PD Smith

Australian review

03 September 2007 | Curie, Doomsday Men, Haber, Oppenheimer, Teller | 2 comments

There’s a great review of Dooms­day Men on the Aus­tralian blog Lit­er­ary­Mind­ed.

Here’s an excerpt:

“Smith takes you inside the nar­ra­tives of great writ­ers and inside the nar­ra­tives of his­to­ry. He enmesh­es them so that you realise just how sci­ence-fic­tion-like the world has become. You are present and ner­vous with Leo Szi­lard when the first nuclear reac­tor is test­ed in the Uni­ver­si­ty of Chica­go foot­ball sta­di­um. You wit­ness Marie and Pierre Curie hold­ing up a vial of ‘luminous’ radi­um. You expe­ri­ence a ter­ri­fy­ing eye­wit­ness account of Hiroshi­ma. Smith gets right into the con­flicts of these peo­ple, allow­ing you to relate to their sit­u­a­tions, and be appalled at the atti­tude of some of the Strangelovean char­ac­ters eg. Fritz Haber, Edward Teller and Robert Oppen­heimer. The book is descrip­tive, well-writ­ten and infi­nite­ly inter­est­ing. It is also incred­i­bly fright­en­ing.”

Read the rest here.

The return of the Doomsday Machine

02 September 2007 | Doomsday Machine, Doomsday Men

There’s an inter­est­ing arti­cle by Ron Rosen­baum at Slate on “The Return of the Dooms­day Machine?

Hav­ing read my book, he’s fol­lowed up some of my ref­er­ences to the Sovi­et-era com­put­erised sys­tem called Perimetr. This was designed to launch the Russ­ian nuclear arse­nal in the event of a sur­prise attack that wiped out their top brass. It all sounds eeri­ly sim­i­lar to the one described in Dr Strangelove

It’s well worth tak­ing the time to read some of the fas­ci­nat­ing com­ments to Rosen­baum’s arti­cle too.

Looking for gold

01 September 2007 | Ackroyd, Dr Dee, My Books, Reviewing, Science & literature | 5 comments

A few days ago I went on a walk with my part­ner through the water mead­ows not far from our home. It was a beau­ti­ful day, one of the few in recent months when it did­n’t rain. We let the course of the riv­er guide our feet. The water beside us was as clear as crys­tal. Fish flick­ered among the green weeds.

river path

Niet­zsche once said that “only thoughts that come by walk­ing have any val­ue.” I think he was right, about this at least. Things have a habit of falling into place while you walk.

Now that my book Dooms­day Men has gone out into the world, I’m in writer’s lim­bo. For the first time in four years I’m not writ­ing a book. It’s a bit unset­tling. Although some say writ­ing is a flight from real­i­ty, I don’t feel I’m quite alive unless I’m writ­ing some­thing.

But although I’m not actu­al­ly writ­ing a book, I am dream­ing books: I have sev­er­al ideas in my mind for poten­tial ones. One of these embry­on­ic books has even got as far as a lengthy pro­pos­al. But even that is just a ten­ta­tive begin­ning. I need to con­vince oth­ers — and per­haps even myself — that it is viable and can fend for itself in the real world. It can be mean out there, you know…

The pro­pos­al I have writ­ten is for a cul­tur­al his­to­ry. Like much of my writ­ing, it explores the way sci­ence and lit­er­a­ture work togeth­er to inform our under­stand­ing of the world. I think the links between these two dif­fer­ent fields are fas­ci­nat­ing and impor­tant. (If you’re inter­est­ed, I wrote an arti­cle on this a while back and have just post­ed it here.)

But since leav­ing Lon­don I’ve also begun research­ing a his­tor­i­cal nov­el. It’s a new direc­tion for me, but the more I find out about the late six­teenth cen­tu­ry, the more this peri­od intrigues me. The ideas, lan­guage and peo­ple are draw­ing me back through time into their world. It’s cer­tain­ly dif­fer­ent from what I’ve been work­ing on for the last few years. And per­haps that’s part of the attrac­tion. New faces, unfa­mil­iar land­scapes…

I’ve just been review­ing Peter Mar­shal­l’s The Mer­cu­r­ial Emper­or, a won­der­ful­ly rich biog­ra­phy of the Holy Roman Emper­or Rudolf II (1552–1612). If you want to dip into the cul­ture of this time, then Mar­shal­l’s book is a great place to start. The char­ac­ters that inhab­it this world are extra­or­di­nary. Dr John Dee, for instance — the most cel­e­brat­ed magus of his era, an alchemist who con­versed with angels and who spied for Queen Eliz­a­beth I.

Dr Dee

In 1584, Dee left his home by the banks of the Riv­er Thames for Rudolf’s court in Prague. He shared his visions and unique wis­dom with the Hab­s­burg emper­or for two years before rumours of necro­man­cy forced Rudolf to ban­ish him. Dee returned to Eng­land to find his home and the library he had spent forty years col­lect­ing had been destroyed by a mob that believed him to be a black magi­cian. Undaunt­ed, he con­tin­ued his fruit­less quest for the Philoso­pher’s Stone and died with­out a pen­ny to his name. Dee’s real wealth lay in his thoughts and words.

Peter Ack­roy­d’s superb nov­el about this mag­i­cal char­ac­ter, The House of Doc­tor Dee (1993), sets an almost impos­si­bly high stan­dard for any­one tempt­ed to explore this peri­od in fic­tion. There’s a won­der­ful pas­sage in it about researchers who spend their lives among old books and in dusty archives: “we under­stand that we are at odds with the rest of the world: we are trav­el­ling back­wards, while all those around us are still mov­ing for­ward.”

When I read writ­ing as good as Ack­roy­d’s, I ask myself why I even both­er pick­ing up a pen. How can I hope to equal such elo­quence… Do oth­er writ­ers feel that too?

But per­haps writ­ers are like alchemists. They are dri­ven to dis­cov­er some elu­sive, hid­den knowl­edge, either about the world or about them­selves. Pen and paper are their cru­cibles. Just add fire.

Whether they dis­cov­er fool’s gold or the real McCoy, only time will tell.

river weeds

[also post­ed on TNB]

Living with megadeath

31 August 2007 | Doomsday Machine, Doomsday Men, Dr Strangelove, Faust, Wells, WW1

BBC His­to­ry Mag­a­zine has reviewed Dooms­day Men in its cur­rent issue (Sep­tem­ber 2007, Vol 8, No 9). Unfor­tu­nate­ly, the review is not avail­able online, but in his review, Jeff Hugh­es — author of The Man­hat­tan Project: Big Sci­ence and the Atom Bomb - com­pares my book to Gino Segrè‘s Faust in Copen­hagen:

“In a deep­er and dark­er study, pop­u­lar sci­ence his­to­ri­an PD Smith takes the Faus­t­ian theme more seri­ous­ly. Using a wider range of sources than Seg­rè (includ­ing lit­er­a­ture, pop­u­lar mag­a­zines and film), he charts the ways in which sci­ence and sci­ence fic­tion inter­act­ed in a quest for Dooms­day ‘superweapons’ in the 20th cen­tu­ry. From HG Wells to Dr Strangelove and after, fic­tion has evoked weapons of mass destruc­tion and their con­se­quences, and cre­at­ed new hori­zons of pos­si­bil­i­ty. Many sci­en­tists and pol­i­cy-mak­ers react­ed to the pos­si­bil­i­ties, and from the First World War onwards, sci­en­tists worked with the mil­i­tary to pro­duce the weapons and strate­gies that shaped the world in which we now live. Smith’s book offers a much broad­er cul­tur­al-his­tor­i­cal per­spec­tive than Segrè’s, and an equal­ly approach­able his­to­ry of atom­ic sci­ence.”

I’ve not yet read Segrè‘s book, but I’m look­ing for­ward to doing so…

Elective affinity?

28 August 2007 | Brecht, Metaphor & Materiality, My Books, Reviewing, Science & literature | 8 comments

Review­ing Bahr’s Weimar on the Pacif­ic remind­ed me of my own research on Brecht’s won­der­ful play about sci­ence in the atom­ic age, Life of Galileo. As well as form­ing a chap­ter in my book Metaphor & Mate­ri­al­i­ty, I explored Brecht’s use of sci­ence in a long arti­cle for Prometheus mag­a­zine. As this has nev­er been put online in its entire­ty, I thought I would make it avail­able.

Elec­tive Affin­i­ty: A Tale of Two Cul­tures?” tries to move beyond the rather tired idea that there are two opposed cul­tures — the arts and the sci­ences. Using a num­ber of impor­tant texts from the nine­teenth to the twen­ti­eth cen­tu­ry, I try to show how lit­er­ary writ­ers have engaged with sci­ence. Sci­en­tists and writ­ers are indeed lis­ten­ing to each oth­er; and some are even talk­ing the same lan­guage…

I’d be very inter­est­ed to hear what peo­ple think about the books I dis­cuss, and of any oth­ers you know which deserve to be men­tioned.