Skip to main content

The Rag and Bone Shop - Veronica O'Keane ***

Many people don't realise how recently medicine has come to be scientific. This didn't really occur comprehensively with most areas of medicine until the second half of the twentieth century. The area that has arguably lagged far behind the rest is mental health, where outdated Victorian ideas (such as those of Freud) with no scientific basis have clung on, as if we still resorted to bleeding people to make them better.

Although the book centres on memory, Veronica O'Keane shows impressively how the increasing awareness of the impossibility of divorcing aspects of the mind from the physical aspects of the brain make it necessary to have a very different understanding of mental health issues. Often an understanding of physical problems with the brain have been developed from medical cases, and O'Keane takes us effectively and interestingly through some of these cases and the functions of the different parts of the brain relevant to memory and how problems with them can induce anything from amnesia to hallucinations.

There was a small issue with a brief foray into history of science, where O'Keane comments that heliocentrism 'effectively removed Earth from the creationist dogma of the Church. At that time, the belief systems of the Church had dominated thinking for one and a half thousand years.' This sounds like a recycling of the Victorian attempt to blame Christianity for the non-existent 'dark ages' and (leaving aside the fact the 'Church' didn't exist in this sense 1500 years before Copernicus and Galileo) totally overlooks the fact that Aristotelian physics - the norm in the 1500s - would simply not work without the Earth at the centre of the universe.

The only reason I haven't rated the book higher, though, is that I didn't enjoy reading it. The scientific content is great, but the way it's presented just didn't work for me. Sometimes the writing can be rather long-winded. For example, the entire chapter 2 boils down to 'we encounter/learn things through our senses', as if this is some sort of revelation. But for the rest, it's more about style: if some popular science is like a good action thriller this is more like reading literary fiction. If you enjoy literary fiction and 'intellectual' plays, this will make the book a delight. If you find the likes of Samuel Beckett and Proust pretentious and boring, (Beckett particularly is heavily referenced here) then it will make for a difficult read.

Overall, then, this is a marmite book. The content is great, but the presentation of that content will be wonderful to some and irritating to others. 


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


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