I'm confused by a review that describes this book as concise, because I found it to be anything but. It seemed like the entire manuscript had been choI'm confused by a review that describes this book as concise, because I found it to be anything but. It seemed like the entire manuscript had been chopped up into paragraphs and rearranged, then never reworked for logical flow. It jumps from topic to topic in a not-at-all-charming way. It introduces terms 20 pages after the main discussion they were relevant to, if at all. It triggered far too many eye-rolls and sighs of exasperation in me, particularly at the awkwardly syrupy, sweeping, citation-needed passages that end many "chapters."
I also don't feel like I actually learned much new about evolution. "Hey, guess what? Organelles used to live outside! Wacky, right?" Yes, I've heard. That's why I'm here.
The science itself is scant and buried in answers to relevant, but less exciting questions: Historically, who has come to similar conclusions and been rejected by the larger scientific community? Which aspects of their ideas are wrong and right? Who disagrees with the author, and why are they wrong? What happened when she went through the halls that one time?
Oh, the anecdotes and autobiographical information! Yes, these are pivotal events in the journey to her eventual area of study, but I was not prepared for this! I wanted to read about symbiogenesis! RAAR!
Aside from those memoir bits, perhaps the book is an accurate reflection of how science is done. Occasionally you look through a microscope or something, but mostly you're wading through academic papers, dissecting their ideas, and responding to criticism.
That may excuse much of the content, but not the form. Not all scientists can write books for a general audience by themselves. That's fine! They shouldn't! The problem is she did.
P.S. You can't object to the personification of Gaia and then call her "a tough b*tch" on the next page where it suits you....more
This book is full of supercool information, pun intended. Though an introduction, it covers many sub-topics in surprising depth. Without Marchand's elThis book is full of supercool information, pun intended. Though an introduction, it covers many sub-topics in surprising depth. Without Marchand's eloquence, the presentation of hundreds of studies could easily have been twice as long and half as intelligible.
That said, this is more of a textbook than a pop-sci read, so the language can be a bit dry, and is best suited to shorter reading sessions. But again, it's quite accessible; unless extremely put off by charts or the occasional simple (and well explained) formula, anyone with interest will be rewarded with some fascinating insights into the interconnected lives of winter-active organisms.
Life in the Cold satisfies the curiosity of anyone who's shoveled a walkway and exposed a tiny tunnel system, or examined the density layers in a cross-section of the snowpack. It shows you what's actually happening inside the deciduous trees going dormant, and how the evergreens are affected by and affect their surroundings. And, have you ever watched deer wade through snow at 30 below and wondered why their legs don't fall off? Even if you haven't, the answer is pretty awesome.
Finally, going beyond the image of the polar bear on a shrinking iceberg, a chapter on climate change addresses the disappearance of the very patterns and conditons that shaped cold-climate adaptations, and a few of the the ways life is coping (or not) with their now-foreign landscape. That part's a bit upsetting.
Fish, insects, humans... it's all covered. An eager novice deserves an overview that retains complexity, and Marchand delivers. As the second proper snow of the season approaches, I look forward to winter walks with this read under my belt....more
I'm glad I read this, but I can't say I always enjoyed doing so. I paused quite regularly to groan "ugh, such a journalist." More than noting my persoI'm glad I read this, but I can't say I always enjoyed doing so. I paused quite regularly to groan "ugh, such a journalist." More than noting my personal preferences, though, this was a complaint about the conventions that led the author to write some genuinely bad passages. Elaborate metaphors. Bad-in-a-bad-way puns. Repetitive rectum-related cracks. Gross caricatures of pretty much everyone.
Credit where credit is due: she does switch between the trifles of her treks and the mechanism of the unfolding disaster more gracefully than some. So, irritating as the former may be, I pushed on because there was good information woven throughout.
I suppose I can suppress my long list of minor complaints, because this book did produce a well-rounded picture of the interconnected factors driving the current mass-extinction event.