Monday, September 23, 2024

Readable science writing

 kw: book reviews, nonfiction, science, nature, science writing, nature writing, anthologies

Science and technical writing are notable for being unreadable. Fortunately, some articles are well written and readable. Some. For The Best American Science and Nature Writing 2023, edited by Carl Zimmer, the editor and his helpers managed to find twenty articles and essays that are readable and informative, in a range of technical disciplines.

I don't intend to survey the whole book. This is more of an accolade than a full review. I used Dall-E3 to generate a number of images intended to evoke "science writer." I like this one best. For the sake of this volume, I chose a female writer because 13 of the 20 articles are by females, although one is amidst a transition to outward maleness.

In the Foreword the editor makes note that more and more of modern science and nature writing has a political flavor. This is not surprising. Many of the articles in this volume are based in research related to climate change, which has been overly politicized to the point that few granting entities are willing to fund work that is not explicitly supportive of the "mainstream view," no matter that it is very far from being the "settled science" that certain loud voices claim. While I am at it, I must say that two of the articles are not about science at all but are personal testimonies regarding the consequences of the political climate, related primarily to issues of gender and morality. While they are voices that deserve to be heard, they have no place in this volume.

My second favorite generated image is this one, of a naturalist in the field. Boots on the ground are sorely needed to winkle out all the effects of the increase of both temperature and atmospheric volatility. Articles about the changing populations of certain butterfly or frog species evoke the scientific spirit: "Why has this changed? and how?" 

Science is conservative, in the sense that new things, new ideas, new hypotheses must prove themselves. It is unscientific to accept a new "explanation" that lacks solid evidence. Environmental stewardship is also a conservative value. Social conservatism is different from political conservatism. Let us remember that prior to the Twentieth Century the conservatives (for example, the Tories in England and the Democrats in the US) were pro-royalty, pro-aristocracy, pro-feudalism, and pro-slavery. The constitutional liberals (who these days are called "conservatives" by leftists), particularly the leading Christians, led the way to abolish slavery. Their contention that all the "races" were equally human was based on scientific studies, on scientific conservatism, as much as on religious grounds. We are amidst a struggle to determine where the boundaries lie between scientific study of climate and political proclamations based on sketchy understanding of science.

Scientists would do well to learn better writing. For the moment, those who write well deserve appreciation, and this volume provides a little of that.

No comments: