Popular Science Fail

The last time the 100 book meme came around I decided to step out of the vein and create a list of 100 books that I liked or have had a significant influence on me. Most of the them were non-fiction books about science, and I was glad to see the Jennifer has created a list of 75 popular science books to share.

As with the last survey, though, I've read almost nothing on this new list. I've read On the Origin of Species, The Demon-Haunted World, and Wonderful Life, but that's it.

As with the last meme, I'm considering going through my library and making a list of my favorite 75 popular science books. I know that I've read more than that, but there are quite a few that I didn't particularly care for, so I might have to shorten the list a bit.

[Hat-tip to John Lynch]

Tags

More like this

Over at the new Seed blog, here on ScienceBlogs, Katherine Sharpe asks about the best science books ever (a topic that was also discussed at Cosmic Variance some time back. I've been sort of swamped this week, but that's only part of the reason why I haven't responded. The main reason is a shameful…
I don't often play these meme games but since none of the other female SciBlings have jumped on the bandwagon, and I've read at least as much science fiction as some of the other Scibs in the game (PZ, Mark, Afrensis, Orac, Joseph, Bora, and John), I just had to join in. First, for the record, I…
Summer is here, which means vacations for lots of people, which means "beach reading"-- trying to read a book or two while kicking back somewhere. The ideal beach read is something that isn't so heavy as to bring you down or demand too much attention, but is also serious enough that it's not…
I kicked off the week with a grumpy post about the Guardian's flawed list of great non-fiction, so let's end the week with a slightly more upbeat take on the same basic idea. The New York Times did a slightly lighter list, asking their staff to pick favorite nonfiction. The lack of consensus is…

I've read a few more than that, but — sssh! — not many. And some of the best books on my personal list I wouldn't count as "popularizations", The Feynman Lectures on Physics for example.

I know that I've read more than that, but there are quite a few that I didn't particularly care for, so I might have to shorten the list a bit.

Listing the worst is always more fun, too.

I wonder: are people who have been formally trained in some scientific field more likely to "fail" this kind of thing? There exist only so many hours in the day, and if we have to spend them reading textbooks and journal articles, well. . . .

Blake; I think you might be on to something. I would definitely read more popular science books outside the realm of my immediate area of interest if I had more time. Between work, class, and working on the book, though, I just don't have the time.

In general I imagine that we science folk are more likely to stick to a particular area than to read all the good pop science books that are put out. Jennifer is probably more widely read than most, and I know if I do my own list it's going to be much more narrow in focus.

As for the worst pop-science books, I made such a list in December of last year. Maybe it's time to make a new one...

Tom Swanson makes a similar point: it's not just the time we have to spend, but the activities we feel to be relevant ways to spend it.

I don't read tremendous amount of pop-sci, and not much in physics since A Brief History of Time, as I've gone to grad school since then and really don't need much prose on how weird quantum mechanics and relativity are. (I had to put my foot down on getting pop-sci books as gifts after getting a pop-up book of cosmology; I felt a bit like John Cleese in a Monty Python sketch.)

Do you like your rattle? Do you like your rattle?
Ah, yes, the rattle.
Ooh, he's talkin' already
Of course I can talk, I'm the Minister for Overseas Development.

It's probably something which we should keep in mind — a book which a professional X-ologist might find an interesting and invigorating complement to the standard presentation of X might not be a good introduction to X for an untrained reader (or a specialist in field Y).