The Invention of Air by Steven Johnson

Johnson, Steven. The Invention of Air: A Story of Science, Faith, Revolution and the Birth of America. New York: Riverhead, 2008.


Joseph Priestly was a man of contradictions. He was an inventive scientist, one of the fathers of chemistry, who somehow clung to an ancient idea his own research undermined. He had the courage to be a heretic, but held on to religious beliefs when many of his peers embraced atheism. He was a proponent of political liberty and the American cause whose views brought him trouble even in America.
Johnson’s Invention of Air is partly a biography of Priestly. It is also an attempt to see how revolutions in ideas occur. Priestly was connected to the scientific, religious and political revolutions of the Enlightenment. As one man’s involvement in all of them suggests, they were not completely separate, nor did the intellectual leaders of the time see them as discreet.

As a biography, the book works well. The sections shift emphasis from science to religion to politics. Though Priestly was a professional clergyman and ostensibly amateur scientist most of his life, Johnson’s framework works well chronologically because of his subject’s shifting emphasis.

Johnson doesn’t hit on a new theory of idea revolutions. He suggests the outlines of one, or maybe the method of discovering it. He finds in Priestly the beginnings of a systems approach to knowledge, especially science, that crosses disciplines and switches from small-scale to large-scale and back again. The model is modern ecological and systems science, which Johnson finds rooted in the coffeehouse meetings of Enlightenment amateurs who the many areas of human knowledge and endeavor as connected and amenable to improvement through reason.

I’m not a great fan of Enlightenment thinking, but I admire that they were serious and that they saw that truth in one realm (science, religion or politics) had ramifications in others. People seem willing to throw up walls and throw up their hands just to avoid the difficulties of struggling with all these things. Science wants to be unfettered from political and religious restrictions, but only thrives in stable and free (political) environments where people see the material world as worthy of study (an essentially religious view). The political freedom we long for needs support from good and available knowledge (science) and institutions that support individual self-government (religion). Religion in particular is walled off from other areas, but scientists and politicians have too readily shrugged off ethics that were based on human sentiment, when they were accountable to no one because no one was stronger.

Stephen Johnson also wrote The Ghost Map.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in
Einstein’s Clocks, Poincare’s Maps: Empires of Time by Peter Galison
The Science of Leonardo by Fritjof Capra
Steam by Andrea Sutcliffe

The Ghost Map by Steven Johnson

Johnson, Steven. The Ghost Map: The Story of London’s Most Terrifying Epidemic—and How It Changed Science, Cities, and the Modern World. New York: Riverhead Books, 2006.

Steven Johnson presents the London cholera epidemic of 1854, and the work of Dr. John Snow and Rev. Henry Whitehead to link cholera to a water source, as multiple conflicts. It is a conflict between two species, Vibrio cholerae and Homo sapiens. It is a conflict of ideas between tradition and evidence. It is also a conflict between the problems arising from the high density living of cities and the human capacity to solve those problems.

In the first case, a colony of V. cholerae arguably won the bout in 1854. The outbreak was one of the most intense in London’s history, especially considering how rapidly it spread and killed. That it ended when it did may be due as much to happenstance and desperation to act as to a winning argument from evidence. In the immediate wake of the outbreak, the view that cholera was a waterborne illness was not widely accepted.

In the second case, the reasoned case from evidence eventually won over tradition. This led to a victory over cholera in London also. Though cholera is still a problem in parts of the world, the answers implemented in London (better sanitation and clean drinking water) will work anywhere.

Johnson is not too hard on the opponents of Snow. It was widely accepted that disease was caused by miasma, or bad air. It was hard for even intelligent people of the time to accept that disease could be caused by something that could not be detected by the senses (though an Italian scientist had viewed V. cholera under the microscope, it was not widely known). In fact, Snow hadn’t found the cause of cholera, only how it was transmitted.

In the last case, Johnson happily reports that human innovation has triumphed over the problems of cities so far. In many ways, cities are very advantages ways for people to live.

The last chapter launches from Snow’s study of the cholera epidemic, and the map he used to illustrate his findings, to how smarter maps and other innovations are creating a bright future for cities. Snow, Whitehead and science eventually are victorious in the aftermath of the 1854 epidemic, but it is cities that are the big winners.

Johnson brings up a number of vulnerabilities of cities in the next several decades. He is confident that the ingenuity show by the likes of Snow and Whitehead, and modern technology they couldn’t imagine, will overcome most of these problems. Even the problems that can’t be overcome don’t seem to be enough to end the urbanizing trend around the globe.

Order this book here.

The Man Who Loved Books too Much by Allison Hoover Bartlett

Bartlett, Allison Hoover. The Man Who Loved Books too Much: The True Story of a Thief, a Detective, and a World of Literary Obsession. New York: Riverhead, 2009.

I like books. You probably do, too. People like books for different reason. I, and many people I know, love reading. Others enjoy and appreciate books as pieces of history, as art, for associations with their authors or previous owners, as objects with various qualities.

Some people own books because of what the books they own say about them. John Gilkey is such a person. The down side of books is they can be expensive, especially fine are rare books that might burnish the image of their owners. Gilkey had a unique way of overcoming this obstacle. He stole books.


Bartlett seems reluctant to focus on Gilkey. It’s partly because she is reluctant to seem to glorify a criminal or give an outlet to a criminal who is intent on burnishing his image. It’s also because the true story has other interesting participants, especially bookseller Ken Sander who has taken upon himself to track down book thieves. She also seeks to understand the kind of compulsion that goes into collecting, especially when that compulsion drives someone to crime.

It’s a little scary how easily Gilkey accomplished fraud and theft. He took the opportunity to steal a little information, and then picked up the phone to use it to steal books. What is scarier is his capacity for self-justification. Self-justification is a common human activity, but Gilkey has mastered it such a degree that he seems to have almost no conscience. It may be good fortune that his fixation is books and the easy criminal, but not violent, way of acquiring them.

The book is weakest in this last respect. Bartlett didn’t seem to understand the collector’s drive much better at the end of the book than at the beginning. I didn’t. The Man Who Loved Books too Much works as a story about interesting or unusual people.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in
The Private Investigator’s Handbook by Chuck Chambers

Range by David Epstein

Specialization is king. It has become seen as the road to success. Since Malcolm Gladwell popularized the 10,000-hour Rule a few years ago (perhaps unintentionally), I’ve seen a lot of people using it to justify and spell out the road to specialization: focus and start early. However, specialization can hurt when we face problems that cross boundaries and pull us out of our niche; we can be lost and ill equipped outside of our specialization. Journalist David Epstein explored the issue in his book, Range.

 Epstein starts out by showing the limitations of specialization. It works well in an arena where repeating patterns prevail, and we can learn to recognize those patterns from exposure. When there are no repeating patterns, or they are complex and obscure, a high degree of specialized knowledge can lead to wrong conclusions and false confidence. We can have a few good tools that we trust, but if they are the wrong tools for the job we may be doing the wrong thing without realizing it. Complex environments and problems require us to reason conceptually, connect ideas from different contexts and solve problems without direct prior knowledge of what we are facing. We need breadth.

 Though it is not as popular a narrative, Epstein provides several examples of how people with broad and diverse knowledge have become high achievers. Creativity is, to a great extent, finding relationships between seemingly unrelated things. One must be equipped with a variety of experience to be able to make these leaps.

 I can see how the generalist’s path can seem unappealing. It may not seem like a path at all. Deep learning is slow and effortful. It is a way of errors, false starts and diversions that can seem like a waste of time. Developing range is messy and uncertain; by comparison, specialization seems like a sure thing.

 Epstein’s book contains ways to develop range. Analogies allow us to apply knowledge from one area to another, and seeing where analogies fall apart can lead to new ideas. Take an outsider’s cooler, distant and critical view and save yourself from the pitfall of taking a rosy view of familiar things. Pay attention to things that don’t fit the model. Don’t plan too far ahead, but be open to exploration an experimentation. There is a time for mastering particular knowledge and procedure, but the overall approach to learning should be to make connections and gain perspective.

 If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

The Checklist Manifesto by Atul Gawande

The First 20 Hours by Josh Kaufman

Freakonomics by Steven D. Levitt & Stephen J. Dubner

The Genius in All of Us by David Shenk

Learn Better by Ulrich Boser

Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

 Epstein, David. Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World. New York: Riverhead Books, 2019.

How We Got to Now by Steven Johnson

The prevailing myth of invention is that it is the product of a solitary genius. Steven Johnson takes on this myth in How We Got to Now.

Johnson’s book is a history of invention with a focus on six particular innovations. He demonstrates that simultaneous invention is common, suggesting that societal knowledge, norms and expectations play a part in invention—at least in providing an environment in which certain types of inventions can be created and flourish.

Thomas Edison and the light bulb is the classic myth challenged by simultaneous invention. Humphrey Davy demonstrated an incandescent electric light in 1802 and Frederick de Moleyns received the first patent for a light bulb in 1841. By the time Edison got involve, people had been working on light bulbs for 30 years, and the potential for electric light had been now for 70 years. Edison and his team of collaborators deserve a lot of credit for creating a commercially successful electric lighting system, inventing solutions to many problems along the way, but is a story of systematic hard work.

Edison’s electric lighting system depended on a lot of prior technology, which relates to another of Johnson’s points: clusters of inventions. An invention can illuminate a previously unnoticed problem (or create a new one). For instance, the availability of affordable books that follow Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of the printing press revealed that many people were farsighted. This sparked a demand for reading glasses. The tinkering with lenses led to the invention of telescopes and microscopes. Galileo took up the telescope and made discoveries in astronomy that reshaped how people saw the world. Robert Hooke used the microscope to explore a seemingly alien world of the very tiny thing all around us, though the revolution he inspired took longer to bloom.

Johnson explores other aspects of invention and society. I think it is fair to say that his view of how invention works is a lot messier than the myth. Inventors are at the right place at the right time, with open minds that are prepared (likely by accident) to make a connection and a willingness to do the work of thinking, testing and making something new. They probe the boundaries of their fields, tinker and throw themselves into hobbies that bring them, often with companions, to crossroads that challenge their notions of where they can go and how they can get there.

On the whole, Johnson presents a vision of hope in our history. We are not dependent on genius or serendipity; human creativity is both a social and an individual process in which the collision of ideas leads to new ideas. We live in an era where the collision of ideas may be more possible than ever.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

Ada's Algorithm by James Essinger

The Age of Edison by Ernest Freeburg

The Big Necessity by Rose George

The Big Roads by Earl Swift

The Big Thirst by Charles Fishman

Bottled Lightning by Seth Fletcher

Circles by James Burke

Dreams of Iron and Steel by Deborah Cadbury

Empires of Light by Jill Jonnes

The Great Stink by Clare Clark

Hedy's Folly by Richard Rhodes

Make a Joyful Sound by Helen Elmira Waite

The Pinball Effect by James Burke

The Powerhouse by Steve Levine

Rust by Jonathan Waldman

Steven Johnson also wrote

The Ghost Map

The Invention of Air

Johnson, Steven. How We Got To Now: Six Innovations that Make the Modern World. New York: Riverhead, 2014.

Help, Thanks, Wow by Anne Lamott

Anne Lamott’s little book on prayer, Help, Thanks, Wow, is not a theological work, it is a personal essay.  Of course, there is theology.  Lamott suggests prayer is important whatever your conception of god, be it something from a formal religion or just a notion of something bigger than ourselves.  Even an atheist can pray.  Prayer is communication for our hearts to something else, something greater.

As the title suggest, she considers three prayers particularly important.  The first is, “Help.”  Praying “Help” is a way to admit we don’t have the answers or power to solve a problem.  We let go and trust that something bigger has good answers and power to achieve good results, even if it is not exactly what we want.  I see in this prayer not just a reaching out for aid, but a practice of humility.  It is amazing how near we can find God to be when we are humble.

I have written elsewhere that I consider gratitude to be essential to a happy life.  Lamott’s second prayer is, “Thanks.”  It is an important courtesy to thank those who help us, and if you seem to receive mysterious, improbable help from strangers, or no human agent at all, maybe a prayer of thanks would be in order.  Lamott suggests that we pray our thanks even when we don’t get what we want.  We should be thankful things were not worse.  We should be thankful that things are somehow okay even though we didn’t get what we want, even though something bad happened.  Gratitude is a path to peace and character.

The final prayer is, “Wow.”  It is an expression of wonder and awe.  Sometimes we experience something that blows us away: the beauty of nature and art, the love of others, the changes we see in ourselves, and other wonders.  Wow is a great prayer because it shows we can still sense and appreciate the amazing things around us.

As I mentioned, the book is personal.  It is not a detailed autobiography.  She tells enough of a story to illustrate a point, often that life sucks sometimes, and moves on.  The book has a very informal, conversational tone.  Lamott doesn’t come across as someone making an argument for the importance of prayer, she is simply talking about something that is important to her and explaining why she finds in meaningful.

Lamott, Anne.  Help, Thanks, Wow: The Three Essential Prayers.  New York: Riverhead, 2012.

Google