As part of the run-up to ScienceOnline'10, Coturnix of A Blog Around the Clock has been running written interviews with the participants of the '09 conference... including me! You can…
Happy birthday to Ray Harryhausen!
It's a good time of year for birthdays: today is Ray Harryhausen's birthday! If you don't know who Ray Harryhausen is, you should be ashamed of yourself -- he's the…
Abramowitz and Stegun online!
Abramowitz and Stegun is a classic reference book which contains all sorts of information about special functions and their integrals. If you've ever needed to reference something on the road…
Francis Stevens’ The Nightmare and Other Tales of Dark Fantasy
In my readings for this blog, I am constantly surprised by how many truly excellent authors and works of weird fiction have been (mostly) lost in the passage of time. Fortunately, a number of publishers have valiantly taken up the cause of bringing these forgotten works back into the public eye, and I’ve talked a quite a bit about Valancourt Books, Wordsworth Mystery and Supernatural, and Paizo Press. I should probably add to this list Bison Books, an imprint of the University of Nebraska Press, which a few years ago produced an edition of Francis Stevens’ short stories, titled The Nightmare and Other Tales of Dark Fantasy:
Francis Stevens was the pseudonym of Gertrude Barrows Bennett (1883-1948), who wrote a number of novels and short stories between 1917 and 1923. She is credited in the Bison Books edition as being “the woman who invented dark fantasy”, and with good reason: though the tales in the book are uneven in their plot and character development at times, they present a truly dark vision of the world that has obvious influences on such luminaries as H.P. Lovecraft and A. Merritt, as we will see.
Happy birthday to Bruce Davison!
I'm out of town for a few days, and likely posting light, but I had to put in a short "happy birthday" to actor Bruce Davison! Davison, who has a…
Oh, the things I hear
Overheard at the airport this morning, part of a conversation between two older ladies: "She's really pretty. She has beautiful teeth."
A REAL problem for modern universities
There have been a lot of people of late who have offered suggestions for "improving" the university system, mainly by putting the blame on the faculty. There's been criticism that…
Yet another phishing fail
Sure, phishing emails are annoying as hell, but they're often so badly planned out that at least I can drag some entertainment out of them, as well. I've posted some…
In defense of those “dull” scientists
The other day, Chad at Uncertain Principles linked to a very odd argument on the site Medical Hypotheses: “Why are modern scientists so dull? How science selects for perseverance and sociability at the expense of intelligence and creativity”, by Bruce Charlton:
Question: why are so many leading modern scientists so dull and lacking in scientific ambition? Answer: because the science selection process ruthlessly weeds-out interesting and imaginative people. At each level in education, training and career progression there is a tendency to exclude smart and creative people by preferring Conscientious and Agreeable people. The progressive lengthening of scientific training and the reduced independence of career scientists have tended to deter vocational ‘revolutionary’ scientists in favour of industrious and socially adept individuals better suited to incremental ‘normal’ science.
The article has been out on the ‘tubes since February — published in the journal Medical Hypotheses — and is so over-the-top polemical I’m tempted to think that it is a Poe of sorts. However, it seems to be a sincere article, and so I thought I’d take a brief moment to give some rebuttal.
Best wishes to Eric
As a short personal note, my very good friend Eric is in the hospital today for what is considered a "minor" heart surgery. Eric has been a good friend for…