What do you think?
Rate this book
The Science of Shakespeare: A New Look at the Playwright's Universe
William Shakespeare lived at a remarkable time―a period we now recognize as the first phase of the Scientific Revolution. New ideas were transforming Western thought, the medieval was giving way to the modern, and the work of a few key figures hinted at the brave new world to the methodical and rational Galileo, the skeptical Montaigne, and―as Falk convincingly argues―Shakespeare, who observed human nature just as intently as the astronomers who studied the night sky.
In The Science of Shakespeare, we meet a colorful cast of Renaissance thinkers, including Thomas Digges, who published the first English account of the "new astronomy" and lived in the same neighborhood as Shakespeare; Thomas Harriot―"England's Galileo"―who aimed a telescope at the night sky months ahead of his Italian counterpart; and Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, whose observatory-castle stood within sight of Elsinore, chosen by Shakespeare as the setting for Hamlet ―and whose family crest happened to include the names "Rosencrans" and "Guildensteren." And then there's Galileo As Falk shows, his telescopic observations may have influenced one of Shakespeare's final works. Dan Falk's The Science of Shakespeare explores the connections between the famous playwright and the beginnings of the Scientific Revolution―and how, together, they changed the world forever.
In The Science of Shakespeare, we meet a colorful cast of Renaissance thinkers, including Thomas Digges, who published the first English account of the "new astronomy" and lived in the same neighborhood as Shakespeare; Thomas Harriot―"England's Galileo"―who aimed a telescope at the night sky months ahead of his Italian counterpart; and Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, whose observatory-castle stood within sight of Elsinore, chosen by Shakespeare as the setting for Hamlet ―and whose family crest happened to include the names "Rosencrans" and "Guildensteren." And then there's Galileo As Falk shows, his telescopic observations may have influenced one of Shakespeare's final works. Dan Falk's The Science of Shakespeare explores the connections between the famous playwright and the beginnings of the Scientific Revolution―and how, together, they changed the world forever.
384 pages, Hardcover
First published April 1, 2014
About the author
Dan Falk
11 books44 followersI'm a science journalist, author, and broadcaster based in Toronto, Canada. I've written three books so far: My first book, Universe on a T-Shirt, looked at the quest for a unified theory of physics, while In Search of Time explored the physics and philosophy of time.
I'm very excited about my new book, The Science of Shakespeare, to be published this April! This time I turn the clock back 400 years, investigating the period we now call the Scientific Revolution, and looking at the interplay between science and literature in the age of Shakespeare.
The book is published in the U.S. by St. Martin's Press and in Canada by Goose Lane.
Visit my website at www.danfalk.ca -- I'd love to hear what you think of my books!
I'm very excited about my new book, The Science of Shakespeare, to be published this April! This time I turn the clock back 400 years, investigating the period we now call the Scientific Revolution, and looking at the interplay between science and literature in the age of Shakespeare.
The book is published in the U.S. by St. Martin's Press and in Canada by Goose Lane.
Visit my website at www.danfalk.ca -- I'd love to hear what you think of my books!
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 35 reviews
March 20, 2014
I received a copy of this book for free through a Goodreads First Reader Giveaway.
As with all things Shakespeare, there's a lack of true "proof" for much of what the author is arguing, but he talks quite openly about that. The book is presented very clearly as a theory, and gives a fascinating overview of the world Shakespeare lived in, and the many theories and discoveries he could have encountered. I really enjoyed the depth given to the history of the time, and the care the author took in making clear the way the world was changing while Shakespeare was alive and writing.
As with all things Shakespeare, there's a lack of true "proof" for much of what the author is arguing, but he talks quite openly about that. The book is presented very clearly as a theory, and gives a fascinating overview of the world Shakespeare lived in, and the many theories and discoveries he could have encountered. I really enjoyed the depth given to the history of the time, and the care the author took in making clear the way the world was changing while Shakespeare was alive and writing.
May 27, 2014
Unless you have a particular interest in astronomy, you might find there is too much science and too little Shakespeare in this book. Falk, a Canadian science journalist with two previous physics books under his belt, is at his best when weaving in on-the-ground tales of library and museum visits, or anecdotes about tracking down Shakespeare sites in Stratford and London. Especially delightful is his “time traveler’s walk” through London, in which he imagines twenty-first century trappings dropping away to uncover what Shakespeare himself would have seen.
Still, he gracefully achieves his aim of reconciling Shakespeare’s writings with the science of his day: “[T]here is no need to imagine art and science in competition...Science has given us a new world, and Shakespeare illuminates our place in it”—even 450 years on.
(See my full review at BookTrib.)
Still, he gracefully achieves his aim of reconciling Shakespeare’s writings with the science of his day: “[T]here is no need to imagine art and science in competition...Science has given us a new world, and Shakespeare illuminates our place in it”—even 450 years on.
(See my full review at BookTrib.)
September 12, 2019
Very interesting and well written.
I wouldn’t say that it would be good for the layman. I relied a lot of my knowledge from my degree about what was going on at the time and who the major modern thinkers are that Falk name dropped.
I wouldn’t say that it would be good for the layman. I relied a lot of my knowledge from my degree about what was going on at the time and who the major modern thinkers are that Falk name dropped.
April 27, 2014
Liking science, Shakespeare, and history this was a great read. The Science of Shakespeare is accessibly written with delightful asides as well.
I received my copy from Goodreads First Reads and have already passed it on to my sister.
I received my copy from Goodreads First Reads and have already passed it on to my sister.
January 17, 2014
Such an epic read on shakespeare and his perspective. anyone looking for a fabulous read, choose this!
May 7, 2020
Great introduction to science and Shakespeare. Falk writes clearly and effectively while peppering humor into this brilliant overview of renaissance science and literature.
June 7, 2014
Around the time of Shakespeare there were two views of the solar system: the older view was Earth-centered (Ptolemaic), and the newer view was Sun-centered (Copernican). In The Science of Shakespeare, Dan Falk provides a wonderfully accessible history lesson explaining these two astronomical systems--how the Ptolemaic view dominated for so long and then was overtaken by the Copernican theory (roughly around the time Shakespeare wrote Hamlet). If Mr. Falk’s book had been solely, or even mostly, about this crucial history lesson, I would probably be writing a four-star review. I am not.
At the heart of Falk’s book is a vein of wishful-thinking that borders on conspiracy theory. What begins as an informative interdisciplinary discussion--examining the intersection of Elizabethan drama and modern science—by Chapter 7 diverts in to a scholastic pipedream with Shakespeare being a closeted devotee of Copernican astronomy. Perhaps, the author and his chief source suggest, Hamlet is more than just a great play. Perhaps it is also a clever and elaborate allegory exploring the revolutionary discoveries of Galileo et al. What if the characters in Hamlet are actually symbolic stand-ins for the leading thinkers of Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomies?
As Falk grants by way of academic integrity, prevailing literary theory finds this hypothesis flimsy. Shakespeare’s plays have clear, unmistakable, and fully-developed themes. Science-flattering allegory is not one of them. It smacks of the same contrived, cherry-picking investigation that lies at the core of conspiracy theories--like the one about Shakespeare not being the author of any or all of those plays. This does not stop Falk from devoting a lot of ink and credulity to the idea. It is as if Falk wants to be the Copernicus of Shakespearean scholarship--establishing a new unifying truth of what the Bard's plays really mean, a revelation that has eluded centuries of previous thinkers.
To his credit, Falk makes clear the highly speculative nature of suggesting Shakespeare had his finger on the pulse of the Scientific Revolution. Furthermore, I am not offended that Falk addressed the notion of Hamlet as science allegory. I am annoyed at how hard he worked to make it look compelling. I come at this as a Shakespeare fan with a humanities degree. I feel like Falk might feel if he had to read multiple chapters of me saying, “The Academy may have dismissed Velikovsky’s ideas about the solar system, but clearly he was on to something. Scholars should revisit him.”
The truth is Hamlet does not want for a science tie-in to be one of the greatest achievements of human expression.
Late in The Science of Shakespeare, Falk makes a compelling exploration of King Lear. The author hits his stride juxtaposing the Bard with the fledgling modern science of his day. He also does justice to what makes King Lear great--its humanity. For this chapter above all others, I am glad I stuck this book out to the end. Falk even got me in the mood to reread King Lear. And that is great, because Shakespeare’s plays deserve to be read. They do for English literature what Copernicus and Galileo did for science--they give us a lasting foundation for worthy exploration.
At the heart of Falk’s book is a vein of wishful-thinking that borders on conspiracy theory. What begins as an informative interdisciplinary discussion--examining the intersection of Elizabethan drama and modern science—by Chapter 7 diverts in to a scholastic pipedream with Shakespeare being a closeted devotee of Copernican astronomy. Perhaps, the author and his chief source suggest, Hamlet is more than just a great play. Perhaps it is also a clever and elaborate allegory exploring the revolutionary discoveries of Galileo et al. What if the characters in Hamlet are actually symbolic stand-ins for the leading thinkers of Ptolemaic and Copernican astronomies?
As Falk grants by way of academic integrity, prevailing literary theory finds this hypothesis flimsy. Shakespeare’s plays have clear, unmistakable, and fully-developed themes. Science-flattering allegory is not one of them. It smacks of the same contrived, cherry-picking investigation that lies at the core of conspiracy theories--like the one about Shakespeare not being the author of any or all of those plays. This does not stop Falk from devoting a lot of ink and credulity to the idea. It is as if Falk wants to be the Copernicus of Shakespearean scholarship--establishing a new unifying truth of what the Bard's plays really mean, a revelation that has eluded centuries of previous thinkers.
To his credit, Falk makes clear the highly speculative nature of suggesting Shakespeare had his finger on the pulse of the Scientific Revolution. Furthermore, I am not offended that Falk addressed the notion of Hamlet as science allegory. I am annoyed at how hard he worked to make it look compelling. I come at this as a Shakespeare fan with a humanities degree. I feel like Falk might feel if he had to read multiple chapters of me saying, “The Academy may have dismissed Velikovsky’s ideas about the solar system, but clearly he was on to something. Scholars should revisit him.”
The truth is Hamlet does not want for a science tie-in to be one of the greatest achievements of human expression.
Late in The Science of Shakespeare, Falk makes a compelling exploration of King Lear. The author hits his stride juxtaposing the Bard with the fledgling modern science of his day. He also does justice to what makes King Lear great--its humanity. For this chapter above all others, I am glad I stuck this book out to the end. Falk even got me in the mood to reread King Lear. And that is great, because Shakespeare’s plays deserve to be read. They do for English literature what Copernicus and Galileo did for science--they give us a lasting foundation for worthy exploration.
April 27, 2014
Since I love reading anything by William Shakespeare, I had to give this book a go. With my love of stars, combined with science, I had to practically pull myself away just to do something, anything else needed to be done.
The book literally covers the thought process of the plays, stars, science and many other things that had to do with William's life. He studied the stars through astrology, science as a whole. You actually learn more about his life and the things he done throughout his time. It wasn't based on the plays and was really neat to be able to come down to a level of seriously being able to put yourself in his time and learn the things that he did.
During his time, science was just beginning to come into existence.
I literally would love to have this book in print form. It's unique, a book to reread and love for a long time, as anything that is about Shakespeare or even that he has written. My favorite thing that he ever wrote was and always will be, "Julius Caesar"!
The book literally covers the thought process of the plays, stars, science and many other things that had to do with William's life. He studied the stars through astrology, science as a whole. You actually learn more about his life and the things he done throughout his time. It wasn't based on the plays and was really neat to be able to come down to a level of seriously being able to put yourself in his time and learn the things that he did.
During his time, science was just beginning to come into existence.
I literally would love to have this book in print form. It's unique, a book to reread and love for a long time, as anything that is about Shakespeare or even that he has written. My favorite thing that he ever wrote was and always will be, "Julius Caesar"!
May 7, 2015
A solid and comprehensive study of the scientific history during the life of Shakespeare and how it may have influenced his work. Falk introduces many theories regarding the influence of science on the Bard and supports most while exposing the flaws of the rest. He freely admits that our knowledge of the man is limited, but provides us with the best evidence he can. I found it an enjoyable read for history buffs and Shakespeare fans.
March 29, 2016
Enthusiastic if not a touch irrigorous about the connection between fascinating science and the thing Shakespeare may have read, including some speculation over people the playwright could have met if right-place-right-time was taken to an extreme. Mostly the Copernican-Kepler decentering of the Ptolemiac cosmos, and all the dominoes that fell over the space of a couple decades (Shakespeare's lifespan being a close match for the beginning of a heliocentric modern Europe).
January 30, 2015
This is a very good overview of the impact of the scientific revolution on the Tudor Age. The question is always there. "How educated was Shakespeare" and "Who did he know, outside the world of Tudor/Jacobean
theater". Dan Falk takes you on an interesting tour of the science of the time and how it may be found in the plays of the Bard of Stratford.
theater". Dan Falk takes you on an interesting tour of the science of the time and how it may be found in the plays of the Bard of Stratford.
June 14, 2020
The first half of this book seemed to be a history of 16th century astronomy, with passing references to Shakespeare here and there. It was interesting enough, but I thought the title was almost misleading. By halfway through the book, the integration of scholarship about the bard and the transition from a world of magical thinking to one of systematic observation and testing was getting more and more impressive.
The book provides a fascinating examination of the scientific revolution, with all of its implications for a very different way of seeing the world. There is discussion of medicine, mental health, the revival of an "atomistic" worldview, astrology, atheism and much about astronomy. It's very intelligently and thoughtfully crafted, with many demonstrations of how the changing world is reflected in Shakespeare's works, along with suggestions about what Shakespeare knew and believed about the dramatic changes happening around him.
I found this the sort of book that makes me want to read more about the history of that era AND read more about and by Shakespeare.
The book provides a fascinating examination of the scientific revolution, with all of its implications for a very different way of seeing the world. There is discussion of medicine, mental health, the revival of an "atomistic" worldview, astrology, atheism and much about astronomy. It's very intelligently and thoughtfully crafted, with many demonstrations of how the changing world is reflected in Shakespeare's works, along with suggestions about what Shakespeare knew and believed about the dramatic changes happening around him.
I found this the sort of book that makes me want to read more about the history of that era AND read more about and by Shakespeare.
Read
September 21, 2021Very (and admittedly) hypothetical, but at the very least it gives the reader a good grounding in the science of the time and is valuable for that alone. A good working knowledge of Shakespeare and the history of the era will aid the reader a good deal.
July 30, 2019
Covered more ground than I'd thought it would.
August 19, 2019
Alternate title: "Here's a science-y thing that happened in Shakespeare's lifetime. Did he know about it? Probably not! But let's try to find it in the text anyway."
May 10, 2016
This review originally published in Looking For a Good Book. Rated 3.25 of 5
It's hard to believe anyone could possibly write anything new on Shakespeare.
Considered by many to be the greatest writer who's ever lived (in the English language, at least), Shakespeare's works have been dissected by scholars and his life has been researched and studied by many who've spent a lifetime trying to learn more about this man. So what more can we get? Dan Falk takes a slightly different approach, exploring some of the sciences that Shakespeare calls upon in his canon and connects the dots to some of the leading figures in the scientific revolution that was going on around this time.
From what we know, Shakespeare was not a scientist, but he was a keen observer and picked up on ideas and was able to comment on how humans interacted within the world of changing ideas. It's not often mentioned, but Shakespeare (as author Dan Falk points out), was born the same year as Galileo. This is pointed out not to make an association between the two men, but to put into context what was happening in science when Shakespeare was writing his plays. Also working in science, a little closer to home for Shakespeare, was John Dee - whose work straddled the line between science and magic and who was, according to history, passionate about theatre. The connection that Falk draws here seems quite plausible. And the fact that Dee's science is often questionable, at best, might explain why some of Shakespeare's science isn't always spot on.
One of the problems I had with this book is that the 'science' seems a little more targeted than general science. The Astronomy of Shakespeare might have been a more apt title as much of this book centers around the stars and what was known (or believed) about the universe at that time.
The most interesting part of this exploration is the 'forensic astronomy' done by a professor at Southwest Texas State University - reconstructing the skies and trying to determine what stars (or other celestial bodies) might be being referenced in classic works of literature (so, for instance, when Horatio mentions in Hamlet - in regards to the stabbing of Julius Caesar - "As stars with trains of fire and dews of blood" it is this particular astronomer trying to track what comet that may have been).
Falk gets a little more speculative as the book goes on, and he tries drawing some parallels. He writes about the names Rosencrantz and Guildenstern which "do in fact sound stereotypically Danish" and "What led Shakespeare to choose these names?" Falk notes that Tycho Brahe once commissioned a self-portrait, which is surrounded by the crests of his extended family, which includes the names "Rosenkrans" and "Guildensteren". Falk is not the first person to point this out (as he, himself, notes), but he does try to draw the connection to Shakespeare having an interest in astronomical thinking.
Falk does go on about medical science for a bit, noting "Medical men of various kinds appear frequently in the canon--more often, in fact, than workers of any other profession." The connections here are a little stronger, as Shakespeare's daughter Susanna, was married to John Hall, a doctor.
All in all, there were moments here when I thought that an idea might be worthy or more pursuit and study, but too much that felt a bit of a stretch. A tighter focus - not something as broad as 'science'- might have served this well. I am glad I read this, and there were things I took from it, but it's not likely to become the next 'must read' book on Shakespeare.
Looking for a good book? The Science of Shakespeare, by Dan Falk, explores some interesting concepts about the role the science revolution of the late 1500's might have played in Shakespeare's writings, but nothing is explored deeply enough to really make a difference in the way we see Shakespeare's works.
I received a digital copy of this book from the publisher, through Netgalley, in exchange for an honest review.
It's hard to believe anyone could possibly write anything new on Shakespeare.
Considered by many to be the greatest writer who's ever lived (in the English language, at least), Shakespeare's works have been dissected by scholars and his life has been researched and studied by many who've spent a lifetime trying to learn more about this man. So what more can we get? Dan Falk takes a slightly different approach, exploring some of the sciences that Shakespeare calls upon in his canon and connects the dots to some of the leading figures in the scientific revolution that was going on around this time.
From what we know, Shakespeare was not a scientist, but he was a keen observer and picked up on ideas and was able to comment on how humans interacted within the world of changing ideas. It's not often mentioned, but Shakespeare (as author Dan Falk points out), was born the same year as Galileo. This is pointed out not to make an association between the two men, but to put into context what was happening in science when Shakespeare was writing his plays. Also working in science, a little closer to home for Shakespeare, was John Dee - whose work straddled the line between science and magic and who was, according to history, passionate about theatre. The connection that Falk draws here seems quite plausible. And the fact that Dee's science is often questionable, at best, might explain why some of Shakespeare's science isn't always spot on.
One of the problems I had with this book is that the 'science' seems a little more targeted than general science. The Astronomy of Shakespeare might have been a more apt title as much of this book centers around the stars and what was known (or believed) about the universe at that time.
The most interesting part of this exploration is the 'forensic astronomy' done by a professor at Southwest Texas State University - reconstructing the skies and trying to determine what stars (or other celestial bodies) might be being referenced in classic works of literature (so, for instance, when Horatio mentions in Hamlet - in regards to the stabbing of Julius Caesar - "As stars with trains of fire and dews of blood" it is this particular astronomer trying to track what comet that may have been).
Falk gets a little more speculative as the book goes on, and he tries drawing some parallels. He writes about the names Rosencrantz and Guildenstern which "do in fact sound stereotypically Danish" and "What led Shakespeare to choose these names?" Falk notes that Tycho Brahe once commissioned a self-portrait, which is surrounded by the crests of his extended family, which includes the names "Rosenkrans" and "Guildensteren". Falk is not the first person to point this out (as he, himself, notes), but he does try to draw the connection to Shakespeare having an interest in astronomical thinking.
Falk does go on about medical science for a bit, noting "Medical men of various kinds appear frequently in the canon--more often, in fact, than workers of any other profession." The connections here are a little stronger, as Shakespeare's daughter Susanna, was married to John Hall, a doctor.
All in all, there were moments here when I thought that an idea might be worthy or more pursuit and study, but too much that felt a bit of a stretch. A tighter focus - not something as broad as 'science'- might have served this well. I am glad I read this, and there were things I took from it, but it's not likely to become the next 'must read' book on Shakespeare.
Looking for a good book? The Science of Shakespeare, by Dan Falk, explores some interesting concepts about the role the science revolution of the late 1500's might have played in Shakespeare's writings, but nothing is explored deeply enough to really make a difference in the way we see Shakespeare's works.
I received a digital copy of this book from the publisher, through Netgalley, in exchange for an honest review.
November 7, 2015
A hypothetical conversation between a young (“almost nine”) William and his father opens this book. The two comment on what may or may not be a new star in the sky, with the father asking his son to speak in Latin. This helps set the tone with regards to the science and the language of the day. Shakespeare lived in interesting times; surely the breakthroughs in scientific thought interested him? Dan Falk addresses this question to great effect, drawing from the work of other researchers but synthesizing it all under a new light.
This is a history of science that tracks the development of scientific understanding with Shakespeare in parallel, though more as support: convenient evidence from a prolific and popular writer. Most of the science relates to astronomy, though the medicine of those times is also explored. This is good science writing, and readers – like myself – need not fear the literary analysis; that too comes from a more scientific approach, and the author provides references for those who may be curious to learn more. One chapter, though, contrasts the SAA (Shakespeare Association of America) with the AAS (American Astronomical Society). The book is well-organized in short, readable passages with often witty headings.
We know very little about the playwright himself, and rely mostly on his works to get a sense of his personality. More biographical info is available for others historical figures of the time, but it is notable that all of these scientists or their predecessors, the ‘natural philosophers,’ are men. Although, Queen Elizabeth was in power for much of this period, and we get a pretty progressive image of her, even if she was a monarch. There is a focus on characters like Tycho Brahe, John Dee, Leonard and Thomas Digges and Thomas Harriot, among others, like the strange figure of Giordano Bruno. We also get to learn a little about a few contemporary Shakespeare scholars.
Eventually we get to Galileo, who was born the same year as the bard. Though he may not have been the first to construct a telescope, this great thinker has been a hero of mine since the fourth grade when I dressed up in a funny blue beard to give a report. Beards aside, what I always was inspired by was how he not only looked at the universe differently, but also stood up for what he believed and had evidence to back it up. Peter Sís’s beautiful “Starry Messenger” was largely responsible for my admiration, and now I realize that Galileo’s own break-through publication shared that title (Siderius Nuncius). Galileo’s drawings of our moon and Jupiter and its moons are included among the figures that help illustrate the book. The author went to many of the places he writes about, and his own black-and-white photos add a nice touch as well.
How slow science progressed back then! But look at us now, where many are ignoring the beneficial results of peer-reviewed science only to use prejudice, emotion and rhetoric to make their argument. It is sad, but I hope that science will regain a more respected place in our culture. Opinions are one thing, but science is for everyone, I think. (I don’t want this blog to start sounding too opinionated; please let me know if gets to be so!) Falk does an excellent job of fairly presenting all different opinions, especially as new ways of perceiving the universe started happening in the past several centuries and even further back. For that matter, the historical connections between what would become science and religion, astrology, and even “magic” were interesting, something I hadn’t thought too much of before. The next time I read or see a work of Shakespeare, I will think of the science of his time and how far it has come since then. This book is another inspiration I need to get me thinking too about where we can take science from here.
Note: this book was provided through Net Galley, and my review also appears on my blog (http://matt-stats.blogspot.com/).
This is a history of science that tracks the development of scientific understanding with Shakespeare in parallel, though more as support: convenient evidence from a prolific and popular writer. Most of the science relates to astronomy, though the medicine of those times is also explored. This is good science writing, and readers – like myself – need not fear the literary analysis; that too comes from a more scientific approach, and the author provides references for those who may be curious to learn more. One chapter, though, contrasts the SAA (Shakespeare Association of America) with the AAS (American Astronomical Society). The book is well-organized in short, readable passages with often witty headings.
We know very little about the playwright himself, and rely mostly on his works to get a sense of his personality. More biographical info is available for others historical figures of the time, but it is notable that all of these scientists or their predecessors, the ‘natural philosophers,’ are men. Although, Queen Elizabeth was in power for much of this period, and we get a pretty progressive image of her, even if she was a monarch. There is a focus on characters like Tycho Brahe, John Dee, Leonard and Thomas Digges and Thomas Harriot, among others, like the strange figure of Giordano Bruno. We also get to learn a little about a few contemporary Shakespeare scholars.
Eventually we get to Galileo, who was born the same year as the bard. Though he may not have been the first to construct a telescope, this great thinker has been a hero of mine since the fourth grade when I dressed up in a funny blue beard to give a report. Beards aside, what I always was inspired by was how he not only looked at the universe differently, but also stood up for what he believed and had evidence to back it up. Peter Sís’s beautiful “Starry Messenger” was largely responsible for my admiration, and now I realize that Galileo’s own break-through publication shared that title (Siderius Nuncius). Galileo’s drawings of our moon and Jupiter and its moons are included among the figures that help illustrate the book. The author went to many of the places he writes about, and his own black-and-white photos add a nice touch as well.
How slow science progressed back then! But look at us now, where many are ignoring the beneficial results of peer-reviewed science only to use prejudice, emotion and rhetoric to make their argument. It is sad, but I hope that science will regain a more respected place in our culture. Opinions are one thing, but science is for everyone, I think. (I don’t want this blog to start sounding too opinionated; please let me know if gets to be so!) Falk does an excellent job of fairly presenting all different opinions, especially as new ways of perceiving the universe started happening in the past several centuries and even further back. For that matter, the historical connections between what would become science and religion, astrology, and even “magic” were interesting, something I hadn’t thought too much of before. The next time I read or see a work of Shakespeare, I will think of the science of his time and how far it has come since then. This book is another inspiration I need to get me thinking too about where we can take science from here.
Note: this book was provided through Net Galley, and my review also appears on my blog (http://matt-stats.blogspot.com/).
December 24, 2014
Shakespeare and his works have been analyzed for centuries. With so much mystery surrounding the man, and such controversy surrounding his works and authorship, we dissect his works and pick a key theme to analyze. Some people argue about which play is best. Others look for themes of religion and politics in them and how they played a role in his life. Others analyze his individual characters and how they reflect his view of mankind. Author Dan Falk is no different in picking an element to explore, except the element he's chosen is science. In his book, The Science of Shakespeare, the author looks at the Bard and his writings through the lens of the scientific revolution that followed the Renaissance.
The first thing one notices when reading this book is that the title is misleading. Instead of focusing on various fields of science, Falk focuses primarily on astronomy and the change from a geocentric worldview to a heliocentric world view. In fact the first hundred or so pages barely mention Shakespeare, if at all. Instead we learn about different astronomers, scientific theories, and speculations that Shakespeare could have met them or read their writings. These were interesting chapters that made you at least pause and think. After this, there is a chapter on medicine and a chapter on magic. It would have been great if there had been more devoted to other sciences.
The last chapter of the book provided the most trouble for me. In this chapter, Falk made the mistake that many people make and equated science with atheism. He tries and in my opinion fails to make a case that Shakespeare was an atheist. It's a shame the book took this route, especially given the fact that he discouraged people from buying into fringe theories, and it seems he did just that. It is widely accepted the Shakespeare was Christian, and perhaps even a secret Catholic (secret because Catholics were persecuted in England during this time). Overall, I wasn't too impressed with this book. It felt like Falk tried really hard to make his theories fit to suit his book. It also was a 300+ page book that could have been condensed to 100 pages. I'd give this book 2.5 stars.
The first thing one notices when reading this book is that the title is misleading. Instead of focusing on various fields of science, Falk focuses primarily on astronomy and the change from a geocentric worldview to a heliocentric world view. In fact the first hundred or so pages barely mention Shakespeare, if at all. Instead we learn about different astronomers, scientific theories, and speculations that Shakespeare could have met them or read their writings. These were interesting chapters that made you at least pause and think. After this, there is a chapter on medicine and a chapter on magic. It would have been great if there had been more devoted to other sciences.
The last chapter of the book provided the most trouble for me. In this chapter, Falk made the mistake that many people make and equated science with atheism. He tries and in my opinion fails to make a case that Shakespeare was an atheist. It's a shame the book took this route, especially given the fact that he discouraged people from buying into fringe theories, and it seems he did just that. It is widely accepted the Shakespeare was Christian, and perhaps even a secret Catholic (secret because Catholics were persecuted in England during this time). Overall, I wasn't too impressed with this book. It felt like Falk tried really hard to make his theories fit to suit his book. It also was a 300+ page book that could have been condensed to 100 pages. I'd give this book 2.5 stars.
April 29, 2014
What could have been better than hanging with William Shakespeare when the Scientific Revolution began/evolved? Or better yet watching his marvelous plays (stars, constellations, space) with the King/Queen setting in the balcony.
Wow all the many researched historical theories & discoveries pieced together juxtaposed; oxymoron; methodical)? Is there a link between the 2, as the author tries to predict/show (hypotheses)? He kind of convinced me.
What an awesome book cover, great illustration, pictures, font & writing style. A kinda what if very historical informative well written book. It was very easy to read/follow from start/finish & never a dull moment. No grammar errors, repetitive or out of line sequence sentences. Lots of exciting scenarios, with several twists/turns & a great set of unique characters to keep track of. This could also make a great medieval documentary movie, PP presentation or mini TV series (History Channel; A & E). 1 you won’t want to put down. There is no doubt in my mind this is a very easy rating of 5 stars.
Thank you for the free book
Tony Parsons MSW (Washburn)
Wow all the many researched historical theories & discoveries pieced together juxtaposed; oxymoron; methodical)? Is there a link between the 2, as the author tries to predict/show (hypotheses)? He kind of convinced me.
What an awesome book cover, great illustration, pictures, font & writing style. A kinda what if very historical informative well written book. It was very easy to read/follow from start/finish & never a dull moment. No grammar errors, repetitive or out of line sequence sentences. Lots of exciting scenarios, with several twists/turns & a great set of unique characters to keep track of. This could also make a great medieval documentary movie, PP presentation or mini TV series (History Channel; A & E). 1 you won’t want to put down. There is no doubt in my mind this is a very easy rating of 5 stars.
Thank you for the free book
Tony Parsons MSW (Washburn)
November 26, 2016
I really expected to love this book. It dovetailed perfectly with an exhibit I was researching on science in the time of Shakespeare, part of a series of exhibits curated at my university to commemorate 400 years since the death of Shakespeare. But I found it to be disjointed and frustrating: for one thing, it's written in a journalistic style, and often in the first person, which isn't what I came for. Many other books proved much more valuable including Brian Ogilvie's The Science of Describing: Natural History and Renaissance Europe and Deborah Harkness' The Jewel House: Elizabethan London and the Scientific Revolution. But my big discovery was coming across a historian of science who was active in the 1930s and 40s at Stanford University named Francis R. Johnson. Johnson produced an impressive body of work: a series of fascinating and beautifully written scholarly articles on science in the early modern period in England. Gems. And not the least for the prose, which has none of the ostentation and tortured vocabulary of much current academic writing.
April 1, 2014
There are many ways to read Shakespeare: the author of this essay, research in the tragedies, comedies and relatively even in the sonnets, all of the various hypotheses to test his thesis and that is that Shakespeare, as well as a great writer and poet, was also a connoisseur of science and empirical research that took place during his time. Interesting, but if you are not experts on the subject and absolutely interested, this book might be slightly hard.
Ci sono tanti modi di leggere Shakespeare, l'autore di questo saggio ricerca nelle tragedie, commedie e relativamente poco anche nei sonetti, tutte le varie ipotesi che possano verificare la sua tesi e cioé che Shakesperare, oltre che un grandissimo scrittore e poeta, era anche un fine conoscitore della scienza e delle ricerche empiriche che si svolgevano durante la sua epoca. Interessante, ma se non siete dei cultori della materia potrebbe risultare leggermente pesante.
THANKS TO NETGALLEY AND ST.MARTIN'S PRESS FOR THE PREVIEW!
Ci sono tanti modi di leggere Shakespeare, l'autore di questo saggio ricerca nelle tragedie, commedie e relativamente poco anche nei sonetti, tutte le varie ipotesi che possano verificare la sua tesi e cioé che Shakesperare, oltre che un grandissimo scrittore e poeta, era anche un fine conoscitore della scienza e delle ricerche empiriche che si svolgevano durante la sua epoca. Interessante, ma se non siete dei cultori della materia potrebbe risultare leggermente pesante.
THANKS TO NETGALLEY AND ST.MARTIN'S PRESS FOR THE PREVIEW!
December 16, 2016
By all accounts, this topic should have fascinated me, but it took me absolutely forever to get through for some reason. I think it would have benefited from a little more focus. I was expecting a book purely about Elizabethan astronomy and Shakespeare's awareness of new astronomical developments, which is why I picked it up, but there was lots of stuff about medicine, philosophy, religion, etc., that I was less interested in. Falk also repeats himself. A lot. The book could have been 100 pages shorter and gotten the same amount of information across.
September 3, 2014
I enjoy reading the history of science and attend several Shakespeare plays each season, so this book played to my interests. I enjoyed the author's style and may look for his other books. Many of the science connections were insightful, others obvious and some seemed quite far fetched. However, I will be more aware for references at my next performance. One thing I noticed: I have not read Shakespeare since school (a long time ago) and hearing it performed is much better.
June 25, 2014
Admittedly, the audience for this book is the niche group who watched Cosmos every Sunday this past spring and is constantly trolling about for live Shakespeare opportunities. Fortunately for Dan Falk, I am that niche audience that equally enjoyed both the discussions on the birth of Renaissance astronomy and Will's works.
March 1, 2015
Falk demonstrates that Shakespeare was fully aware of the cutting edge developments in Renaissance science, especially Copernican astronomy, and that his elite patrons would expect him to incorporate this chic knowledge into his allegorical and figurative language, which is a nice reminder of the integration of science and the humanities we need to cultivate.
July 5, 2015
I really enjoyed it. It was thought-provoking. However, it's not a "light" read. If you're not very familiar with Shakespeare's works, you might find the detailed analyses too much. There's also a lot of science in the book, but as a non-science major, I didn't find it too hard. If you don't like science OR Shakespeare, this isn't the book for you!
April 13, 2015
Loved this! It was well-researched, entertaining, and illuminating (no pun intended). Even for a person who has no knowledge of astronomy, this book is easy to follow - no scholarly pretensions here. Great job on this, Dr. Falk. Stellar Canadian content.
May 9, 2015
If you're a Shakespeare nut, definitely read this. It's an exploration of the Scientific Revolution and what the leading scientific theories of Shakespeare's day were, and how they were portrayed in his works.
June 22, 2015
A new and refreshing look at the meaning of the plays of Shakespeare. A pity that the real writer -Francis Bacon- was not revealed as the true author which would have made the research done a good deal more meaningful.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 35 reviews