2 comments about Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin: An Autobiography and Other Recollections.

1. I saw the previous review and had to write a real review for those interested in this book. The book has effectively four introductory essays by Virginia Trimble, Jesse Greenstein, Peggy Kidwell, and Katherine Haramundanis. Each of these are well worth reading on their own and they place Cecilia Payne, later Payne-Gaposchkin by marriage, in context. I will refer to her as "CPG" from now on.
   
   The part of the book written by CPG, "The Dyer's Hand" is a memoir of growing up in England, being a woman scientist at Cambridge, and moving to Harvard to become an astronomer when being a woman still made the directors of the Harvard Observatory immediate think of placing you in the pool of woman calculators -- underpaid and not considered on the level of the men. CPG helped change that. She applied the then new ideas of Saha to the analysis of the sun's spectrum and realized that the sun was made up of a huge amount of hydrogen compared to helium and the other elements. Up to the publication of her thesis in the 1920's no one really understood that stars were mostly hydrogen and helium. Earlier observations had been incorrectly interpreted as showing earthly abundances of the elements. CPG helped force astronomers to revise their stellar models -- the first step to truly understanding the stars.
   
   Her working life spanned roughly 50 years and she devoted her life to astronomy even though it was not until the 1950's that Harvard woke up and gave her a job title other than assistant to the director of the observatory. She helped create our understanding of how stars work and she is a gifted writer. This is an amazing life and the autobiography is necessary reading.



2. i believe the author owes me not only an apology but a greeting and invitation for the only if in the why and why not

No comments about Pierre Duhem: Philosophy and History in the Work of a Believing Physicist.

2 comments about Biowarrior: Inside the Soviet/Russian Biological War Machine.

1. Readers of Russian politics and world peace will find Biowarrior: Inside the Soviet/Russian Biological War Machine to be an intriguing insider's look at the Soviet biological war machine, written by a leading Russian scientist who worked for decades at the heart of the program. Igor Domaradskij was a dedicated scientist who was often in conflict with military approaches: he became a specialist in epidemic bacterial infections, and was responsible for plague control within the former USSR, and also helped design the Soviet military's bio-weapons program. A chilling account, Biowarrior is a welcome and informative addition to the growing body of Cold War Era information that has come to light since the downfall of the old communist empire.



2. This book was not what I expected. The author spends much valuable time describing his personal trials and tribulations with the Russian "system" rather than explaining the what, how, where, and gory details of biological warfare. If you are looking for an exciting read, pass on this one...I did read the whole thing and I can guarantee it will put you to sleep every time you pick it up!

5 comments about Kinsey: Sex The Measure Of All Things.

1. As a Bloomington resident and a long-time admirer of Kinsey's work, I decided it was time to learn more about the man beyond what the Liam Neeson film taught me. What I found in Gathorne-Hardy's bio was a solid portrait of a man who opened the world's eyes to sexuality. The book is well-researched and interesting, but at times it can get bogged down with a bit too much analysis of Kinsey's motives and correspondence, especially as it pertains to his own sexuality.
   
   Still, the book is an easy read and well sourced, and it certainly provides an informative biography of Kinsey while acknowledging some of the man's flaws.



2. I chose to read this book because I wanted a balanced account of Kinsey's life and science, unfortunately, this book does not satisfy the requirement. Where the Jones book turns Kinsey into a demon, Gathorne-Hardy seems to want to turn him into a god. Gathorne-Hardy has a well researched account of Kinsey's life and activities, however he constantly tries to justify Kinsey's methods and continually comments on how no one has been able to do better sex research since, a patently untrue and scientifically unsupported statement. It would be difficult to cover both the biographical research on Kinsey and do an indepth study of current sex research, and I don't believe that Gathorne-Hardy even tried to do much research into current sex literature, that is why it is irritating when he tries to justify most of Kinsey's ideas. Overall, if you want a book that details the activities of Kinsey's life, this is an acceptable book, but if you are interested in his science, it is woefully lacking.



3. This book is so professionally researched, well documented and written with flowing, easy to follow prose, that it almost over-shadows the subject matter which is, of course, the fascinating life and work of Alfred C. Kinsey, and culminating with his most absorbing research work of all: the sexual habits of primarily, the American public.
   
   But don't worry, the study of sex prevails as the intriguing winner of our primary attention for it is spelled out clearly, sometimes more than one is ready for but can't turn away from and do not honestly want to. And a word of warning to the sexually squeamish- this IS sex, all about sex and sexual habits, many of which, one might not have ever thought of, but necessary for an exacting, broad-spectrum all inclusive study of the human animal.
   
   J. Gathorne-Hardy is British and that shows up in his grammar, so don't think the book is full of typos, that's the way they spell on the other side of the Pond and it lends some flavor to the American subject matter. As can be seen in his detailed research, he is a well qualified researcher, and this work is now considered by many as the de facto authority on all things Kinsey. And fortunately so because there are a tremendous amount of books about Kinsey in print, but rest assured and good as many may be, none can hold a candle to this work.
   
   Kinsey's research was as clinically studied as any highly disciplined research should be, but it is no secret that Kinsey and his fellow researchers did a tremendous amount of, ahem, shall we say, "hands-on", direct involvement work which raised scholarly eyebrows, but as Gathorne-Hardy points out, it was done with the most scientific detachment possible. Yes, well, it certainly made for some scandalous reactions for which Kinsey was acutely trying to avoid, but had an uncanny ability to dismiss and side-step.
   
   For those who have been interested in Kinsey's life and work, but were put-off by the voluminous original works, will certainly appreciate this study, because it not only summarizes Kinsey's work in great detail, it also edits down the laborious writing style of Kinsey, without loosing any important details and most importantly, it includes Kinsey's personal life from early childhood and on to his later research work- something that is missing and/or not accurately portrayed in too many other studies. It also covers many of the people who worked with Kinsey and who graciously lent their personal observations to the author for much of the critical data found here-in.
   
   This book is truly, an outstanding accomplishment and honors the deeply important work of Kinsey and his research team, notorious as many saw it, but whose dogged dedication to the subject of sex studies opened-up a more mature approach for the average citizen's awareness of what most now conclude, is step "A" in knowing oneself and the biological world we live in. I highly commend Jonathon Gathorne-Hardy for this monument to that awareness.



4. In this scholarly, well-documented biography of nearly 500 pages, Jonathan Gathorne-Hardy tells you probably all you ever wanted to know about Alfred Kinsey; and he does it in a most reader-friendly fashion. From Kinsey's early life, growing up in the confines of a narrow Methodist family, to his marriage and tenure at Indiana University, to his studies of the gall wasp and his studies of the sexual behavior of males and females that changed forever the way we look at sex-- it's all here. Since Gathorne-Hardy has written the most recent biography of Kinsey (1999) he had the benefit of the research of previous biographers. He thus attempts to set the record straight concerning the 1997 Kinsey biography by James H. Jones, ALFRED KINSEY - A PUBLIC/PRIVATE LIFE. He maintains -- and goes to considerable lengths to prove it-- that Jones ceased to be an "objective researcher" but rather attacked Kinsey's private sexual behavior. He, in Gathorne-Hardy's words, "belongs to what one might call the Kenneth Starr school of biography." Enough said.
   
   Kinsey, an extremely complicated individual, was an atheist (he rebelled vigorously against the strict religion of his father), a brilliant professor and scientist, mesmerizing lecturer, intolerant of what he considered shoddy work of other scientists, a loving husband and father, a "benevolent despot", a bisexual, a compassionate and humane person. (For years he corresponded with both prisoners and their families and often gave and/or lent them money.)
   
   Gathorne-Hardy maintains-- and offers considerable proof-- that while some of Kinsey's conclusions may have been erroneous, that no one since him has done the client interview, the heart of Kinsey's research, better than he and his staff did. For instance, he used a face-to-face interview with an elaborately coded chart he devised and did not ask the first question about sex until 20 minutes into the history. Interviewers never said, "have you ever" but rather "when did you first?" He abhorred random sampling and attempted whenever possible to take the histories of 100% of the members of a group so as to decrease the chances of error. Just as he went everywhere looking for new varieties of gall wasps, he and his group interviewed everyone they could: prostitutes, prisoners, castrates, the Yale Divinity School, amputees, rapists, lobotomy patients, professors, colleagues, students.
   
   Although Mr. Kinsey was denounced by many church leaders including Billy Graham-- after all Kinsey did most of his sex research in the 1940's-- he was revered and praised by many, and was a life line to many persons troubled about their sexuality. He received thousands of letters throughout his career from people hungry for advice and answers and attempted to respond to them all himself. He was incensed and saddened by most of the prisoners he interiewed serving sentences for "sex" crimes, since he believed that they should never have been in prison in the first place. After all, they were just doing what many other people were doing, or as he put it, everyone's sin is no one's sin. His statistics on the incidences of homosexuality in the general population, though often challenged, have never been successfully refuted even though his numbers may have been slightly exaggerated.
   
   Finally, while for the most part, Gathorne-Hardy tells the reader nothing without documentation, occasionally he makes a statement he cannot prove. For example, on page 32, he writes that Kinsey had difficulty expressing intimate personal feelings in public, but that "as often with people who have difficulty here, Kinsey loved small children nd was extremely good with them." I'm not convinced that is an accurate statement and Mr. Gathorne-Hardy makes no attempt to offer up proof. Since this book was first published in England, the author offers explanations and illuminations to his British reader about some of the "Americanisms" here. He, for example, explains the semester system in American universities, defines our corn crop as "maize," tells the reader what "tea room" means and comments often on the "ghastly" weather, meaning of course our 100 degree-in-the-shade summers. They would be a far cry indeed from England's dark, damp Decembers.
   
   You may love Kinsey or you may hate him; but when you finish this biography, you'll feel that you've got at least a glimpse as to what the man was all about and what he accomplished-- no small feat for any biographer.



5. I just saw the new movie, "Kinsey," this evening and now am especially intrigued to read more about him. If the movie is telling of the book, this will be a good read. Thanks!

No comments about Escape From Leipzig.

1 comments about Discoveries: Darwin and the Science of Evolution (Discoveries (Abrams)).

1. The book summarizes the earliest proponents and opponents of evolution, the voyage of the Beagle, and the closest members of Darwin's family.
   All of it is easy to read except a chapter entitled "Evidence for evolution" (pp. 116-128).
   
   The book could be improved with an FAQ chapter, answering questions such as "Why are there still monkeys?" and "What good is half an eye?"
   The book is small, profusely illustrated, and can be read in a short time. If there were more of it, I would give it a 5.

No comments about The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin.

3 comments about American Genesis: A Century of Invention and Technological Enthusiasm.

1. Thomas Hughes provides a critical look at how technology developed throughout the 20th century. The book begins in the 1870's with the inventors workshop and people like Edison gathering machinists around to develop new technologies for profit. This type of work space was based upon proprietary knowledge and combing the skills of those present. It was not a business driven venture on a product but it focused on the business of innovation. From the centers of innovation corporations began to develop their own think tanks and research and development labs. Although the book leaves out the early efforts of Du Pont it does pick up with AT&T and Bell Labs as the forbearers' of corporate research. The military became the other area for innovation as World War I and eventually 2 brought together science and research in a whole new way from the TVA to the Manhattan project. Also included in this new venture was mass production and the scientific management of Frederick Taylor that was employed at companies such as Bethlehem Steel and beyond. The book trails off in the 1970's with the countercultures efforts at rejecting Taylorism and starting into the PC revolution. This book provides an excellent synopsis of these doctrinal shifts in technological production and how they shaped America.



2. The title indicates his thesis. "Americans," Hughes writes, "created the modern technological nation; this was the American genesis."(3) The problem he faces is this: Americans see "themselves primarily as democratic people dedicated to the doctrine of free enterprise" rather than, as he does, as builders.(1) Hughes' challenge therefore is to redirect the focus on Americans and their culture as inventors and systems builders. He makes a good case. Hughes articulates a chronology that logically follows the growth of systems. First he discusses the invention of systems, then the spread of large systems, and finally "the emergence of a technological culture, of mammoth government systems, and counterculture reactions to systems."(6-7)
   
   American inventiveness and technological enthusiasm characterize the period from 1870 until 1970. In its aftermath there remained a legacy, which Hughes labels as "the burden" of nuclear destruction, environmental concerns, and the wastefulness of wars (he specifically mentions the Vietnam War). Hughes hopes that "those who know the history and [understand] the burden may be able to rid themselves of it or turn it to their ends."(12) In his eyes history has a humanitarian message and he is the oracle. While his focus is on technology, his philosophy is humanistic. Government has a role, but people make the difference. This is how history is valuable. The American experience was unique and his purpose is to elevate people's understanding of their role; indeed, their responsibility.
   
   Beginning in 1870, about the time when Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone in 1876, independent inventors were responsible for a "Gigantic Tidal Wave of Human Ingenuity."(13) The number of patents doubled and, between 1866 and 1896, the number issued to each person nearly doubled. Hughes feels existing historical accounts create an unfair image of inventors, as "one-dimensional heroes."(19) To Hughes this is an inaccurate characterization and he proceeds to redefine them as the cornerstones of technological systems.
   
   To make his point he tries to uncover the source of inventor's creativity and motives. They relied on experimentation and their work was characterized by long hours of drudgery punctuated infrequently by "eureka moments."(20) The independent inventors acted on their own free will and followed their own inspirations. They "could not depend on science and abstract theory as guides into the future because they were exploring beyond the front edge of technology and knowledge."(48-49)
   
   Hughes tries to understand why independent inventors chose to solve the problems they did and how they went about solving them. He also tried to get into their heads. Based on their work his analysis disclosed two types of inventions. "The system-originating inventions can be labeled radical, the system-improving ones conservative."(53) Examples of the radical inventors are the Wright Brothers, the airplane; Lee De Forest and Reginald Fessenden, wireless communication; and Nikola Tesla, power transmission. More conservative professional inventor-entrepreneurs include Thomas Edison, Elmer Sperry, and Sir Hiram Stevens Maxim because of "their years of full-time dedication to invention and their establishment of companies to exploit their inventions."(67) This proves insightful and represents original thinking. It becomes a useful reference as Hughes proceeds to discuss the growth of systems.
   
   Furthermore, in delving into the inventor's minds, Hughes observes a unique thought process in problem solving. A "problem-identification technique that suggest[ed] the image, or metaphor, of a reverse salient in an expanding military front. ...A military front line has salients and reentrants (reverse salients) all along its length."(71)"The reverse salient in an advancing military front proves an apt metaphor for a technological system, because the system, like a military advance develops unevenly. Some components in a technological system, like some units in the military front, fall behind other. In the case of the military, ahead and behind can be determined by physical distance. Some components in technological systems can be said to be behind others, if the former function less efficiently and act as a drag on the system."(72)
   
   This is interesting. Hughes realizes he is using a metaphor which might be confusing to the reader so he proceeds with an explanation in order to make it work. It is an apt metaphor, he observes, because "`reverse salient' suggests the fluidity of the course of technological-system development; other metaphors suggesting rigidity and simplicity, such as `bottleneck,' do not work as well."(72-73)
   
   Metaphors must be used skillfully in order to be affective however they can be misleading. Hughes understands this. "[N]ot only poets, but schizophrenics...[can] make such metaphors."(76) There has to be some similarity or, rather than fostering clarity, just the opposite will occur. In explaining the metaphor Hughes not only educates the reader with a deeper understanding of the technological system, but of the military as well. However this is an appropriate technique if used only sparingly. If each metaphor has to be accompanied by an explanation its usefulness as a literary device is negated.
   
   The "reverse salient" metaphor is important to Hughes as a continuing metaphor fundamental to his thesis. The advance of systems technology is not linear; there are advances and retreats along a wide front. This is evident when technological development shifted from independent inventors to a "system must be first"(184) approach that occurred when the radical attitude of system-originating inventions clashed with the conservative system-improving ones.
   
   A case in point is the experience of inventor-entrepreneur Edwin Armstrong and his investigation of frequency modulation (FM) to counter static interference, a "major reverse salient on the expanding [AM] radio front."(146) "Here was a classic case of the independent inventor's radical attitude toward invention and development clashing with the conservative approach of the large corporation."(148) Armstrong was snubbed by RCA and NBC, both heavily invested in existing technology. A protracted legal struggle ultimately led to Armstrong's vindication in court but only after his death by suicide from the stress. In this example Hughes' previous explanation of the salient was essential to the subsequent use of the metaphor and its understanding.
   
   Utilizing another metaphor Hughes describes the Ford Motor Company Highland Park Plant in Detroit as a "great flowing tide of production" and offers alternative ideas which may have inspired Henry Ford's idea for the assembly line. The evocative images of the "flow of production" in the moving lines of the Chicago meatpackers, in tin can manufacture, and in moving conveyors in flour mills might have influence Ford. Hughes also sees a comparison between auto production and the demand for constant flow, mass demand, and mass supply of electric utility production which Ford learned while an engineer at the Edison Illuminating Company of Detroit. Hughes admires the uniqueness of Ford and Edison "who understood that there were no experts about the unknown; no theories, only hypotheses or metaphorical insights, about the uninvented."(215) The idea of mental images as the source of Ford's inspiration is a logical conclusion of Hughes' reasoning.
   
   To make his books more appealing and in deference to his audience, Hughes includes captioned photographs. But there is another, more analytic, reason for the pictures. On the one hand the images help the reader visualize history. On the other hand the pictures are symbolic of the verbal and visual metaphors imagined by inventors to understand their "moment of inventive insight."(75) A metaphor aids interpretive history and also, according to Hughes, in understanding the mystery of an inventor's creativeness. Pictures, whether in the mind or in print, help to clarify history. This is revealing. Hughes, from his literary understanding of the use for metaphors, ingeniously points to their usefulness also as a mental tool of inventors. Historians and inventors have something in common.
   
   Hughes argues the history of technology is critical to understanding America's development but he is not a technological determinist. He does not see American technology as socially constructed, nor is America's development driven by technology because, he writes, "the makers of the modern world...[were expressing] long-held human values and aspirations."(5)



3. From the Independent innovators, to the beginning of research groups, to military research, to systems creators of Taylor and Ford, to military industrial complex systems of production. The first few and last chapters are the best. Edison had over 1000 patents, I have none. :-(

No comments about Bargain Hunters, Contrarians, Cycles and Waves (Secrets of the Great Investors).

1 comments about In the Thick of It: My Life in the Sierra Club.

1. Michael McCloskey has had a huge influence on conservation and environmentalism in America, and he's truly eligible to be the subject of an informative biography. Unfortunately, he should have had someone else write it. I am a volunteer officer with Sierra Club, active at both the local and state levels, with an interest in the organization's history. For that reason I was attracted to this autobiography of the man who served faithfully with Sierra Club and other important groups for some 40 years, and was one of the Club's most influential Executive Directors. However, even I had trouble keeping up my interest as this book dragged along, and I can't imagine any general reader (who may very well crave knowledge about conservationist history) being able to hold more than a polite semi-interest. This is because McCloskey's story, as told by himself, becomes an interminable list of brief reports, presented strictly in chronological order. Milestones and achievements are presented monotonously with an unchanging focus toward their importance and influence, or lack thereof, and there are very few deeper insights or analyses of historically important trends in conservation.
   
   Granted, there are a few useful tidbits here and there, especially in Chapter 13 in which McCloskey discusses how environmentalists can build alliances with labor, minorities, the poor, and business interests; while in a few other places he has some good advice on the specific financial and tax challenges face by non-profit advocacy groups. But on the other hand, most of the book dwells on minutiae of dubious usefulness, most notably the tedious coverage of several decades of internal power struggles within the Sierra Club leadership - passing strife that now means little to current Sierra Club members and even less to the interested layperson. McCloskey is also regularly prone to an underlying, yet subtle, self-righteousness. Once again, McCloskey is immensely influential in American conservationism, he was a strong leader of an important organization, and his lifetime of accomplishments is ripe material for a biography. But in the form of a self-aggrandizing autobiography, his story does not receive the insight and analysis that could be delivered by a professional biographer or historian. [~doomsdayer520~]