So here are the entries for the Aventis Prize - and I have actually already read one of them - unusual in that I normally just dive into bookshops pick up a book that catches my eye and leave (I think thats usually termed the make shopping experience). Of course I am leaving out the fact that recently very little has been catching my eye and have had to spend minutes (the horror!) inside the bookshop (usually around 10 minutes to be pricise). Anyhow here is the list and my comments..
In The Beginning Was the Worm, by Andrew Brown (Simon & Schuster)
In brief: The story of the nematode worm and the scientists who have devoted their lives to unravelling its secrets. But it will appeal to far more than just worm-lovers for its insights into the work of brilliant scientists such as Sydney Brenner, Bob Horvitz and Sir John Sulston, who shared a 2002 Nobel Prize for their work on this microscope creature, the first organism to have its entire genetic make-up sequenced.
About the author: Freelance journalist and author of two previous books, one on the Metropolitan Police and another on the feuds amongst evolutionary theorists.
In theory not really one for me I don't think but I have always been intrigued with genetics and its potential - if it tells me more about how knowing the genetic make-up is anything other than a start in understanding genetics it will be a really good read. Its always intrigued me that decoding something is like decoding a lauguage like chinese (which I am still trying to learn (Manadarin not Cantonese)). At the end of the day, I can convert chinese into a latinised script but its still just letters that I can now understand visually but lets face it thats as far as it gets. It is a good start though, I give you :) I think I will probably pick it up and flick through the next time I am in Waterstones :)
A Short History Of Nearly Everything, by Bill Bryson (Doubleday/Transworld)
In brief: One man's quest to understand the world around us, from the Big Bang to plate tectonics. The author explores such matters as the size of the Earth and the origins of life, in prose that never fails to be elegant and comprehensible. Fascinating characters and tales from the history of science in a book that's entertaining and brilliantly readable.
About the author: best-selling travel writer and author of books such as Notes From A Small Island and The Lost Continent.
This is the book I have read! Absolutely brilliant except for one selfish thing. Its the book I always wanted to write. I shall have to think of something else now! Anyhow, it takes a bit of everything and talks about it in a really simple conversation style kind of way (the way I write..). A must read!
Magic Universe, by Nigel Calder (Oxford University Press)
In brief: At 705 pages long, this is a giant of a book that covers a vast range of scientific fields in almost encyclopaedic fashion. Subjects are covered in alphabetic order - from alcohol to volcanic explosions - but this is no dry and dusty work of reference. There are dozens of essays, covering everything from cloning and human origins to gravitational waves and the electroweak force. A book to dip into and savour.
About the author: a distinguished science writer, broadcaster and former editor of New Scientist.
Not seen it, will have to have a flick through at some point. Sounds like something I would be interested in but at 705 pages long will need a strong will!
Mutants, by Armand Marie Leroi (Penguin: Viking USA)
In brief: A fascinating exploration of the human body, taking in the story of a French convent girl who found herself changing sex upon puberty; children born with a single eye in the middle of their foreheads and the tale of a hairy family kept at the Burmese royal court for four generations. Beautifully written, this is a mixture of the history of science and medicine and up-to-date explanations of how our genes make us what we are.
About the author: Reader in Evolutionary Developmental Biology at Imperial College London.
I am noticing a pattern here between all the books so far - genetics or the story of everything.. anyhow as before I am intrigued by genetics so again I should probably read it..
Nature Via Nurture, by Matt Ridley (Fourth Estate)
In brief: The perfect antidote to all the hype in recent years about the human genome. The author explores the battles fought over whether nature or nurture makes us what we are, and argues that human behaviour can only be explained by both. A very readable guide to some of the very latest scientific research in genetics.
About the author: science journalist and award-winning author.
More genetics!!!!! I have flicked through this book before and read about it in the New Scientist. I do agree with the major conclusions of this book that both nature and nurture makes us what we are - the intriguing part is which part causes what and this I seem to remember causes much argument in the scientific fields. Think I might wait and just read the scientific magazines to keep up on this debate!
Backroom Boys, by Francis Spufford (Faber & Faber)
In brief: A history of the achievements of arguably some of the more neglected members of British society: engineers. The book looks at some fascinating episodes from the history of technology in the last century, from Britain's early efforts in space to the engineers working on the first mobile phone.
About the author: Author of several acclaimed non-fiction titles and editor of literary anthologies.
Ahh yes.. engineers :) In theory I am one of them (I studied electronic + electrical engineering for 4 years!) - in reality my usage of this knowledge is limited - I work in online video advertising, but I am digressing. Another broad look at a field of work - though not quite as broad as the previous books. The engineer in me is coming out - this book sounds interesting! I wonder if anyone else will find this book interesting! (lets face it.. genetics is a sexy topic, as is nanotech and cloning to name a few - engineering has not been sexy for a long time!). Anyhow, I leave it to you to decide :)
Looking back through the list, it becomes quite obvious why Terry Pratchett (one of the judges voting on the best of them all) said that the quality of the books was "noticeably better" than when he was first involved in judging the competition almost a decade ago. Specifically he referred to the readability of the books - I reckon the major reason for this is the lack of major scientific depth to these books - they are all very general and cover the best and most interesting bits. I actually think this is a good thing since it gets the important facts out to the mass market and then if they are interested further can then search for more in depth books. Maybe, just maybe the scientific world is learning to communicate with everyone else!
About time too.. (my vote of course goes to Bill Bryson!)
the UK press and the US press is very different (as if you didnt know that!) - the major difference seems to be that commentary is identified in the states where as you cannot distinguish between factual articles and commentary over here - makes it very difficult to know whats fact and whats opinion..
I am based in the UK if you didn't know already ;)
interesting how a journalist's lack of research can change the meaning of a word.. booyakasha - an "asian" word meaning cool or hi and having existed for at least a decade (longer?) is now written as being invented by Ali G and being an anti-white racist remark in a foreign language.
I got a response back from the journalist saying that it is what his kids told him - now I know kids use terms like this all the time and i am sure for some kids due to the ali g influence it is an anti white racist remark, but a simple search on google (or any of the others ;) ) shows the usage in this was as being limited and that the majority are using it in a way meaning cool! anyhow maybe i am getting old..
This does lead me onto modern day journalists and how they have changed from the past - no not a pining for how the old days were great since I do not remember them - it has been the way it is now for all my life. What I mean is originally, journalists wrote about their own trade and usually had worked in the field so to speak prior to being a journalist. This meant that factual errors were less frequent and at the very least they understood what they were talking about. Of course its not really economical to have journalists from every field writing about their own field, especially in the general press! But this all means that the amount of errors massively increases and even worse press releases are often just regurgitated out to the world - with all their inherant exaggerations!
The best journalists research their stories first - unfortunately time pressures can mean this research is limited and even worse there is often little way to actually know which stories are researched properly and which is just trash - until they make those blatant mistakes anyhow :)
Right rant over.. and if any of my journo friends are reading this - make sure you keep researching ;)