Brian Clegg's Blog, page 31

The Modern Myths - Philip Ball - review

Philip Ball is one of our most esteemed science science writers, so it's easy to think of his new book The Modern Myths as a hobby project. However, Ball brings to this exploration of the idea that stories about the likes of Robinson Crusoe, Dracula, Sherlock Holmes and Batman are our modern day myths the same erudition, attention to detail and careful research as he does to writing about the physical world.

Ball's thesis is that there is something about certain stories that enables them to escape the bounds of their origin to mutate and become something quite different - and further reaching - than the original. Often, many of us haven't ever read the originals. And if we have, they can be quite disappointing. As Ball points out, to become a myth, it helps a lot of the original work is ambiguous in interpretation and loosely written. As a result, we are unlikely ever to find 'great literature' taking on mythical form - it is far more likely to come from genre fiction and more recently other media such as graphic novels.

Along the way we discover a lot about the original works and the way that they have inspired a whole range of other versions and stories that have the myth at their heart, even if they have totally different protagonists. If anything, given the importance of malleability and spinning off variants, Ball spends a bit too long on the original and its creator in each case: one thing that seems pretty much impossible to do is to consciously create a myth. It was quite fun when Ball got onto a chapter dedicated to other myths-in-the-making to try to guess what might fit in this class. Before reading on, I guessed the James Bond books, which Ball pleasingly then listed as a possible case.

Inevitably with such a subjective concept, it's unlikely that anyone will agree entirely with Ball's assessment - that's part of the fun of reading a book like this. I found it quite amusing that when talking of Sherlock Holmes, we are told that he and Watson cannot be fixed points in a changing age, as if they were, ‘the works of Conan Doyle would be like those of Dickens or Austen, treasured but immutable.' But, in fact, Jane Austen's work has relatively recently had a fair amount of the treatment Ball uses to identify a myth. Think, for example, of Lost in Austen, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies, Bridgerton and Death Comes to Pemberley.

Arguably, the humour in myth and in the development of myth is the thing that is most missing from this book - Ball's approach is mostly deadly serious (with the exception of the 1960s Batman TV series). This comes through, for example, in his dismissive attitude to Buffy the Vampire Slayer, arguably by far the most innovative development of the Dracula myth, both in the way it subverts the structure and in its brilliant humour - perhaps he hasn't watched it.

Overall, though, this is a wonderful book for anyone interested in the nature of writing and storytelling and the way that we as human beings respond to story and it responds to us. It's a must-have for lovers of myth and genre fiction alike.

The Modern Myths is available from  Bookshop.org ,  Amazon.co.uk  and  Amazon.com .

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Spot the error

 Every now and then I get an email from a reader pointing out an error in one of my books. I'm grateful for  the opportunity to put things right, even though it's hard not to feel like a parent, having a fault in one of your children pointed out. 

The other day, though, I got a correction that felt quite different. The problem was with this illustration from Quantum Computing:

A reader wrote to me to point out (correctly) that the number in the picture should in fact be 0.7071067811... - obvious, I'm sure you're thinking, but I missed it. 
I couldn't help ask if the reader could do amazing mental arithmetic in his head. It turns out not to be the case. He told me that his job was writing graphics software, and this meant that a few key values come up all the time, one of which happens to be this number.
The number will be fixed in future editions. My thanks to Icon's editorial director, Duncan Heath, for pointing me to this Fry and Laurie sketch, which seemed very appropriate...

The unworthy attraction of spurious accuracy

(Photo: Sky UK Limited) I was interested to see a press release announcing that Sky News was to begin broadcasting a daily Climate Show, highlighting the latest information on climate change. It is obviously extremely good that a broadcaster is taking climate change seriously, but it looks as if Sky has fallen for one of the oldest problems in the book when it comes to reporting data: spurious accuracy.

I can only guess, but my suspicion is that the show has a bit of a problem with daily reporting on a topic that is changing relatively slowly. There's only so much drama you can put into a slow moving topic, but by making the show daily, Sky would need some impressive graphics, including their huge on-screen display. When I saw this, something leapt out at me. Apparently the average global temperature has gone up by 1.123456789 °C  since 1880. Clearly this was just a test number for the display (though it's a shame it appeared in their publicity photo), but equally it seems likely that they intend to display the increase in average temperature to nine decimal places - presumably so it can dramatically tick upwards during the show. But there's a big problem with this.

The good news is, we know where Sky is getting their data - and it is genuinely impressive that they have an attribution for it on their graphic, pointing to the University of Oxford's Global Warming Index. Even so, nine decimal places seems impossibly accurate for a number that is notoriously difficult to calculate. The Earth is a big place and temperatures around the world at the same time can vary hugely, making the deduction of a realistic value really tricky. The Oxford gang do a great job - there's a good paper here describing how it's done. But the interesting thing is to look at the uncertainty in these figures.

In the 2017 paper, Haustein et al tell us that 'the human-induced warming in May 2017, calculated relative to the period 1850–79*, reached +1.01 °C with an uncertainty range of +0.87 to +1.22 °C (5–95% confidence interval).' This tells us that with a reasonable degree of confidence, the rise was somewhere between 0.87 and 1.22 degrees (though it would not be extremely unlikely for it to be outside that range). The value, then is accurate(ish) to about 0.18 degrees either way. This means that the only safe figure is a 1 °C rise. You could probably push this to 1.0 °C. But any further accuracy is pure fantasy.

A value that shows nine decimal places may look pretty on the screen, but it is hugely misleading to the viewer. You wouldn't be impressed if a courier told you that a parcel would arrive at 10.50am, and when it didn't arrive they said 'Oh, that just means it will come sometime this year.' Yet that's far closer than is nine decimal places to one decimal place. Spurious accuracy can result in all kinds of misunderstandings when it is misinterpreted. It can also backfire on the scientists when they have to revise a value. For example, if the temperature rise were calculated more accurately, it might turn out to be, say, 0.9 or 1.2 - this would make it seem like they were stabbing in the dark when they had apparently previously claimed to know it to such accuracy.

So, please Sky News, consider dropping this feature - or if you must make use of this spurious accuracy, please display the confidence intervals on the display too (and explain them). Otherwise the result will not do climate science any service whatsoever.

* So strictly speaking this is not since 1880, but we'll let Sky off on that one.

Knit your own coffee (sort-of)

I have always been very wary of non-coffee substitutes for the real thing, and wouldn't normally think of buying any. However, we get a monthly goody box of odd products that manufacturers are trying to get people aware of, so sell relatively cheaply - the latest including this stuff called Barley Cup. To my surprise, it's not bad. Not great, admittedly, but not bad either.

Its main ingredients are barley, rye and chicory. When I saw the C word I was distinctly nervous, having been exposed to the horror that is Camp 'coffee' in my youth. But it only seemed fair to give it a try.

First impressions is it's a kind of anti-coffee. With real coffee, by far the best thing is the smell - the taste is definitely a relative let-down. Here the smell is... well, odd. Certainly not coffee. Not particularly unpleasant - perhaps roasting barley - but not coffee. The taste, however, is not unlike a cheap instant coffee. 

As a drink it's warm and wet (as they say), but is never going to thrill. It is no substitute for a pungent, real coffee. But I find too many real coffees upset my stomach, so I tend to drink one or two instant ones a day as well - and this stuff really isn't worse than those, with the advantage that it never had any caffeine in it, rather than being decaffeinated (not always a brilliant process), and also doesn't have all the other slightly dodgy natural chemicals that may well be why coffee upsets my stomach.

One tip if you decide to try it - don't be stingy. You need a good two heaped teaspoons in a mug to get a reasonable outcome. This does mean it's quite expensive compared to instant coffee, with which it's similarly priced by jar size.

Review - Rotherweird - Andrew Caldecott *****

I much prefer fantasy novels set in the real world, rather than some swords and sorcery kingdom, so was delighted to come across Rotherweird, with its cracking concept of an establishment from the sixteenth century that still exists in the present day as a town and surrounding countryside cut off from the rest of England with its own rich traditions. Rotherweird hides a dark secret involving gateways to an alternate world and a phenomenon that can produce strange combinations of creatures and abilities.

Andrew Caldecott builds particularly, I'd suggest, on the tradition of Mervyn Peake's Gormenghast books, in the gothic complexities and rules of Rotherweird and the odd names, with a touch of Harry Potter thrown in from some aspects of mixing this with modernity. However, the book stands in its own right as a piece of hugely imaginative writing. Some of the characters verge on cliché (to be fair, this is also true of Gormenghast), but there is some interesting development of them, which mitigates this to a degree.

Without doubt, there is a richness and complexity to Rotherweird's world, combined with a well-crafted plot that keeps the pages turning. I think my only issue with the book is the key potential failing of fantasies set in the real world: we can accept any oddity in the fantasy part, but the real world part has to be realistic. Here there are two bumps in the road. Science plays a significant role in Rotherweird (if not the plot), so I wish Caldecott had got some good science advice, as there are a number of issues with the science mentioned in passing. And the idea that a town could be complete cut off from the rest of England by decree in the 21st century probably needed more nuances. In reality there would have been Rotherweird websites, visits by drones and more.

These are small complaints, though. Overall, a great piece of imaginative writing and I am very much looking forward to reading the two (to date) sequels.

Rotherweird is available from Bookshop.org, Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.com.

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review - The Time Traveller's Guide to Medieval England - Ian Mortimer ****

History is one of those subjects that ought to be fascinating, but all too often is dry and dull. Ian Mortimer had the excellent idea of doing a series of 'time traveller's guide's - telling you what you will experience on a visit to medieval England (here considering roughly 1300-1400).

As you might expect, there's a fair amount of dispelling of clichés about the period, while at the same time showing that others have a reasonable basis. It really was dirty, smelly and often nasty for many, yet there was also, for example, a surprisingly high level of literacy in the middle and upper classes. The class divisions are stark and multifold, both interesting as (as we will see) producing the biggest problem for Mortimer in making this book approachable.

I was particularly shocked by the statistic that the population of England halved in the period, primarily down to a series of waves of plague. And this was in a population that seems tiny now. Mortimer lists the estimated population in 1377 of the biggest towns and cities by size. London tops the list with 40,000. By the time we're down to number 10 on the list (Boston, in Lincolnshire), it's 4,800. Cambridge, for example, struggles in at number 21 with 3,200 people - a population that we would see in a reasonable-sized village today.

Traditionally, history has been accused of focusing too much on royalty and nobles. That's all in here, but there's plenty all the way down to the lowest villein, with lots of enjoyable little details (like women not using side saddles, as we might imagine). The detail is both the book's delight and its failing. We like to get intimate little details, but Mortimer feels it necessary for each of the areas he looks at (from what to wear through to eating and drinking) to detail what what would apply for each of the levels of the hierarchy - something that after a while gets occasionally tedious. I think it might have been better had he followed a real guide book more in being prepared to just focus in on some areas (perhaps varying from topic to topic), rather than trying to be comprehensive. (My favourite old guidebook, England on 10 Dollars a Day, for example is decidedly selective on where it covers.)

What is certainly true is that this book would be a boon for anyone writing historical fiction set in the fourteenth century or thereabouts. It is wonderfully rich in detail. I did enjoy it and do recommend it - but sometimes, reading it felt just a bit too much like doing my homework.

The Time Traveller's Guide to Medieval England is available from Bookshop.org, Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.com.

Review - You Are Awful (But I Like You) - Tim Moore

Not a biography of Dick Emery, but a humorous UK travel book, one of my favourite genres. With Bill Bryson setting the bar and Stuart Maconie managing to better Bryson's approach with a mix of wry observation and genuine affection, Tim Moore had stiff competition. The concept behind the book was to visit places that are widely considered to be awful and see what they are really like - Moore goes the whole hog by making the journey in an awful car (an Austin Maestro) with a soundtrack of awful music, choosing to eat and stay in the dregs of the rating system.

There are dangers attached to this approach. Of the six places I've lived, three could well feature in such a book (though, as it happened, only one did - the one that most deserved it - and that tangentially), and I wouldn't be very happy if they got the same sort of treatment Moore gives to, say, St Helens, Rhyl and Cowdenbeath. The good side is that he gives genuinely interesting historical context to the sad state of places such as Hull or Barrow, but despite his claim to like these places, it's hard not to see at least some of his comments (and his attempts to phoneticise local accents) as typical 'Londoner snipes at the provinces'.

I'd also say that Moore's masochistic requirement to eat at the most horrible establishments he can find (or to stay in total dumps) does not help in giving a good picture of these locations. A Maconie version would have given us a warts and all view: Moore only provides warts and more warts.

The book is not uninteresting, and occasionally entertaining. I enjoyed the historical context and some good unlikely trivia (such as the comedian Roy 'Chubby' Brown's real name being Royston Vasey) - but I think the straightjacket of a format that Moore placed on himself limits the book's ability to be truly enjoyable and fails to give a fair picture of places where real people live. One thing is certain, though: if I'm ever in Middlesborough, I won't be ordering a parmo.

You Are Awful (But I Like You) is available from Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.com.

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

How dodgy statistics can ruin a perfectly good message about recycling

I got a press release the other day which put across a sensible message that people often don't understand what recycling symbols on packaging mean. The sponsors of the survey asked 2,300 people the meaning of various recycling symbols - the infographic shows their results. The percentages are interesting, though not really surprising, apart perhaps from 88% not able to understand the aluminium one. (I certainly had no clue about the financial contribution one.)

So far, so good. But the headline of the press release blares Brits Are Spending 54 Hours A YEAR Trying to Recycle. What? Where did that number come from? We are also told that 'Brits can spend up to 14.2 hours a year searching for a recycling symbol and its meaning, before deciding to give up'. Really?

The press release gives the following methodology (and full marks to them for telling us what it was - many don't):

1.      SaveOnEnergy averaged a ‘big shop’ every 2.5 weeks, with 60 items brought per shop, which worked out at 20.8 ‘big shops’ a year.

2.      SaveOnEnergy then timed a number of participants to find out how long it would take them to: look for the symbol and Google what the symbol meant, before giving up (average of 41 seconds) and looking for the symbol, Google what it means and keep searching until they found the correct method of recycling (average of 2 minutes, 37 seconds).

3.      SaveOnEnergy then used this to work out how much time was spent looking per item, per ‘big shop’.

I did have to clarify the second point - how they got stats for both giving up and continuing. It turns out just 100 of the 2,300 participants were timed and were asked 'to let us know how long they spend looking up symbols and if they were to give up (because it took too long) then to be honest and let us know - out of those (38) who did look and give up, it averaged at around 41 seconds, for those (62) who kept looking until they found the right instruction (checking local council website…etc), it took on average 2 minutes and 37 seconds.'

Okay. But there's one huge flaw here. Remember Brits Are Spending 54 Hours A YEAR Trying to Recycle - not a single person said they do this. And even if they did try to look up the symbols, who would do it for every item in their shop every time? Personally, I just follow my local authority guidance - I don't pay attention to the symbols at all, and I've never looked one up. Even if I did, say, look up four or five of them, we're talking ten minutes, not 54 hours.

So, yes, there's a sensible message here. Many of those symbols are pointless. Maybe we could come up with a more intuitive set. But for goodness sake, people, please don't use horribly distorted statistics to try to make the point. (Oh, and I'd rather not be called a 'Brit' - but that may be just me.)

Wild and Game - review

Like a lot of people during lockdown, when supermarket deliveries were like gold dust, we found a number of alternative sources for food. Most of those have now gone by the wayside, but one that is a continued favourite is Wild and Game.

This is a non-profit with the aim of making game meat more accessible. Obviously not a lot of interest if you are vegan/vegetarian, but if you eat meat I'd highly recommend giving them a try. Apart from anything else, game has arguably significantly better animal welfare than other meats and tends to be lower in fat. But, to be honest, my main reason for recommending them is their products are so good.

We're particularly fans of their brilliant patés, which are up to anything you'd get in a posh restaurant, along with their sausages, burgers, various venison products and game bird fillets. If you're into pies, they also have an excellent range of these. We started with one of their variety packs, but it's we'll worth having a look around the site.

I ought to say that I don't have any affiliation with Wild and Game or make anything from this recommendation - they're just too good not to pass it on.

How to Be a Well Being - review

My natural inclination on encountering a self-help book is to cringe - but I have to admit I rather enjoyed How to Be a Well Being by Andy Cope, Jim Pouliopoulos and Sanjeev Sandhu. It's amiable, quirky and doesn't take itself too seriously (a common fault of many such books).

Inside we find 22 (a strange number) lessons or rules for life, each getting a short section that gives us some detail, some thoughts on addressing the lesson and often a story of personal experience from one of the authors. Although the authors touch on spirituality occasionally, there is no resorting to woo, mindfulness and other such stuff (despite the dubious term 'wellbeing') but, rather, sensible observations on life.

One way to look at these 22 sections is a series of short sermons for those who don't go to church - little contemplations on something important to our lives. It's interesting how many of the rules are obvious. We all really know them. So we get, for example, things like 'seize the day' (without using those exact words), 'life isn't fair', the benefits of saying 'thank you' and the importance of getting enough sleep and eating well most of the time. Another way of looking at these rules is as the set from which most people choose their New Year resolutions (if they have them). Unfortunately, of course, most who do make New Year resolutions break them pretty quickly, which I suppose is why there needs to be more than one self-help book in the world.

Overall, then, it may be obvious stuff - but it's obvious stuff most of ignore much of the time. And it can't be a bad thing to get occasional reminders of the little things which can genuinely make our life better.

On the downside, I found the authors' relentless jokiness rather wearing. The book has the same tone as something like Horrible Histories, which works well for children, but can feel a bit heavy going for an adult reader. Also, while I'm happy to give the book 3 out of 5 stars, which is probably the most I would ever give a self-help book, I very nearly reduced that to two stars for one reason. One of the authors, Andy Cope, has a PhD. Where the other authors refer to themselves as Sanj and Pouli, Cope calls himself 'Dr Andy'. I'm sorry, that just feels uncomfortable to read - it's hard to trust someone who calls himself Dr Andy.

One other disappointment. The book opens by tell us this is a book for NOW (sic) because the world has changed due to the pandemic. I had hoped that meant the rules would give specific reflection on the impact of coronavirus on our lives and how to deal with it. In practice this seems to have been bolted on at the last minute as the pandemic isn't mentioned again.

Do you need this book? Quite possibly, because we are so bad at picking up on these simple but really helpful points in our life. Will it change the way you live your life? Experience suggests, no. But it's worth having a go.

How to Be a Well Being is available on Amazon.co.uk and Amazon.com.

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you