the structure and function of DNA that along the way demolishes a whole boatload of modern history of science myths. The most recent, and the subject of this review, is

The Big Ideas in Science - Jon Evans ***

The starting point of a review like this has to be to congratulate the author on his achievement, Jon Evans, because getting all of science into one relatively short book is a massive (and thankless) task. Although inevitably the result is a fairly hectic dash through the material, with limited space for subtleness, Evans manages to make the experience readable and has a light touch that is effective without becoming too simplistic.

There is only one reason this book doesn't get four stars - it's not the quality of the writing but rather the selection of the contents. Of course, there is bound to be plenty of stuff missed out - how else could you get all of science into 269 pages? But the balance is strangely skewed. Chemistry is pretty much omitted, though aspects of chemistry occur under other headings. But for me, the real problem is that physics is really under-represented. It's interesting to use Jim Al-Khalili's recent excellent physics summary title The World Acc…