4 ms·
> Professional biographers are generalists who turn existing primary and secondary sources into a narrative of someone's life And that's why most "professional
by cambalache 6y ago
> Professional biographers are generalists who turn existing primary and secondary sources into a narrative of someone's life
And that's why most "professional" biographies suck. I am not saying the biographer should dedicate their life to their subject , although it certainly does not hurt, but a certain level of competence beyond "just" reading the primary and secondaries sources is expected for a great biography. Sometimes you get that because of long experience, sometimes you get that because you knew the subject or because you have worked in the same field. If you want vapid books like this one or ,a little less charitably, Walter Isaacson's Einstein go for it. But if you want fantastic tour de forces like Westfall's "Never at Rest", Joseph Frank's series on Dostoevsky, Pais' "Subtle is the lord",Stach's books on Kafka you need an experienced world-class expert in the subject in a multi-year (sometimes, multi-decade) effort.
- spaetzleesser 6y agoIsaacson is definitely guilty of writing very readable but shallow biographies. Can you recommend any deep biographies about scientists or engineers?
- keiferski 6y agoAll of Ray Monk's biographies are supposedly excellent. I have only read the Wittgenstein one, but he also wrote some books on Bertrand Russell (philosopher/mathematician) and Oppenheimer (scientist.)
- cambalache 6y agoYeah, Isaacson revered as a great biographer, is like Jobs being lauded a great engineer. Anyway, here are some recommendations, hopefully you can pick one or two you still dont have: Einstein -> Subtle is the lord, Abraham Pais (Already mentioned) Newton -> Never at rest, Richard Westfall (Already mentioned) Galileo -> Galileo, John Heilbron Oppenheimer -> Inside the centre (Ray Monk), more technical: "Robert Oppenheimer, a life" A. Pais Euler -> Euler: The Master of Us All, William Dunham (This is less a biography more like a compedium, still recommended) Archimedes -> Archimedes, E.J Dijksterhuis(As many on this list, this is considered the seminal biography) Dirac -> The strangest man ,Graham Farmelo (This is a popular account by a good writer). Dirac: A Scientific Biography, Helge Kragh. More technical.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Bakary 6y agoRealistically, how would you know these biographies are actually that good? Suppose we took the most well-researched biography imaginable: a person who pores over a single life over decades and manages to find all or most of the material still available. In this hypothetical case, you are still sold a narrative that is based on the author's own impressions and reading of the material, and the material itself lacks important details about the person that could not be recorded due to their very nature. We can with some reasonable degree of certainty conclude that some bios are better than others and some bios are not worth reading at all, but in all cases you are left with an illusory understanding of the person.
- cambalache 6y agoYou are looking for a perfect biography, that does not exist, not even auto-biographies, those tend to be the worst. But let's compare the Einstein biography written by Pais: He had a PhD in physics, also a degree in mathematics, personally knew Einstein, personally knew most of the greatest physicists of the 20th century. Worked at the IAS in Princeton, published a lot in Quantum Physics,had several contributions to the theory, was a tenured professor, wrote several excellent books in the history of physics. Now imagine a book on Einstein which starts "Dont worry if you dont know who Albert Einstein was, I didnt know either five years ago"
- Bakary 6y agoI won't lie, that turn of phrase gave me a good chuckle
- ck425 6y agoPersonally I thoroughly enjoyed both of Walter Isaacson's biographies on Jobs and Benjamin Franklin. I got a lot from both. What specifically makes the other biographies better? More details, wider points of view etc?