The Electric Notebook

It fell out of my brain onto the keyboard, and that's all I have to say.

3,468 notes

I’ve never been female. But I have been black my whole life. And so, let me perhaps offer some insight from that perspective, because there are many similar social issues related to access, to equal opportunity that we find in the black community and the community of women in a male dominated — white male dominated — society. And I’ll be brief because I wanna get to more questions. When I look at, throughout my life, I’ve known that I wanted to do astrophysics since I was 9 years old, my first visit to the Hayden Planetarium. I was a little younger than Victor at the time, although he did it before I did. So I got to see how the world around me reacted to my expression of these ambitions. And all I can say is, the fact that I wanted to be a scientist, an astrophysicist, was hands down the path of most resistance through the forces of society. Anytime I expressed this interest teachers would say “Don’t you want to be an athlete?” I wanted to become something that was outside the paradigms of expectation of the people in power. And so fortunately my depth of interest in the universe was so deep and so fuel-enriched that every one of these curveballs thrown at me and fences built in front of me and hills that I had to climb, I just reached for more fuel and I kept going. Now here I am, one, I think, one of the most visible scientists in the land, and I want to look behind me say, well, where are the others who might have been this and they’re not there? And I wonder. what is the blood on the tracks that I happened to survive that others did not? Simply because of the forces of society that prevent it at every turn. At every turn. To the point that I have security guards following me as I go through department stores presuming that I am a thief…I walked out of a store one time and the alarm went off, so they came running to me. I walked through the gate at the same time a white male walked through the gate. And that guy just walked off with the stolen goods, knowing that they would stop me, and not him. That’s an interesting sort of exploitation, what a scam that was…I think people should do that more often! [laughs] So my life experience tells me that when you don’t find blacks in the sciences, when you don’t find women in the sciences, I know that these forces are real, and I had to survive them to get where I am today. So before we start talking about genetic differences, you’ve got to come up with a system where there’s equal opportunity. Then we can have that conversation.
Neil deGrasse Tyson (via yayfeminism)

(via magnificent--desolation)

Filed under Neil deGrasse Tyson science diversity in science

139 notes

Anonymous asked: Hello. I know that you're a fan of Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell (as am I) and also generally savvy about sussing out problematic stuff in the works you love so I was wondering if you had any thoughts on some of the criticism I've seen; of there being only one POC and the women being saved by men & the fact that not all POC of that that place & time were nameless slaves like Stephen? I did love the characterization in the bk & thought everyone had agency. I dunno. Is this a valid criticism?

hellotailor:

i don’t think JS&MN is a racist or sexist book in itself, although there’s no simple answer to the question of whether it “should” include more women or POC characters.

obviously both Norrell and Strange are immensely privileged, but that privilege doesn’t go unexamined. norrell’s intellectual snobbery and classism are constantly mocked within the narrative, and Strange lives the kind of life that is only possible if you’re born into wealth and social freedom. meanwhile people like stephen black and lady pole are repeatedly screwed over by their place in society, regardless of their own skill, intelligence or ambition. 

the book acknowledges the stratified nature of class in 19th century england. in fact, that’s one of the main themes throughout, with Strange and Norrell only reaching their positions of power because they’re rich, white, upper-class men. and then, of course, they abuse those privileges (or at least, misuse them). the book is all about divides: north/south, rich/poor, race, gender, etc. i can’t really get behind the criticism that it’s being racist or sexist purely by focusing on JS & MN’s stories, although I WOULD use that exact same criticism for a book or movie that blithely heroizes a bunch of white male characters for no reason. (needless to say, neither Norrell nor Strange are “heroes,” with Norrell being actively unlikable throughout.)

for me, the main issue would be the fact that while it’s a very smart and well-informed novel, it does join the already-enormous canon of historical and fantasy literature that focuses on white men. but once again… this doesn’t go unexamined. you could actually argue that it’s a takedown of this trend, since strange and norrell both unfairly benefit from being part of the expected ruling class of “english magic.”

re: stephen and lady pole, it doesn’t really make sense to use a criticism like “oh, a male character has to save a woman,” as if we were talking about the latest transformers movie or whatever. stephen and lady pole’s circumstances are an essential part of their story arcs, and it’s made clear that they’ve been held back by 19th century english society their entire lives. i’d compare it to how it’s super easy to find out about the political/historical/scientific impact of upper-class white englishman IRL, whereas learning about the equivalent of Stephen Black or Lady Pole is wayyy harder. And since JS&MN is written partly as a kind of history book, i think that subtext was intentional. WE get to hear about stephen black and lady pole, but the people who “History” will remember are Strange and Norrell themselves, because they have such a foothold in britain’s ruling classes and cultural zeitgeist.

the Gentleman with the Thistledown Hair literally silences Lady Pole and Stephen Black: a direct commentary on the way women & POC were silenced in real life. Strange & Norrell get to be at the centre of attention in british society, while the (equally important) storylines for lady pole and stephen are hidden away in the background — known only to us, the readers.

the entire story is structured to highlight the way strange and norrell can basically do whatever they want (which is eventually their downfall, and fucks shit up for a lot of other people), while everyone who isn’t a rich white man has to put in way more effort — often to no avail. for example, it’s implied that childermass could be more powerful/knowledgeable as a magician than norrell is, but his social status prevents that from happening. and norrell actively combats anyone “below” him from learning about magic, because he has this gross patriarchal belief that He Knows Best. 

there’s also the way the gentleman with the thistledown hair treats stephen throughout their relationship. i think it’s implied that the reason why stephen is so good at dealing with the Gentleman is because he’s used to putting up with people in positions of power trying to control him, or treating him like he’s some kind of curiosity. 

IMO, what we have here is a book where:

  • most of the lead characters are white men
  • BUT it’s set during a historical period where white men held the overwhelming majority of power and privilege
  • AND the book criticizes this constantly, in almost every aspect of the story. 
  • there is only one POC character, and he is a former slave
  • BUT his character arc deals intelligently with issues of race and class in the context of his life and surroundings, AND he’s not portrayed as a stereotype. plus, [SPOILER] stephen black’s storyline ends with an explicit critique of people’s concept of “englishness,” because he turns into the successor of the Raven King — another “nameless slave” (which, btw, is not how Stephen is actually characterized within the narrative) who was kidnapped as a child and learned to speak english later on. 

this all brings us back to the more general question of whether it’s racist/sexist to continue to write books about rich white men when there are so many stories about them already. Stephen Black is the only major character who isn’t white, and his backstory (former slave; now a butler) is probably what most people think of as an “expected” scenario for a black man in 19th century england. (although you could say the same of pretty much every other character, all of whom exist within the specific parameters of their social class.) 

i don’t think JS&MN was a case of susanna clarke thoughtlessly ignoring the existence and life stories of women and POC in 19th century england. it was a case of her purposefully setting out to write a book about two immensely privileged people and how this kind of undeserved, unexamined power generally leads to disaster. if the book had been JUST about norrell and strange then it would have come across as a blinkered view, but because they’re both portrayed as being products of their social status, and because the book gives us a nuanced view of the way this differs from the lives of characters like stephen, childermass and lady pole, i didn’t have a problem with it.

(p.s. i read this book in 2012, so this answer probably isn’t as well-informed as it could’ve been. apologies if i got something glaringly wrong.)

Filed under jonathan strange and mr norrell literature

242 notes

fuckyeahhistorycrushes:

Michael Faraday is a hero of mine—we studied about his works in early science classes, but like in a lot of middle schools, never really went into the history behind the man or the deeper aspects of the theories, experiments, and discoveries. Long story short, he was born into poverty, received little formal education, and despite behind held back by other scientists, depression, and memory problems later in life, he revolutionized the world of science with his studies of electricity and magnetism, identifying magnetic fields and how they effect light and connect to gravity, creating inventions like the first transformers and generators, and creating the building blocks for scientists like Einstein and Tesla.
With the assistance of James Clerk Maxwell, one of the most famous mathematical physicists ever, Faraday’s theories were written in a way that could be understood and accepted by other scientists of the time. To add to how awesome Faraday is, Einstein kept a picture of him, Maxwell, and Newton on his study wall.
If you want to hear more about him, just watch episode ten of “Cosmos: A Space Time Odyssey”. They do the man (and many others) justice.

"The Electric Boy" is a fantastic episode of television.

fuckyeahhistorycrushes:

Michael Faraday is a hero of mine—we studied about his works in early science classes, but like in a lot of middle schools, never really went into the history behind the man or the deeper aspects of the theories, experiments, and discoveries. Long story short, he was born into poverty, received little formal education, and despite behind held back by other scientists, depression, and memory problems later in life, he revolutionized the world of science with his studies of electricity and magnetism, identifying magnetic fields and how they effect light and connect to gravity, creating inventions like the first transformers and generators, and creating the building blocks for scientists like Einstein and Tesla.

With the assistance of James Clerk Maxwell, one of the most famous mathematical physicists ever, Faraday’s theories were written in a way that could be understood and accepted by other scientists of the time. To add to how awesome Faraday is, Einstein kept a picture of him, Maxwell, and Newton on his study wall.

If you want to hear more about him, just watch episode ten of “Cosmos: A Space Time Odyssey”. They do the man (and many others) justice.

"The Electric Boy" is a fantastic episode of television.

Filed under cosmos michael faraday science history