I've two I bought a few weeks ago after hearing them read as Book of the Week on Radio Four – but missing odd episodes. They are:
The Second Sleep – far-future dystopiae are everywhere but Robert Harris' novel is an unusual take on the theme .
Firstly, this is about a young priest being sent to investigate the death of a fellow clergyman in the fictitious but credibly-named village of Axford, evidently near the real Exeter in which some of the events occur.
Further, although this takes place 800 years hence, it is in a post-apocalypse English society that has become a Christian theocracy that has recovered in anything technical only about as far as perhaps the early-18C. We "see" artefacts from the late-20 to early-21C through puzzled 29C eyes – a neat touch that reinforces the drama. Why has that society stopped there, by what means, with what effects? How did the cleric die? What was the purpose of a massive, sealed concrete structure from ancient times, on what is now the local manor's land?
You will have to read it, won't you?
'
And…
'
The other book is very different, and factual.
Scientist and science journalist Adam Rutherford explores the nature of bigotry in his How To Argue With A Racist, showing the stereotypes and myths, of which not all are necessarily nasty, but which back up the false idea of races having specific characteristics that do not exist in reality.
For example, the idea that because many Indians are superb mathematicians or many Africans excel at athletics, they must have some genetic reason for it – no, he says, examine cultures, not biology.
He also shows how science, particularly modern developments in DNA testing and genetics, is being misused to bolster racism, such as on self-gratification web-sites devoted to the attitude.
As for those DNA testing companies that purport to tell you your geographical and racial origins… he exposes their reasoning as deeply flawed, by simple arithmetic that to be honest I find somewhat counter-intuitive. It goes like this:
Each organism takes half of its DNA information from one parent, half from the other. Each of them in turn… only a few generations shows the startling effect of that 1/2-exponent. As I understand it, even if any of us can trace our documented marital lineage over several 100 years, we cannot be anywhere near as sure of our biological hence ethnic origins. Rutherford goes on to explain how the DNA companies arrive at their results – basically, by bad statistics and generalising.
Why counter-intuitive? It made me think of a population decreasing by about [1 / ( 2^4) ] per century, not growing rapidly, but of course that forgets that most couples who have children, produce two or more; and the generations in each family overlap. (He types, having just learnt of becoming a great-uncle yet again!)
This is an interesting and more, a thought-provoking, work that ought be set in every school in the land – every land.
And next time I am faced with a tick-box list on an official form, asking my ' Ethnicity ' usually concatenated with nationality, I will tick the box labelled ' Errr…. '