When I saw Christopher Nolan sweep into the foyer of Senate House with his entourage some time before The Dark Knight took over the place a few years ago, I knew he was a wrong un because he had his coat unironically flung over his shoulders like a cape. I will never get back the hours I’ve spent watching his very long films. Tobes and I emerged from the IMAX after watching the Dark Knight deeply wrinkled with our beards down to our feet Van Winkle style
Haha, you're probably roght. I can mostly remember him being interested in grabbity (which I found intriguing, noone else seemed to care about grabbity) but with the details filled in that takes a totally more fascinating turn. So now that you have wised up, is there grabbity on the moon?
Nice! That dichotomy between "science" and "culture" was indeed strange. I wonder why it happened? And when? But it's over now. Or is it? It is, isn't it? For me it was definitely over when your son asked me " Do you know about grabity?". It's just that noone told Christopher Nolan....
That was when it changed for me too! Because what he actually said to you was ‘Pete, is there grabbitty on the moon, because my mum says there isn’t’, and you said ‘never listen to your mother about this sort of thing’ and I honestly suddenly felt really ashamed of my total ignorance. I remember thinking ‘I cannot be filling my kids’ heads with nonsense, I need to wise up.’ (Also it was *so weird* that you were the person he chose to ask, because he’d never met you and didn’t know what your job was…)
I have always been fascinated by the cultural approval of “maths is dull and incomprehensible”. Some people find it easy, some people find it hard, but no one is shut out completely. Yet in the cultural conversation some influential people make out that it’s a Good Thing that they “can’t do maths”. Personally I find Henry James incomprehensible but I don’t want applause. So there’s that. But one thing we should all collectively be over by now is the Great Man Theory of History, and Christopher Nolan is a very naughty boy for promoting it. (In other words: I agree with everything you say here, and you say it very well 😊)
Ha at Henry James. I went through a phase of reading all of his but must admit I don’t, ah, return to them very often. (Edith Wharton much better IMO.) Was just talking with Toby about the maths/arts division and we were saying there does seem to be something at the core of maths that is fundamentally difficult for some people - maybe if you aren’t very good at pattern recognition, or at visualisation of rotating shapes? I was astonished by how much of my older son’s maths studies comes down to sketching out rough graphs showing the effects of functions - how visual it all is. And if you’re not good at that, you are never going to be great at maths. Maybe there’s a basic human response whereby it’s much safer to think ‘that bores me’ than to think ‘I suck at that and will have to work quite hard to suck slightly less at it’
I think you are right that some people do find maths fundamentally difficult. For what it’s worth, though I was “good at maths”, I am not good at visualisation and find geometric problems hard. But I find algebra and logic more tractable. I liked quantum mechanics because I could handle it algebraically, and visual intuitions were completely misleading so I wasn’t in difficulty (unlike relativity which involves a lot of visual intuition, at least in the early stages). But the thing is, I knew all this was about _me_ and what I could get the hang of, and not about _maths_ and whether it was cool or interesting or “hard” or not. It taught me a sort of humility. Ask my therapist whether it was good for me or not 🤣
Ah this is so interesting. The very little bit I did of algebra at O Level I also found perfectly manageable and quite enjoyable in a neat, precise sort of way (which was always the way I enjoyed maths the most - the feeling of constantly reducing something, physically/literally, until it was at its neatest). I massively struggle with visualisation in all kinds of ways (no sense of direction, have to hold maps upside-down if that's the way I'm headed etc) so maybe that's why that struck me most when I saw how visual my son's work sometimes is. But also I'm kind of interested in why quantum is algebraic whereas relativity is visual! What's the difference? (In my head it's all 'universe' stuff...)
Roughly speaking: quantum mechanics is so weird that you sort of have to play with the algebra and trust that it works. And it generally does, for instance Peter Higgs predicted the Higgs boson from the maths and 50 years later it was finally found experimentally. And visual thinking doesn’t help much at all unless you’re Richard Feynman and he was turning algebra into pictures not the other way around. Whereas relativity is very visual (lots of thought experiments with trains and clocks and cones of light and so on). But in truth to be good at mathematical physics you probably need to be good at maths and pictures and experiments, and I could only manage the maths, hopeless at the rest. Einstein admitted to not being very good at maths. But he was phenomenally good at the visual thinking.
I loved this piece! It made me laugh all the way through and for me personally was very relatable. I’ve yet to watch Oppenheimer and, perhaps perversely, I am now more inclined to do so. It’s always good to have some criticism to push against as well as out and out praise.
My husband is a physicist and it has always been a source of equal frustration and admiration that he can turn his hand to anything. After 25 years of marriage I am resigned to it! I have realised recently though that I really enjoy listening to the discussions of people much smarter than me about things that I am maybe just on the cusp of being able to understand (although I choose to do this via podcast rather than in person.)
I’ve not read Rhodes’ book but I will definitely be looking it up.
Please report back! I honestly just don’t think Oppenheimer was very good (leaving aside my argument here) but I know lots of people disagree. I found the Rhodes book genuinely life-changing. It’s brilliantly written. It is *huuuuge* though (just to warn you). I recommend an e-reader version unless you have very strong arms.
I’m proud of them! They’ve done great things! More seriously, I have an immense liking for Pugh. I think she’s a really talented actor, but I’m also slightly in love with her public persona, the way she approaches celebrity. And the way she gets her bosoms out and sort of requires everyone else to deal with it. I’m not usually convinced that female nudity in a patriarchal society is necessarily a good thing for women, but there’s something about Pugh’s ‘yeah, and?’ attitude that makes it really punchy.
I totally agree! I loved the way she rose above all of the ridiculous discourse surrounding Don't Worry Darling. She said NOTHING. She did her contractual appearances, letting her performance speak for itself. And I watched the film the other day for the first time (I'm resistant to hype) and she was INCREDIBLE in it.
Ahhh I’ve been avoiding it because of all the nonsense around it, but maybe I’ll stick it on one day when Tobias is out watching a superhero movie. I was a bit bewildered by all the whispers around it because I don’t really know who has slept with whom. But yes, she was wonderfully sphinx-like about it all.
Re: Moshe Dayan. I remember your Dad discussing his Dayan documentary with my father, and how difficult it had been to get the balance right. And that was in 1982. I can't imagine anyone would even try and take on something like this now. Nice article. Will check out the Rhodes book.
Hello! Yes I'd like to write about all of that at some stage. There's an amazing story about an off-the-cuff remark dad recorded, and Mossad trying to relieve him of the audio at Ben Gurion airport... What did your dad make of it all? It's interesting how Dayan has been a bit memory-holed - I'm sure not in Israel but even there I suspect he's politically out of fashion with everyone. Hope all well with you (dad mostly hale and hearty, although having recently had a hip replacement he's decided he enjoyed it so much he's now having a knee replacement)
Yes, you should write about this: it would be good to know more about Roy's journey to the cultural centre of the BBC, given his background. Has he written about this? As for the Dayan doc: my father adopted a standard South Wales pessimism about most things, including the intractable nature of Middle Eastern politics. I was surprised that Roy was so equivocal, particularly as it was from him and your mother that I was introduced to the concept of food boycotts and made aware that it mattered where some things - in this case oranges - came from.
If you are going to write on this, ask him about his aborted plans for a documentary on Winston Churchill. I seem to remember him saying that he wanted to do say more about the dark side of his politics, particularly from a South Wales perspective, but was told he could only proceed if it conformed to BBC 'balance'. So, he didn't do it. It was a long time ago, so I may have got this wrong.
Glad the hip operation went well. My father had both his knees replaced in retirement and it gave him a new lease of life. Give Roy my best wishes.
Dad won, obviously - he said the tapes were the property of the BBC and it wasn't up to him to hand them over. Then Mossad checked with Dayan, who asked dad whether he had dad's word that the informal conversations on the tapes would remain private, and dad gave his word they would (because the agreement had been that dad would be interviewing Dayan about his archaeological collection not his political reflections). And Dayan said 'OK if Roy gives his word that's enough for me' and dad got on the plane with the tapes firmly in his hand luggage. Amazing.
Have passed your good wishes on to dad, who says hello!
I enjoyed Oppenheimer but was also disappointed by how it avoided the physics. I guess Nolan wanted to focus on the later political battles and the smear attempts which may or may not have been a reference to our present somewhat fevered atmosphere? I also knew very little about Oppenheimer before this but I had read a biography of Richard Feynman years ago so my expectation was shaped by that.
In general I don't mind committee dramas at all, I'm quite capable of that sort of political nerdiness. And it was astonishing really, what they did to Oppenheimer. If the film had solely been about that - had maybe started with the Trinity test and went from there - I'd have been quite interested. I think the problem was trying to do both. Robert Downey Jr was very good though - probably the only time I've actually really liked one of his performances! Which Feynman biography? I don't know enough about Feynman. Keep meaning to read that report into the Challenger disaster, which everyone says is amazing.
It includes the story of the Challenger disaster enquiry. Gosh I still remember that. Woken by the news on my clock radio on my sister's birthday (it was already the next day in Australia) to it.
Thank you! Ordered. I think I was at school when Challenger actually happened but I remember watching the footage and just thinking about what the terror of that moment might have been like. And that wonderful phrase from the poem 'High Flight' that was in Reagan's speech (written by Peggy Noonan I think?) - 'reached out and touched the face of God'. Brrrrrr.
Haha. Did she wise up by now? Doesn't make any difference, or does it? Do you live the same life knowing there is grabbity on the Moon? And knowing that your mum knows?
When I saw Christopher Nolan sweep into the foyer of Senate House with his entourage some time before The Dark Knight took over the place a few years ago, I knew he was a wrong un because he had his coat unironically flung over his shoulders like a cape. I will never get back the hours I’ve spent watching his very long films. Tobes and I emerged from the IMAX after watching the Dark Knight deeply wrinkled with our beards down to our feet Van Winkle style
Haha, you're probably roght. I can mostly remember him being interested in grabbity (which I found intriguing, noone else seemed to care about grabbity) but with the details filled in that takes a totally more fascinating turn. So now that you have wised up, is there grabbity on the moon?
my mum reckons there's no grabbity on the moon she got in an argument with this guy called lord canine or something
Yes Prof Wolf, a guy who knows quite a lot about it told me there was and I decided to believe him...
Nice! That dichotomy between "science" and "culture" was indeed strange. I wonder why it happened? And when? But it's over now. Or is it? It is, isn't it? For me it was definitely over when your son asked me " Do you know about grabity?". It's just that noone told Christopher Nolan....
That was when it changed for me too! Because what he actually said to you was ‘Pete, is there grabbitty on the moon, because my mum says there isn’t’, and you said ‘never listen to your mother about this sort of thing’ and I honestly suddenly felt really ashamed of my total ignorance. I remember thinking ‘I cannot be filling my kids’ heads with nonsense, I need to wise up.’ (Also it was *so weird* that you were the person he chose to ask, because he’d never met you and didn’t know what your job was…)
I have always been fascinated by the cultural approval of “maths is dull and incomprehensible”. Some people find it easy, some people find it hard, but no one is shut out completely. Yet in the cultural conversation some influential people make out that it’s a Good Thing that they “can’t do maths”. Personally I find Henry James incomprehensible but I don’t want applause. So there’s that. But one thing we should all collectively be over by now is the Great Man Theory of History, and Christopher Nolan is a very naughty boy for promoting it. (In other words: I agree with everything you say here, and you say it very well 😊)
Ha at Henry James. I went through a phase of reading all of his but must admit I don’t, ah, return to them very often. (Edith Wharton much better IMO.) Was just talking with Toby about the maths/arts division and we were saying there does seem to be something at the core of maths that is fundamentally difficult for some people - maybe if you aren’t very good at pattern recognition, or at visualisation of rotating shapes? I was astonished by how much of my older son’s maths studies comes down to sketching out rough graphs showing the effects of functions - how visual it all is. And if you’re not good at that, you are never going to be great at maths. Maybe there’s a basic human response whereby it’s much safer to think ‘that bores me’ than to think ‘I suck at that and will have to work quite hard to suck slightly less at it’
I think you are right that some people do find maths fundamentally difficult. For what it’s worth, though I was “good at maths”, I am not good at visualisation and find geometric problems hard. But I find algebra and logic more tractable. I liked quantum mechanics because I could handle it algebraically, and visual intuitions were completely misleading so I wasn’t in difficulty (unlike relativity which involves a lot of visual intuition, at least in the early stages). But the thing is, I knew all this was about _me_ and what I could get the hang of, and not about _maths_ and whether it was cool or interesting or “hard” or not. It taught me a sort of humility. Ask my therapist whether it was good for me or not 🤣
Ah this is so interesting. The very little bit I did of algebra at O Level I also found perfectly manageable and quite enjoyable in a neat, precise sort of way (which was always the way I enjoyed maths the most - the feeling of constantly reducing something, physically/literally, until it was at its neatest). I massively struggle with visualisation in all kinds of ways (no sense of direction, have to hold maps upside-down if that's the way I'm headed etc) so maybe that's why that struck me most when I saw how visual my son's work sometimes is. But also I'm kind of interested in why quantum is algebraic whereas relativity is visual! What's the difference? (In my head it's all 'universe' stuff...)
Roughly speaking: quantum mechanics is so weird that you sort of have to play with the algebra and trust that it works. And it generally does, for instance Peter Higgs predicted the Higgs boson from the maths and 50 years later it was finally found experimentally. And visual thinking doesn’t help much at all unless you’re Richard Feynman and he was turning algebra into pictures not the other way around. Whereas relativity is very visual (lots of thought experiments with trains and clocks and cones of light and so on). But in truth to be good at mathematical physics you probably need to be good at maths and pictures and experiments, and I could only manage the maths, hopeless at the rest. Einstein admitted to not being very good at maths. But he was phenomenally good at the visual thinking.
Aha. Thank you!
I loved this piece! It made me laugh all the way through and for me personally was very relatable. I’ve yet to watch Oppenheimer and, perhaps perversely, I am now more inclined to do so. It’s always good to have some criticism to push against as well as out and out praise.
My husband is a physicist and it has always been a source of equal frustration and admiration that he can turn his hand to anything. After 25 years of marriage I am resigned to it! I have realised recently though that I really enjoy listening to the discussions of people much smarter than me about things that I am maybe just on the cusp of being able to understand (although I choose to do this via podcast rather than in person.)
I’ve not read Rhodes’ book but I will definitely be looking it up.
Please report back! I honestly just don’t think Oppenheimer was very good (leaving aside my argument here) but I know lots of people disagree. I found the Rhodes book genuinely life-changing. It’s brilliantly written. It is *huuuuge* though (just to warn you). I recommend an e-reader version unless you have very strong arms.
I don't think I'm ever going to get over this:
"I've seen Pugh’s bazookas so often that they now provoke a sense of happy recognition, like spotting two casual acquaintances in a crowd."
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I’m proud of them! They’ve done great things! More seriously, I have an immense liking for Pugh. I think she’s a really talented actor, but I’m also slightly in love with her public persona, the way she approaches celebrity. And the way she gets her bosoms out and sort of requires everyone else to deal with it. I’m not usually convinced that female nudity in a patriarchal society is necessarily a good thing for women, but there’s something about Pugh’s ‘yeah, and?’ attitude that makes it really punchy.
I totally agree! I loved the way she rose above all of the ridiculous discourse surrounding Don't Worry Darling. She said NOTHING. She did her contractual appearances, letting her performance speak for itself. And I watched the film the other day for the first time (I'm resistant to hype) and she was INCREDIBLE in it.
Ahhh I’ve been avoiding it because of all the nonsense around it, but maybe I’ll stick it on one day when Tobias is out watching a superhero movie. I was a bit bewildered by all the whispers around it because I don’t really know who has slept with whom. But yes, she was wonderfully sphinx-like about it all.
Would love to hear your thoughts on it. I was pleasantly surprised.
Re: Moshe Dayan. I remember your Dad discussing his Dayan documentary with my father, and how difficult it had been to get the balance right. And that was in 1982. I can't imagine anyone would even try and take on something like this now. Nice article. Will check out the Rhodes book.
Hello! Yes I'd like to write about all of that at some stage. There's an amazing story about an off-the-cuff remark dad recorded, and Mossad trying to relieve him of the audio at Ben Gurion airport... What did your dad make of it all? It's interesting how Dayan has been a bit memory-holed - I'm sure not in Israel but even there I suspect he's politically out of fashion with everyone. Hope all well with you (dad mostly hale and hearty, although having recently had a hip replacement he's decided he enjoyed it so much he's now having a knee replacement)
Yes, you should write about this: it would be good to know more about Roy's journey to the cultural centre of the BBC, given his background. Has he written about this? As for the Dayan doc: my father adopted a standard South Wales pessimism about most things, including the intractable nature of Middle Eastern politics. I was surprised that Roy was so equivocal, particularly as it was from him and your mother that I was introduced to the concept of food boycotts and made aware that it mattered where some things - in this case oranges - came from.
If you are going to write on this, ask him about his aborted plans for a documentary on Winston Churchill. I seem to remember him saying that he wanted to do say more about the dark side of his politics, particularly from a South Wales perspective, but was told he could only proceed if it conformed to BBC 'balance'. So, he didn't do it. It was a long time ago, so I may have got this wrong.
Glad the hip operation went well. My father had both his knees replaced in retirement and it gave him a new lease of life. Give Roy my best wishes.
Dad won, obviously - he said the tapes were the property of the BBC and it wasn't up to him to hand them over. Then Mossad checked with Dayan, who asked dad whether he had dad's word that the informal conversations on the tapes would remain private, and dad gave his word they would (because the agreement had been that dad would be interviewing Dayan about his archaeological collection not his political reflections). And Dayan said 'OK if Roy gives his word that's enough for me' and dad got on the plane with the tapes firmly in his hand luggage. Amazing.
Have passed your good wishes on to dad, who says hello!
I enjoyed Oppenheimer but was also disappointed by how it avoided the physics. I guess Nolan wanted to focus on the later political battles and the smear attempts which may or may not have been a reference to our present somewhat fevered atmosphere? I also knew very little about Oppenheimer before this but I had read a biography of Richard Feynman years ago so my expectation was shaped by that.
In general I don't mind committee dramas at all, I'm quite capable of that sort of political nerdiness. And it was astonishing really, what they did to Oppenheimer. If the film had solely been about that - had maybe started with the Trinity test and went from there - I'd have been quite interested. I think the problem was trying to do both. Robert Downey Jr was very good though - probably the only time I've actually really liked one of his performances! Which Feynman biography? I don't know enough about Feynman. Keep meaning to read that report into the Challenger disaster, which everyone says is amazing.
Genius by James Gleick
It includes the story of the Challenger disaster enquiry. Gosh I still remember that. Woken by the news on my clock radio on my sister's birthday (it was already the next day in Australia) to it.
Thank you! Ordered. I think I was at school when Challenger actually happened but I remember watching the footage and just thinking about what the terror of that moment might have been like. And that wonderful phrase from the poem 'High Flight' that was in Reagan's speech (written by Peggy Noonan I think?) - 'reached out and touched the face of God'. Brrrrrr.
Haha. Did she wise up by now? Doesn't make any difference, or does it? Do you live the same life knowing there is grabbity on the Moon? And knowing that your mum knows?