I’ve always had high expectations for myself. I’ve always set as my “someday goal” an upper level management position, or a significant government post, or a professor at a named institution. I’ve just always oscillated between these as I changed my interests and my ultimate destination. Many friends of mine never questioned what they were going to do with their lives. (High school friends who knew they were going to be doctors and just partook in their white coat ceremonies, for example.) But I’ve never really known. I took a windy path, one could say, to end up where I am now.
But I had a moment last week that reminded me that where I am now is exactly where I want to be. It was the weekend, I was reading for fun. I was reading Science (if that doesn’t tell you a bit about who I am becoming…) and came across an article about “Yellow Lights” in science – basically that the current stop & go regulatory frameworks that are commonplace make it incredibly difficult to innovate in expensive industries. The article focuses on the complex FDA requirements and high biomedical expenses and argues that more flexible regulations – a yellow light or “California Roll,” if you will – could allow new and safe products to get to market (and help patients) faster. (Interestingly, an earlier magazine (June 12) focused a lot on innovative spaces – primarily in Cambridge, MA and the SF Bay Area – that allow biomedical startups to share workspaces and expensive machinery to compensate for these difficulties.)
Remember, I was reading for fun.
And then I realized I was also reading for work. Because my current task is to analyze the FDA regulatory structures and attempt to find ways the NRC could potentially mimic successful FDA frameworks. And this yellow light idea is definitely one to steal, for it would allow reactor designs that are more efficient but differ significantly from those currently on line to be approved in stages. This would in turn allow the designers to find funding in stages, instead of looking for a couple billion dollars on day one.
And then I realized I was also reading for school. Because part of my research project this fall is to look at other industries – I had planned originally to focus on technologies that inspired a regulatory overhaul, but the FDA parallel structure briefly mentioned in the article (and which I’ve thoroughly researched since then) could also be a perfect case study for comparison. Oh wait, that’s what I’m to complete over the next two weeks at work! And then I’ll rewrite it for school. And the book I’m currently reading for fun is about the beginnings of computer science; I haven’t gotten to anything significant about regulations, but I’m only 1/3 of the way through the book. So maybe my fun reading will become school too. Less likely, but still possible, it might become work.
So work is becoming school is becoming play is becoming work is becoming …
And while I know my parents have discussions where they go back and forth – one is proud of what I’ve done and the experiences I’ve had, while the other is distinctly more aware of the incredibly accomplished people my age who knew what they wanted years ago and have a much more focused resume – I always remember what I’ve noticed about the CVs of the professors I’ve admired and the industrial professionals I’ve looked up to: they’re usually missing a few years. Their resumes and CVs list their undergraduate graduation date and, with only a couple exceptions, nearly nothing can be found within five years of that date in either direction. Maybe an internship with a particularly significant politician, or a summer job at a big name company. But usually, nothing.
I often remind my friends about this while they stress about finding the perfect job today that will set them up for their dreams tomorrow. I remind them that the people we dream to become did something, presumably, for those few years, but it didn’t hold enough importance, relevance, whatever. Even just ten years out, those few post-college years became professionally irrelevant.
Obviously, I don’t want to aimlessly wander for a few years on the assumption that I can take them off my resume when I become who I want to be. I’m not squandering my immediate future because the resumes of people I idolize don’t mention that part of their lives. But I am using this reality – because it is reality – to remind myself that this is the time of my life when I should be doing what I want to be doing. This is the time when I should pursue jobs where expectations at work and the things I’m passionate about align, because that’s how I’ll get to the dream jobs I’ve always seen myself in.
And with that, I’m off to read an article that’s long been on my list of things that sound interesting. My fun list, if you will. I just put it off until an hour when I could say I read it for work, because its relevant to that too. 😉
I’ve been taking the time to write down words this week that I either don’t know or can’t define. Yes, these are different. To not know a word is to need to look it up; context isn’t enough. For example, “novation” was in my readings this week. It means “the substitution of a new contract in place of an old one,” by the way. Words I can’t define are much more common, and much more frustrating. These are words I hear with some frequency, or words I know I’ve looked up before, or even words I sometimes use – only in the same context I’ve heard them, of course. And yet, somehow, I don’t know them. This week, this category included “exogenous” (external), “atavism” (recurrence, reversion), and “concomitant” (naturally associated).
I find it interesting to note that the decision to record novel vocabulary has been associated with an increased level of complexity in my daily speech, as evidenced by this sentence. It’s like the big words come out of a spigot – I can turn them up or down depending on context. For example, I used “magnanimous” in conversation with my professor (yes, that professor) and “ostensibly” while speaking to a good friend in Poli Sci. But I don’t talk like that at home, and I clearly don’t write like that here. (Do I?)
Sometimes I wonder if writing down all these words (and looking them up, and attempting to incorporate them into my vocabulary) is worth it? I’ve had conversations with a friend about the fact that she gets constantly called out by her housemates for using words that are too large; we sometimes wonder where the “egotistical line” is. But there were a few words in the 59 I wrote down this week that were worth it:
- Obsequies: (not the same as obsequious) Plural of obsequy: funeral rite; usually used in plural. [Side note: I have NO IDEA why this was on my list – it came out of a political science/sociology reading, but I didn’t write down the page number, so I have been unable to find the original sentence. Regardless, the fact that funeral rites were mentioned in my reading is humorous to me.]
- Exult: rejoice [intransitive]. Not to be confused with “exalt.” (to glorify something [transitive])
- Sedulous: assiduous, diligent. Assiduous: sedulous, diligent. I’m serious. (Okay, I was judicious in paring down the definitions for these to make a point…) These words were on the same page in one of my readings; I don’t think I ever knew they were different words until that page. The connotations, however, are different. Sedulous implies constant and unwavering commitment, persistence, while assiduous can be temporary, but no less intense.
- Convolve: entwine. Not only a math term, although I did read it in a physics reading, so it probably hasn’t escaped the sciences. Yet.
- Puerile: trivial, childish. I think that someone, somewhere in my past should be despised for having described me as puerile…
In case it wasn’t already clear, I like words. I like derivations. (The linguistic ones, and the computational ones to a lesser extent.) I listen to a podcast – A Way with Words – every so often that answers questions about the history of words and phrases, which is wonderful. I discuss etymology over breakfast, psychology over dinner, and nuclear physics over lunch. I’m a weird one.
[By the way, if you or someone you know is taking the SAT sometime soon, (baby brother, I’m looking at you!) or even the LSAT, they should probably read this post. Words in bold and words in italics are probably all on those crazy-long word lists kids are supposed to memorize in order to prove they’re “smart”.]
As a student of the sciences, I think it is high time I thank the people who have saved me over and over again over the years. And no, I’m not talking about my parents. (Although they did provide me with a brain capable of comprehending…so thanks to you too, I guess.)
No, I’m talking about all those authors who write science books for non-scientists. This is a genre of books I’ve always loved. I loved the science for kids books and, as I grew up, I’ve loved books that explain something (anything, really!) to me. But this week, I need to express a particular appreciation for Richard Martin, author of Super Fuel.
Eventually, I’ll finish the book, and you’ll get a TBTW about it, I promise! But for now, I just need to say:
If you got past Science 101 in college, then you know that science textbooks go very quickly (read: instantaneously) from 1) a superficial overview of a number of topics that include gross generalizations and simplifications in order to expose the student to a broad swath of the subject to 2) a very specific consideration of a topic that assumes complex understanding of about a million classes you never took.
For example, in chemistry, quantum mechanics assumes you already understand all of kinematics, and kinematics assumes you get quantum mechanics (does anyone really get quantum mechanics?) Or in physics, where the advanced lab course requires the topics taught in optics, and optics requires the lab technique taught in the advanced lab course. Regardless of the science you’re studying, there will come a time when the textbook assumes intimate knowledge of topics you’ve never heard of (and the Wikipedia page is similarly bad) and you will want to cry because nothing you’re supposed to be learning makes sense.
Enter science for non-scientists. Specifically, books that have to do with topics you’re intimately interested in.
Because every so often, your Fundamentals of Nuclear Reactor Physics textbook’s pages upon pages of equations do an exemplary job at explaining something like nuclear flux without any actual words, so the wikipedia page (which is all words, and no equations) makes just as much sense. But then the kind science writer explains “in technical terms the ‘neutron flux’ – the density of neutrons zipping around” (pg 68) and all those equations instantly make sense. In just two pages, the entire chapter that made very little, if any, sense at all, suddenly makes sense now. Not because the author incredibly compacted 40 pages of equations into two pages of text, but because he provided the words and the analogies that made the complex ideas “click.”
So thanks, Mr. Martin. I look forward to the next 150 pages of your book.
(And yes, when I got fed up with my nuclear physics, I went running to nuclear physics to escape. Don’t judge.)
I’m trying really hard to get a full book each week this semester and so far, that’s been working out for me. That trend might be coming to an end soon, between my new Science subscription and the end of the snow dayz… we’ll see.
Regardless, this week’s book was an interesting application of psychology focused on medical professionals (doctors, nurses, surgeons, etc.) As someone who isn’t in the medical profession, I must admit I don’t typically think about the impacts of emotion and emotion regulation on my doctors. But Dr Ofri’s book deals directly with this issue, addressing questions such as: does the stress of the medical education process positively or negatively impact doctors’ abilities to connect to and treat patients? when a doctor makes an (inevitable) mistake, how does the process let them heal alongside the patient and/or the patient’s family?
I first bought this book on a whim of sorts over Thanksgiving, and Claire – who studies psychology – borrowed it over break. She loved it so much that it quickly rose to the top of my reading list. If I’m being honest, I think she liked it a lot more than I did, probably because of the psychology aspect. I didn’t dislike What Doctors Feel – it was well written, interesting, and certainly informative. But I also didn’t love it. I’d strongly recommend it as a book for people interested in psychology, or the medical profession. It definitely taught me many things, and gave me a new insight to the real world of doctors. It also explains why I don’t like my primary care physician very much… we operate on different wavelengths.
Anyway, this book gets a “meh.” I’ve got nothing against it, but nothing about it strikes me as phenomenal. Last week’s book, on the other hand, is still burning holes through my mind.
This is the first of the books of 2015 that are not by American authors. (Don’t know what I’m talking about? Read this post’s footnote.) NoViolet Bulawayo is a young author (33) from Zimbabwe, though she attended school here in the States and was also a fellow at Stanford. She has thus far written just the one novel, We Need New Names, which I loved (as did the entire literary world, if the awards/shortlists are any indication).
In short, it is beautiful. Her style runs the gamut from verbose to terse, but never accidentally. The imagery is phenomenal, the characters are crystalline, and you can almost taste the emotions. We Need New Names follows young Darling, who grows up in Zimbabwe with her mother and her friends. Everything comes to the reader through the eyes and mind of Darling, who is just ten when the story starts. As Darling grows up, buries her father and abandons her friends for the green grasses of America, the reader grows up as well, exposed to an increasingly complex understanding of the issues at hand. Some issues, which I’m sure Bulawayo herself has had to deal with, include well-meaning American mothers asking about the issues at “home” – meaning the continent, of course. Because, just as you and I can provide testimony on the racial tensions present tonight in Ferguson or New Jersey, Darling can explain the historical basis of conflict in the Congo or Sudan. (Which are approximately 2500 and 4000 km, respectively, from Zimbabwe)
There were moments where I wanted to stop reading because it was too hard. There were moments where I wanted to stop reading because it was too beautiful. There was at least moment when I wanted to get up and dance:
After the food comes the music…old songs I remember from when I was little. … When they dance, I always stand by the door and watch because it is something to see.
They dance strange. Limbs jerk and bodies contort. They lean forward like they are planting grain, sink to the floor, rise as whips and lash the air. They huddle like cattle in a kraal, then scatter like broken bones. They gather themselves, look up, and shield their faces from the sun and beckon the rain with their hands. When it doesn’t come they shake their heads in disappointment and then get down, sinking-sinking-sinking like ships drowning.
Perhaps because I spent last semester studying African dances this meant something more to me, but I could imagine the men and women literally dancing off the page and all I wanted was to get up and join them. But other parts made me nearly cry, because of the heart-wrenching reality of the lives people around the world lead, so brilliantly described in this passage:
There are two homes inside my head: home before Paradise, and home in Paradise; home one and home two. Home one was best. … There are three homes inside Mother’s and Aunt Fostalina’s heads: home before independence, … home after independence, … and then the home of things falling apart, which made Aunt Fostalina leave and come here. Home one, home two, and home three. There are four homes inside Mother of Bones’s head: home before the white people came to steal the country, and a king ruled; home when the white people came to steal the country and then there was war; home when black people got our stolen country back after independence; and then the home of now. Home one, home two, home three, home four.
Needless to say, I enjoyed We Need New Names. Filled with humor through darkness, home to a stumbling girl trying to find her way, and written as if each moment was truly experienced by Bulawayo herself, this debut novel worms its way into your heart and then sits there. A fabulous way to kick off the 2015 reading challenge to read other nations’ authors, I would strongly recommend it to any adult looking for their next book.
I’m pretty sure I’ve read this book before. For anyone who hasn’t read the book or seen the movie, it chronicles Julie Powell’s year long journey through Julia Child’s Mastering the Art of French Cooking, Volume 1. The book isn’t some sort of literary genius, but as light-hearted fare with a bit of self-deprecation, some swearing, and many a recipe go, Julie & Julia ranks pretty darn high. There isn’t, honestly, much to say about it. Written much like a blog, the writing is casual, unstructured. I enjoyed it, and five years from now, I’ll probably end up picking it up in a moment of boredom and reading it again. It isn’t short (309 pages), but it isn’t long either.
If anything, Julie Powell’s experience – the cookbook, the blog, the book, the movie – makes me want to pick up a cookbook (let’s be honest, it would probably be the Smitten Kitchen cookbook sitting forlornly downstairs) and cook my way from front to back. Or, because you should always go with desert first, from back to front.
But the book itself doesn’t make me want to shout from the rooftops or anything. If you like cooking, this would be fun. If you’re looking for light fare that is unlikely to disappoint, this would be great. If you want a book with Meryl Streep on the cover, go to the nearest bookstore (or, at this point, library…) If you don’t fall into that category, I might suggest something from this list instead.
It’s been a while since I even thought about actually typing up a book review, mostly because I’ve been too busy reading. I just finished Winter Break, during which I read 3,300 pages (13 books) and I’ve already nearly finished another. Nonetheless, family asked over break why I’m not more consistent with my books (by family, I mean brother…) and so we’ll see what we can do.
I considered writing a bunch of reviews of books I’ve already finished, and then just publishing them one by one, but that feels like cheating to me. The whole idea of TBTW was to write about the books as I read them, and I’d like to stick to that. But I also respect the need for reviews, so here are some mini-reviews for the books I read over break. I’m officially accepting requests; I’ll write one or two TBTW’s by the end of January based on requests from you, fabulous readers, of which book(s) you’d like to know more about.
The Winter Break List:
The 17 Equations that Changed the World, Ian Stewart: This was a book I finished over break and then promptly gave to my dad for Christmas. Interesting discussion that ranges from geometry to computer science and everywhere in between. Definitely recommend for anyone who likes math/science or who is vaguely interested in how it relates to our world. You don’t need a subject background, but it helps. (I liked the chem and physics chapters significantly more that the comp sci chapters, for example.)
The Martian, Andy Weir: Unless you’re an English teacher or less than 13 years old, yes! yes! yes! Accept the initial premise that there are humans on Mars, and this instantly becomes a wonderful book with incredibly accurate science about how he survives on the red planet. Not recommended for children because of intense language.
10:04, Ben Lerner: Meh. Interesting structure – the book starts in the middle of the protagonist’s life and ends in the middle of his life and nothing much of interest happens, much like my life, your life, and pretty much anyone’s life. Two stars.
A Child’s Christmas in Wales, Dylan Thomas: Given to me by my neighbor, this is an old children’s story. It’s sweet, enjoyable, but already out of season until next December, I suppose.
The Madame Curie Complex, Julie des Jardins: I got this book when the author came to speak at Tufts; she has an incredible knowledge of the history of women in science, and that certainly shows in this book. A series of mini-biographies of women who have been essentially written out of history, it starts with an explanation of how history has blown Madame Curie into epic, and unobtainable proportions, before revealing the negative impacts of that female-scientist mythology on later scientists, including the Harvard Observatory women and Jane Goodall.
Maidenhair, Mikhail Shishkin: Hailed as the next Dostoevsky, Shishkin certainly has a tight writing style. This book, his debut, follows four unnamed characters through multiple time periods in modern European history. Throughout the last third of the novel, the beginning comes back, and it makes you want to immediately go back to page one and look for the connections. Definitely a book that requires serious analysis, but also a book that I’d probably enjoy seriously analyzing.
Countdown to Zero Day, Kim Zetter: This is the non-fictional, and yet incredibly suspenseful, account of the US government’s Stuxnet attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. Tracking both the history and the aftereffects, Zetter effectively weaves explanation, intrigue, a bit of fear, and some discovery into a well-written jaunt through the first cyber-attack (that we know of).
Devil in the White City, Erik Larson: Not a new book, but new to me, this may have been my favorite of all the books I read over break. It is set during the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair, and tracks both the head architect and a serial killer living next door to the fair itself. I learned all sorts of new facts. (Did you know this was where the first ever Ferris wheel was built, which was designed by Mr. Ferris, and widely considered impossibly dangerous until nobody died?) It was also suspenseful, interesting, and accurate. Definitely a book to recommend.
The Strange Library, Haruki Murakami: This book confuses me. First, it was published in Japanese something like a decade ago, and then the translation was hailed as an “explanation” of Murakami’s interwoven worlds. This is patently false, although it probably sold a lot of books. This one is short (approx. 60 pages) and filled with illustrations, which makes it feel like a children’s book. The simplicity of plot and lack of many of Murakami’s common features (including a distinct lack of sex) also supports that assertion. It was good, though.
Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and his Years of Pilgrimage, Haruki Murakami: This is the most recent of Murakami’s works, and you can tell – his language remains mature and in line with his other later works. Nonetheless, the plot seems simple and the language loose, as if a publisher was forcing the author himself or perhaps the translator to bring the book to market quickly, probably in time for the holiday season. A good book, but not his best.
The Rosie Project, Graeme Simsion: One of the funniest books I’ve read in a long time, and a great way to start off my 2015, but also surprisingly potent, a bit emotional, and probably a good book for anyone to read. A professor with Asperger’s sets out to find a wife, and discovers Rosie. This novel chronicles his ups and downs, his challenges, and his ability to conform to society. I’d definitely recommend this one.
The Power of Noticing, Max Bazerman: Boring! Unless you enjoy reading pretentious Harvard professors telling you the same thing over and over again for a couple hundred pages, this is probably not the book for you. Here, I’ll give you the gist: Question everything, especially your own assumptions, and always assume you don’t have all the information you need. Then question that. There, have a good day!
Fever, Mary Beth Keane: For anyone who read and liked The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, this is a good book. The story of Typhoid Mary, it is historical fiction (not journalistic history) told very well. Perhaps, between this book and Devil in the White City, I’m starting to fall for the historical fiction genre. Once again, I learned a lot about Mary that I didn’t know before, and I have a slightly different view not of her, but of the NYC police that failed to deal with her amicably. Recommend.