Skip to main content

The Heads of Cerberus (SF) - Francis Stevens ****

This book in the MIT Press 'Radium Age' series somewhat stretches the 'and other stories' label as the title work is a complete novel, followed by a number of stories from Francis Stevens, real name Gertrude Barrows Bennett, written in the first 20 years of the twentieth century. Stevens' writing style is very much of the period at the popular end of the market - think Conan Doyle, for example.

This is a bit of a wolf in sheep's clothing for the series, which is supposed to explore proto-science fiction from the period before the pulp SF magazines, but after pioneers such as Wells and Verne. Although Stevens uses some of the props of science, most of the content would be more accurately described as fantasy (but I'm allowing it to slip in here).

The title novel propels three main characters (two male, one female) into a strange world that acts as a gateway to an alternate future version of Pennsylvania. It's entertainingly done, doubtless with some inspiration from The Time Machine in the socially divided society the travellers experience. However, the mechanism of travel is pure fantasy - no more scientific than the hit on the head used to travel into the past in Mark Twain's A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. There might be a brief mention of atoms and frequencies - but used in a meaningless fashion that can't in any way be connected to the magic dust that facilitates their journey. For its age, though, it's very readable still.

Similarly, the first of the short stories, The Curious Experience of Thomas Dunbar, written when Bennett was 17, is an early version of a superhero story - but just as is the case with the comic book superheroes that would follow, a brief mention of a scientific concept is not enough to give any science fiction basis for superpowers. The source of the power here is a new and unknown element that apparently was somehow discovered but can't be again, introduced to the main character in a laboratory accident. But this is no more science than a magical spider bite or the power-giving influence of a yellow sun. This one has less punch than the novel - it doesn't really go anywhere with the super strength, as well as suffering from a touch of period xenophobia.

The rest of the stories are either fantasy or horror, sometimes with a touch of scientific dressing, but based on magic and definitely not SF, even though one has an impressively forward-looking setting of a world where women are in charge. In the end, this arguably isn't too much of a problem given these are still interesting bits of writing of the period from a pioneering female author. But whether the content is a good fit to the series is debatable.

Hardback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

Vector - Robyn Arianrhod ****

This is a remarkable book for the right audience (more on that in a moment), but one that's hard to classify. It's part history of science/maths, part popular maths and even has a smidgen of textbook about it, as it has more full-on mathematical content that a typical title for the general public usually has. What Robyn Arianrhod does in painstaking detail is to record the development of the concept of vectors, vector calculus and their big cousin tensors. These are mathematical tools that would become crucial for physics, not to mention more recently, for example, in the more exotic aspects of computing. Let's get the audience thing out of the way. Early on in the book we get a sentence beginning ‘You likely first learned integral calculus by…’ The assumption is very much that the reader already knows the basics of maths at least to A-level (level to start an undergraduate degree in a 'hard' science or maths) and has no problem with practical use of calculus. Altho

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