This is a follow-up to the best-selling “Information is Beautiful” and is certainly beautiful with seemingly unlimited knowledge contained therein. The book is a set of graphics each one being an imaginative attempt to distil large quantities of data into attractive single- or double-page forms.
There is so much information on some of the graphics that it is obvious that you have to spend quite a lot of time and thought understanding them and working out the implications, pages 34-37 on Digital Capacity for example. However, I often judge a non-fiction book simply on how many thoughts and ideas it generates in my head, and on that score this book scores very highly.
This is not the place to carry out a statistical review of every graphic, suffice it to say that not all of them are obvious. Pages 38-41 on Heretics are extremely interesting, but it will take you quite a while to work out what the personal time axes indicate. Pages 150-151 show Fertility by country, but each plot appears to be just a straight line connecting the 1950 and 2010 values, and as such seems to be a waste of space since most of the area show no additional knowledge at all. The very nice pages 108-109 on Aircraft Safety rather cryptically include “average fatalities per crash”, by year, but only three figures are shown over 20 years. So every graph must be read critically to separate the substance from the style, but take time to understand them thoroughly and they will repay your effort, and give you food for thought in abundance. Try page 177 on Influenza for instance.
Just because the graphics condense huge amount of information in an attractive way does not mean that the information is actually accurate or true. So on pages 82-85 we see famous people judged to be “True Genius” graded on their “progressive-oppressive” nature. Thus for Edmund Burke we read “Founder of modern conservatism, and all that entails.” Whatever that means. And for Francis Galton, a brilliant scientist, statistician and thinker, we get “British polymath. Pioneer of eugenics and all-round prick”. I am afraid that is not “knowledge” but rather propaganda or plain prejudice on the part of the author. These pages also demonstrate the subjectivity behind some of this “knowledge”. You know it is all very dubious when you see Jesus, Gandhi and Buddha at the top, and Churchill, Martin Luther, Newton and Plato near the bottom! Similarly on pages 102-103 we read “Racists are stupid. Low childhood intelligence predicts greater racism in adulthood, usually via a right-wing ideology”. Oh dear.
Some graphics are quite hard to understand because the titles, headings and axis labels are virtually invisible. On page 33 I cannot read the text at all, whilst on pages 175 and 176 on Action Film actors the colour contrast is really poor. Pages 50 and 51 showing the Composition of Galaxies are certainly visually attractive but I am unable to work out from the keys what type of star they are, because not all combinations of colour and shape seem to be included.
As for the correctness of the data, on page 78 we see the well-known graphic showing the “Countries not invaded” by Britain shows that we apparently invaded Brazil and Poland at some point in time. For that to be true you have to use a definition of “invaded” which is so wide as to be meaningless.
Demographic indices such as population size and death rates would be standard data for reference sources, but this book includes many lesser-known areas: like page 120-123 apparently showing us what Sandwich Ingredients go together, although some indication of frequency (popularity) of each combination would have been useful! On pages 220-221 we see a graphic of Philosophical Reality which is probably new to most readers, certainly to me.
And some of the graphics are seriously funny. Take the popularity of Computer Passwords on pages 60-61. Amongst the most popular, “bond007” seems fairly unsurprising, but what about “whatever” and “passw0rd”?
An entertaining production, but read it critically. The reader should be not be dazzled by the pretty pictures, and must always bear in mind the author’s aforementioned bias. Data presenters always show data in such a way as to emphasize the aspects they want to emphasize!
Graham Healey, Aldwincle, Northants