Customer Reviews

The Best American Science & Nature Writing 2000

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

If you have only limited time but are curious about the fields of nature and science, this compilation is a must-have. A carefully-chosen wide range of articles by some of the most brilliant (not just the best-known) scientists and writers currently active. Computer science, HIV. archaeology and Y2K hysteria are all covered yet the book does not seem choppy or disconnected. Any of the short essays/articles can be read alone, for they are all worthy free-standing pieces, but the whole is greater than the sum of the individual items.

There are some powerful essays in this book, which would make a great gift for anyone who likes good writing or who loves the natural world. The best natural history essay that I read this year was free because it was posted on Amazon. It was the sample chapter for Diana Muir's Bullough's Pond.

Of all the annual `best of' anthologies, Houghton Mifflin's Best American Science and Nature Writing has to be the best. I know it has only been out a few years, but in every anthology, 90% of the essays are phenomenal. In the 2000 edition I thought only Wendell Berry's and Wendy Johnson's essays didn't belong (I'm not sure that you could qualify Johnson's piece as science or nature writing). Otherwise you have great pieces by Natalie Angier, Richard Conniff, Paul de Palma, Helen Epstein, Anne Fadiman, Atul Gawande, Brian Hayes, Edward Hoagland, Judith Hooper, Ken Lamberton, Peter Matthiessen, Cullen Murphy, Richard Preston, Oliver Sacks, Hampton Sides, Craig B. Stanford, and Gary Taubes (most of them I had never heard of). And they range over all aspects of science, nature, and technology. Great collection.

It was an interesting choice to try and include the country's best science writing and its best nature writing in one volume. It, to me, was a mostly successful gambit; the writing in this anthology is top-notch.

Quality writing is one part of the story, though. Especially in science where content is king. How do the works here stack up? There are three main styles the entries take: literary journalism, persuasive advocacy, and reflective self-narrative.

Those pieces in the literary journalism category are by far my favorites. Helen Epstein's "Something Happened" is a penetrating look at the science behind the emergence of AIDS in Africa in the 1950s. Cullen Murphy takes us to the desert of Dubai in "Lulu, Queen of Camels", his fascinating vignette about British woman Lulu and the camel breeding-program she's begun. Richard Preston's "The Demon in the Freezer" post-"eradication" history of the smallpox virus is unquestionably the scariest thing I have ever read.

The persuasive advocacy pieces are sometimes ...failures, like Natalie Angier's "Men, Women, Sex, and Darwin" or Wendell Berry's "Back to the Land". Angier argues against evolutionary psychologists who claim that women are _biologically_ attracted to rich and influential men, but her piece is so long-winded and overblown the merits of her argument are easy to miss. Berry's piece is the kind of fact-free politicized "nature" writing whose prevalence is lamented by editor Quammen himself in his introduction.

The quality of the reflective self-narratives is high, if you like that sort of piece. In "Brilliant Light" Oliver Sacks offers a fond reminiscence of his boyhood love of chemistry, and in the process managed to stir my own sense of chemical wonder. And although it doesn't seem to really be nature or science writing, Ken Lamberton's "The Wisdom of Toads" is a sort of "mini-memoir" and look into the conscience and daily life of a convicted sex offender.

Biology and medicine are slightly overrepresented, which is par for the course here in America, but the styles and viewpoints of each of these pieces are unique enough that you don't get bored. The other contributions range in subject from particle physics to Mormon archaeology, a breadth perhaps unparalleled by any other contemporary outlet for science and nature writing. That is the real strength of this anthology. Of course all these writers can put together a few engaging sentences, but what makes this collection good is the diverse array of interesting and important topics the stories here present.

Editor David Quammen writes that science on the one hand is getting bigger and nature "in the narrow, green sense," has apparently gotten smaller, marginalized. "The task of writers who care about one or both of these vast subjects is, among other things, to retain a relentless urge for connectedness and a rogue disregard for boundaries," he says. After all, as he points out in his introduction, "Science is a human activity."

However science and nature are viewed, the requirement for inclusion in this volume was singular: good writing. In that, the book is a success. Each of the book's 19 entries from top writers retains that connectedness in as many different ways. From Natalie Angier's "Men, Women, Sex and Darwin," to Richard Coniff's "African Wild Dogs," to Judith Hooper's "A New Germ Theory," (which explores evolution and infection), Quammen's observation that science is a subset of human culture remains evident and that science is "not so purely objective as it sometimes pretends."

Each of the entries is well worth reading. Atul Gawande's "Cancer Cluster Myth," expands one's thinking in light of preconceived notions. The final entry, Gary Taube's article on string theory lets the reader know that while physicists are on the trail of "a theory of everything," and that they feel they are on to something big, ultimately they are not sure exactly what.

All in all, the collection offers great writing on a wide array of interesting and current topics in science that will inspire readers to want more good writing about science and nature.

"David Quammen" on a cover chains the eye and impels the hand to grasp the book displaying it. That he is the editor of this anthology instead of the writer doesn't prove a disappointment. Quite the reverse. Quammen's writing skills are nearly matched by each of the essays he's selected for this collection. With topics ranging from gorillas to GUTs, we're presented with delightful reading. Every essay will compete for your attention, subtly commanding some time for further reflection, and perhaps action. Quammen's given us readings of compelling interest. Going through this series in one reading may be overwhelming. A pause for personal afterthought could follow each of these articles.

Although a series of excellent pieces, the opening choice was unfortunate. Natalie Angier's diatribe against evolutionary psychology is overblown, overstated and overfocussed. Feminist writers find natural selection a ready target in these days of "political correctness" joining religious fundamentalism in assaulting Darwin from left and right. Attacking an emerging science such as evolutionary psychology is facile. Researchers groping for answers in a field fraught with prejudices and limited information are an easy target. Castigating "evo-psychos", as she terms them, as inconsistent, ignores the problems encountered in establishing a new scientific field. Human behaviour has been the subject of study for millennia. Today, molecular genetics is revealing biological sources for many behaviours giving firmer answers than we've ever had. While she rails at "Darwinian logic", whatever that means, for allotting human male/female roles, the reader can only wonder if she's aware of the wealth of research in those roles in other primates. As a journalistic sniper instead of a researcher, Angier adds nothing to resolving these questions or even posing new ones. Having judged the science as flawed seems sufficient for her purposes.

In striking contrast to Angier's vituperation, the pearl in this collection is Ken Lamberton's very compassionate account in "The Wisdom of the Toads." Quammen's ability to bring the reader into the account has received attention from this reviewer elsewhere. Lamberton's analogue ability gives a graceful style to his description of desert toads and their erratic life. As he and his daughters watch the toads adapting to the unpredictable ways of desert realities, we are granted insight to Lamberton's own reality. While jarring, his admission detracts neither from his powers of perception nor his gently insistent power of his descriptions. His writing commands respect; his close-up view of Nature one we should all emulate. It is particularly interesting that he shares place in this collection with Angier, while inadvertently refuting her.

Several essays dealing with other animals are curtailed in geography, but unlimited in approach. From African wild dogs, we're shown the threats posed to gorillas by human wars, to humans by viruses of chimpanzee origin. An almost whimsical essay introduces us to "Lulu, Queen of the Camels." Cullen Murphy skirts the ludicrous in his narration of the first serious biological study of nature's most useful animal. While many of us think of the camel as a Saharan native, Africa was the last continent reached though natural means by this intriguing creature. Few domesticated animals escape conversion to entertainment roles and Camelus Dromedarius is no exception. The camel racing industry, although rewarding to its practitioners, is beset with unique problems.

While biological research reveals increasing diversity in the pattern of life, physicists are probing atoms for signs of uniformity. The quest for a Grand Unified Theory [GUT] has been elusive. Gary Taubes' account of a quest for a "Rosetta Stone" between Einstein's General Relativity theory and quantum mechanics provides interesting surprises. He turns what could be an arcane topic into a comprehensible picture of the forces underlying our universe.

While the Cold War era produced many works of fact and fiction designed to jar us into more responsible actions, none matches Richard Preston's "The Demon in the Freezer" for ability to frighten readers. We've taken comfort, and no little vicarious pride, in the eradication of smallpox, but Preston jars us back to reality with this account of a hidden global threat. A 1972 outbreak of smallpox in Yugoslavia launches a vivid description of the disease's ability to propagate. That it was stopped required an autocratic government using tactics North American governments would reject. Yet real threats of infection remain, and the source of a new plague may lie in your backyard. Poxviruses move easily through the animal kingdom, and have the capacity to "jump" species, mutating as it infects. Preston's description of pox mechanics isn't dinner-time reading. The pox dissolves animal tissue, particularly the gut, leaving a residue of intestinal fluids and pox viruses. Hence, "don't eat . . . "!

A supporting "further reading" list would have iced this appealing confection of essays. Quammen provides the next thing with biographical sketches of the writers plus the runners- up in the selection process. A little delving with a good search engine has already turned up a few of these, demonstrating the challenges Quammen faced in making choices. None are failures in writing. Quammen has never disappointed and has now added editing skills to his superlative writing ones. This book will entertain, shock, and inspire you. With something in it for all, it's also worth the purchase in providing new areas of interest.

A good book with a fair mixture of diverse science topics. Some of the areas are very interesting, however some fail to interst me. I have read many other science writings that would beat many of the topics covered in this collection, but then my views are biased by my interest in certain fields of science.
Overall a good book. Definitely worth a read.

This is a good book! I just mailed a copy to a friend. One article is about whether or not computers really do increase productivity or whether computer users spend lots of time figuring out software rather than doing real work. Reminds one of Edward Tufte's Visual Explanations about how so many web sites are filled with 'screenjunk' rather than content. Another article discusses cancer clusters and why most people do not realize how random sequences really work, which leads them to jump to the wrong conclusions. One article is about Paul Ewald's work concerning infectious diseases. This lead me to read his current book Plague Time. Very thought provoking. An especially frightening article concerns smallpox and the threat of bio-warfare, and why our government cannot seem to get any new, fresh vaccine made. Many other great articles. Worth the read.

This is a fine read. Many great short articles and several longer ones. The book is written largely for the layman. If you have general science knowledge and are reasonably current with world events, you can enjoy this book. Two articles in particular are "must read" status: "African Wild Dogs," and "The Demon in the Freeze," which is a chilling account of the current status and history of smallpox. Hey, it costs 10 bucks...buy it.

This is a deeply flawed and disappointing collection of polemics revealing the editor's "watermelon" politics, (green on the outside, red in the middle).