Skip to main content

Of Sound Mind - Nina Kraus ***

Like most genres, popular science goes through phases - for the last couple of years, neuroscience has been the in thing, to the extent that I tend to think 'not another brain book' when I see one - but for someone who has always sung, the idea of finding out more about the relationship between the brain and sound, especially music, was attractive. 

Nina Kraus is certainly enthusiastic about her topic and generally the book is well-pitched (appropriate given the musical connotations) and readable. However, Kraus does occasionally fall for a classic academic's failing of making use of unnecessary jargon. For example, she defines two terms 'afferent' and 'efferent', apparently adjectives for direction of travel. Kraus even points out how easily confused they are - so why use them? This isn't a textbook - there's no need to load the reader with all the jargon.

Some sections worked particularly well for me. The chapters on language and sound were very interesting, as were those on noise and ageing. Kraus demonstrates well how sustained background noise - even at relatively low levels - can have a negative impact on achievements. The positive outcomes of being an active musician are also of interest. I use the term 'active' here, as Kraus emphasises that listening to music is good, but to gain the benefits she mentions you have to play an instrument or sing, not just listen. Those benefits are in having an improvement in your 'sound mind', something Kraus defines as 'sound, what our brains do with it, and also what this does to us.' It seems that 'Music does an exceptional job of engaging [the cognitive, motor, reward and sensory] systems, providing effective avenues for learning through sound.'

As is almost always the case in neuroscience books, there is too much text given over to labelling bits of the brain and describing their role. By the time I'm half way through these sections I've already forgotten what all those labels mean - science shouldn't be about learning labels. In at least one case, too, there is evidence of the author being too close to the subject - we are told about hair cells in ear, but it's not mentioned that they aren't actually hairs.

A particularly poor aspect of the book are the illustrations, which look like they belong in a self-published effort. Many of them fall into one or other of the two most common problems with DIY illustrations - they either don't add anything to the text or they are so small and/or murky that it's impossible to make out what it is that they are illustrating.

Overall, I repeatedly found it hard to find any solid meaning in the content of the book. When defining the sound mind, for example, Kraus comments 'I think the sound mind is a force behind a continuum from the past to the present and into the future.' That's alright, then. Time and again, this kind of vague waffly comment made me struggle to follow what was intended. I'm sure some will love it, but for me Of Sound Mind could have been better.

Hardback: 
Bookshop.org

  

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

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mathematics with Love – Mary Stopes-Roe *****

Admittedly it’s early days (this review is written in January), but this, for me, is the surprise hit of the year so far! I approached this book with trepidation, but found it absolutely delightful. It is described on the cover as the “courtship correspondence of Barnes Wallis, inventor of the bouncing bomb”, and contains a series of letters between Wallis and his cousin and eventual wife Molly Bloxham, along with some useful annotation by their daughter, Mary. The courtship itself is not without difficulties, as Wallis was 18 years older than the 17-year-old Molly at the start of the correspondence, and her father, not surprisingly, wasn’t too pleased about the interest of such an elderly suitor, but that isn’t the only reason the letters are interesting – it’s also because of maths, and Wallis’s position in the UK as the engineering hero of the Second World War. (Incidentally, it seemed very strange to see letters addressed to “Barnes” – I had always assumed Barnes Wallis was a ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...
Post a Comment
Read more

On Time - Jim Al-Khalili *****

By a small margin Jim Al-Khalili's The World According to Physics is my favourite of his books, both because the 'three pillars' concept at its heart works so well - but also because it's short. On Time is somewhat heavier, but thankfully not a wrist-buster. It might seem at first sight odd that a book on a subset of physics is considerably longer than one covering the whole thing, but time is one of those subjects that inevitably involves considerable complexities and needs depth. As Al-Khalili establishes, it's hard to think of any other scientific concept where our perception of it - what he refers to as manifest time or psychological time - is so different from the view from physics. Some physicists go so far as to suggest that time doesn't exist at all. In the book, Al-Khalili sets out (to my mind quite successfully) both to explain why they think this is the case, but also why it's not the best interpretation of time. I'd certainly note that I...
Post a Comment
Read more