Skip to main content

World Brain - H. G. Wells ***

Today, we mostly remember H. G. Wells as a writer of science fiction, but he was a prolific non-fiction author (not to mention penning comic/romantic novels such as The History of Mister Polly, which became Half a Sixpence as a film). To those used to his tightly crafted science fiction, the non-fiction can be distinctly disappointing. In its day, some of it was very popular, but now it comes across as turgid and mannered. But this little book, which I'd never seen before, is a bit lighter on the reader, in part because its main content is a series of speeches on a concept that some suggest prefigures Wikipedia - there's an element of truth in that, but Wells' intent was much broader.

While I hadn't come across the speeches that are pulled together in World Brain, I was aware of the suggestion that Vannevar Bush's 1930s memex concept was a sort of precursor of hypertext based on the then hot new technology of microfilm. Wells is also influenced by the ability of microfilm to provide an information revolution in developing his concept of a 'World Encyclopaedia'. 

Each of the five main sections of this very short book (not published in this form in Wells' day) is made up of the text of a speech based on different slices of Wells' overall vision. At its heart was an encyclopaedia of all modern knowledge that would be constantly updated by thousands of experts. But behind the technology was the vision of Wells the internationalist, who believed the nation state must pass away to bring world peace and felt that universal access to the truth would enable the uneducated masses to move towards this goal. (He is, admittedly very vague as to how this transition would take place.)

If the book was just this it would get pretty tedious, but what is particularly interesting is the way every section, each a speech that was given to a different body, takes on a distinctly different flavour. As well as the goal of intellectually hauling up the masses to move beyond their petty nationalism, in one section we see the imagined encyclopaedia mechanism as a way for professionals to share information, in another we see Wells devising a universal system for a fact-based part of the school curriculum, as he felt that the whole education system was in need of an overhaul (aspects of his criticisms still apply to the way we teach today).

Although we can enthusiastically support Wells' pacifist goals - the book pulls together speeches he gave in the lead up to the Second World War - there is no doubt that with hindsight we can also discover a deep naivety in his vision. The idea that his World Encyclopaedia would contain the true facts about everything from history to physics inevitably now begs the question 'Whose truth?' Even physics has plenty of dispute (what would Wells' truth be between dark matter and MOND, for example?). But the idea that anyone could agree on a 'true facts' version of history would surely have seemed a fantasy even to someone sharing the then seventy-year-old Wells' idealism. For that matter the underlying assumption that simply making information available to everyone would enable massive political transformation to take place was one that even then must have seemed more than a little over-optimistic.

This is a not a particularly easy little book to read, but for anyone with an interest in how the modern Information Age has shaped our world - and how that might have been anticipated in the 1930s - not to mention those who are doubtful about the way we teach our children - this is a text that is worth perusing.

Paperback: 
Bookshop.org

  

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

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

God: the Science, the Evidence - Michel-Yves Bolloré and Olivier Bonnassies ***

This is, to say the least, an oddity, but a fascinating one. A translation of a French bestseller, it aims to put forward an examination of the scientific evidence for the existence of a deity… and various other things, as this is a very oddly structured book (more on that in a moment). In The God Delusion , Richard Dawkins suggested that we should treat the existence of God as a scientific claim, which is exactly what the authors do reasonably well in the main part of the book. They argue that three pieces of scientific evidence in particular are supportive of the existence of a (generic) creator of the universe. These are that the universe had a beginning, the fine tuning of natural constants and the unlikeliness of life.  To support their evidence, Bolloré and Bonnassies give a reasonable introduction to thermodynamics and cosmology. They suggest that the expected heat death of the universe implies a beginning (for good thermodynamic reasons), and rightly give the impression tha...

The Infinite Alphabet - Cesar Hidalgo ****

Although taking a very new approach, this book by a physicist working in economics made me nostalgic for the business books of the 1980s. More on why in a moment, but Cesar Hidalgo sets out to explain how it is knowledge - how it is developed, how it is managed and forgotten - that makes the difference between success and failure. When I worked for a corporate in the 1980s I was very taken with Tom Peters' business books such of In Search of Excellence (with Robert Waterman), which described what made it possible for some companies to thrive and become huge while others failed. (It's interesting to look back to see a balance amongst the companies Peters thought were excellent, with successes such as Walmart and Intel, and failures such as Wang and Kodak.) In a similar way, Hidalgo uses case studies of successes and failures for both businesses and countries in making effective use of knowledge to drive economic success. When I read a Tom Peters book I was inspired and fired up...

The War on Science - Lawrence Krauss (Ed.) ****

At first glance this might appear to be yet another book on how to deal with climate change deniers and the like, such as How to Talk to a Science Denier.   It is, however, a much more significant book because it addresses the way that universities, government and pressure groups have attempted to undermine the scientific process. Conceptually I would give it five stars, but it's quite heavy going because it's a collection of around 18 essays by different academics, with many going over the same ground, so there is a lot of repetition. Even so, it's an important book. There are a few well-known names here - editor Lawrence Krauss, Richard Dawkins and Steven Pinker - but also a range of scientists (with a few philosophers) explaining how science is being damaged in academia by unscientific ideas. Many of the issues apply to other disciplines as well, but this is specifically about the impact on science, and particularly important there because of the damage it has been doing...