We’re all aflutter here at Mind The Gap: TV cameras are coming to Fiction Lab! Yes, our humble scientific novel salon will be invaded next month by a full crew from Brook Lapping, a London production company interested in making a pilot programme of live footage of the debate, followed by me interviewing the author (more Lawson than Paxman, I hope; I’m a big softie, really). If the pilot gets the thumbs-up from the powers-that-be, it will become part of a regular, diverse series of scientific programming for the Newton Project, a web-based based science channel run jointly by Brook Lapping, the RI and the London Science Museum.
Of course there had been talk, and some demand, for web-streaming the Fiction Lab, but I’ll be honest with you – I’m a bit nervous about the ‘observer problem’. How will a book club, which is essentially a cozy, intimate affair, cope with the bright white lights and boomed mics of destiny trained upon it? One of the Brook Lapping guys, a nice chap called Jim who’s been gamely coming along and participating for months, assured me that after the first few minutes, people get used to the cameras and become as vociferous as ever. Some of our number, indeed, need no excuse to make a spectacle of themselves (you know who are…Stephen and Philip). After last month’s session demolishing Jonathan Lethem’s minimum opus, I took a straw poll amongst the regulars during the bar decompression stage, and even the shyest, bookish-ist types seemed game. I suppose the only problem is if word gets round (oops) and a hundred people show up, eager for their fifteen minutes of fame. Well, I’ll bring my trusty cattle prod.
Details of this month’s choice can be found on the RI website. The book is Measuring the World by Daniel Kehlmann (Quercus, 2007), which was a rip-roaring bestseller in its native German under the title Die Vermessung der Welt. A fictionalized account of an intense meeting between mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss and natural scientist Alexander von Humbold in Berlin in 1828, this book is billed as “injecting musty history with shots of whimsy and irony” by Publisher’s Weekly.
Do pick up a copy and join us on 6 October at 7 at the RI for another exciting installment; Kehlmann himself may very well show up on the night. I haven’t read the book yet and am still awaiting my copy, so I’ve cribbed this extract from Amazon as a teaser.
Don’t tell.
Oh, that sounds exciting!
And the book sounds interesting too, but my “to read” list has itself become novel-length, so I’m trying to not get too excited about books.
That green thing in the corner?
It’s me.
We’ll train a microphone in your general direction.
Eva, I feel your pain. I’m currently reviewing a novel for Nature and when I lifted the package, I almost did my back in. I couldn’t resist putting it on the laboratory scale, and it weighed in at 1.5 kilos! That rules out reading in the bath, and I’m not sure I can commute with this, as it won’t fit in my handbag. (Yet another argument for e-books!)
He writes like an angel, but are a thousand pages (in very small font) really necessary?
Jenny – I know that there is a difficulty integrating real world and Web, but I was wondering if you could perhaps have a forum for Fiction Lab with an item for each book covered. That way, those of us who couldn’t make it but decide to take a look at the book could throw in our observations, ideally (and this is where it gets hard work) along with transcripts of the best comments from the ‘live’ version.
(Having just finished Across the Table this morning, I can’t say I loved it – in fact I think it was fairly dire – but unlike Stephen, I probably could count the ways.)
Oooh, I second Brian’s suggestion. But then I wouldn’t have to type during the meeting. Perhaps any attendees who felt like it could add in what they thought were their relevant contributions, thereby spreading things out.
I used to participate in a (mostly, I think) scientists’ reading club called Dharma Dogs out in Berkeley. It was more of a “reading out loud” group. Because we wanted to impress one another, the excerpts were invariably of excellent quality. Not all were about science, but lots were. Ah, those were the days.
Brian, I have been meaning to do just that on the LabLit forums. It’s a good idea for other reasons, too – I can get news out to the attendees more quickly than can the RI. (Also, the RI doesn’t allow external links without a long period of consultation, which will make it difficult when we do Henry’s book next month! I can see the official text now: “To order this book, type ‘Lulu’ into Google and then do a keyword search for x…”
Tell you what, I’ll see if I can get this together for you and will let you know when it’s live. I’m happy to provide the choice soundbites from the sessions themselves, although Stephen will probably have no qualms about weighing in!
Breaking news!
My copy of ‘Measuring the World’ just arrived, and it is a mere 288.85 grams. That’s an order of magnitude lighter than the one I need to review. Good news for all of us who are running behind schedule preparing for 6 October.
…although Stephen will probably have no qualms about weighing in!
I’m sure I don’t know what you mean…!
Ooh! How exciting!
Yes, but Henry, I’ve heard a rumor that you don’t actually show up on film.
Au contraire. What they need is Cinemascope(TM), or I won’t all fit in on the same frame.
Don’t I know that.
Afraid your beer mug will get cropped off?
No, I’m afraid Henry will squash me like a bug.
Afraid your beer mug will get cropped off?
You’ve been reading one of my novels again.
Stephen
I didn’t mean to imply your comments were unwanted. In fact, the Brook Lapping guy specifically mentioned your quips as the sort of stuff they wanted to capture on film.
My dear lady, you need not have the slightest concern on my account. My tongue was firmly within my cheek (it’s favourite location) in the comment above!
Happily, my copy of the book has also just arrived in the post…
On first glance the writing looks a bit…Germanic. But I have, as always, high hopes!
You did it deliberately didn’t you! I’m in the sodding country for nearly three weeks, my visa came back this morning in fact so I now have 2 more weeks to kill for no real reason other than I deserve a holiday and you time the next fiction lab for two days after I fly back to the States!
You’re jealous! That’s all it can be!
Hmm. That Grant fellow is right. The Brooks is bored.
The Brooks could write a few pieces for LabLit…
I thought he was doing tht already?
One can never have too much of the Brooks.
That’s too much information.
kthxbai
I’ve read a few pages so far…there are two male characters and the translator just uses ‘he’ and ‘him’. My German is hazy, but I think in that language it’s clear who is the subject and object by which form of ‘he’ or ‘him is chosen. I’m not too impressed that the translator failed to rejig the phrases to make it clearer…it’s very disconcerting. Happened about 5 times in the first few pages.
I’m meeting the Brooks for lunch today. I guess he might be palatable with lashings of home-made chutney.
I guess don’t have as much German baggage as Jenny and haven’t been put off by the prose style. Am about 80 pages in and I must say I’m really enjoying this one!
Stephen, it’s nothing to do with German. It’s the English translation. When the author says something like ‘He gave him the book. It was his favorite.’ I have no idea if the book is the giver or recipient’s favorite, which leads to confusion: is the book welcome to the recipient – or is it a sacrifice by the giver to give away his favorite book? This ambiguity problem crops up in any third-person narrative where the two characters are the same gender, but an English author will use names to avoid ambiguity. The translator should have done the same.
I am enjoying the book, despite the spare, stilted style. I justthink the opening was very weak.
(posting to the correct entry, this time)
Oooh. Anyone else having a James Herriot moment?
I see your point Jenny – but this sort of thing hasn’t bothered me too much. And maybe I prefer a certain spareness of style (now and then)?
The devil in me would entreat you not to fret too much about the details of the -“physics”:http://network.nature.com/people/UE19877E8/blog/2008/09/07/in-which-a-physics-experiment-goes-horribly-wrong- grammar and go with the flow. But don’t worry: I won’t let him say a word! ;-p
I am, Stephen. It always takes a few chapters for me to adapt to an unusual style, and then I don’t notice it any more. I liked the descriptions of Humboldt experimenting on himself!
Sounds intriguing… guess I should pick up some more books to read and not only the “immunology papers” I am trying to figure out 😉
I look forward hearing from the discussion to see if more people agreed with your assessment Jenny.
(Regarding the him/he – yes, my guess would be that you can tell the subject/object/dativ in German since they looove their different ‘kasus’ [whatever it’s called in English]. Then again, maybe the author wanted it to be ambigiuos whose favourite book it was??? To think of it, you could phrase it two ways though so maybe not…)
Interestingly, Asa, I was just going to ask my German friend, who read the German copy of the book, to look this up and see if Kehlmann intended any ambiguity. Now I can understand keeping a reader in doubt on purpose, but I am almost positive this is not what K. intended. They are all trivial little examples, not cliffhanger scenarios.
You can’t read immunology papers all the time – you’ll go mad!
You can’t read immunology papers all the time – you’ll go mad
I think it’s too late for that….. 😉 I dream about those abbrevations; ccl2, cxc, inos, ppr, nfkb and other signalling pathways.
I’m escaping reading Donna Leon at the moment. Italian food and crime in Venice 🙂
The story is definitely heating up, now that we are learning more about the two protagonists’ backstories. I love the descriptions of Humboldt exploring the new world.
bq. two protagonists
twitch
Shaddap, Grant. I’m hardly going to call them duotagonists. Bitagonists?
I’m just twitch ing. I’m not saying anything.
And I AM writing!
…just slowly, is all…
Ian, I can’t believe you took the bait.
Jenny, I just found a Leseprobe… I think this is what you are referring to:
_Gauß nickte, die Antwort kam ihm plausibel vor. Er
verlangte ein Buch. Eugen gab ihm das, welches er gerade aufgeschlagen hatte: Friedrich Jahns Deutsche Turnkunst. Es war eines seiner Lieblingsbücher._
The way it’s written, there is no confusion at all, and this has nothing to do with German grammar.. in fact, the author does use names, as you suggested an English author might have done. Not having seen the translation, it seems that some parts may have been left out?…
This kind of thing always makes me wish I could read every book in its original language – no matter how good the translation, there’s always something taken away.
Any read any Murikami? Apparently there are about a hundred additional layers in Japanese that are impossible to translate. We must really be missing out.
Those wacky Japanese.
(Your comment reminds me of Amy’s objection to ‘opaqueness’ over at forums.lablit.com)
pimp
get your greasy hands off my white leather seats, Brooks.