Rating: 
Summary: An Ode to Obscurity and Mediocrity
Review: The thesis of this book and the clue to the spirit that motivated it can be found on page 13 "...it will become clear that history is not, as we are so often led to believe, a matter of great men and lonely geniuses pointing the way to the future... and this book may help to show that given average intelligence and the information available to the innovators of the past, any reader could have matched their achievements."The logical implication of this assertion is that the reason why people of average intelligence did not match genius in the history of invention and innovation is essentially a coincidence. But then the book proceeds to describe the history of technology as if genius was in fact irrelevant, and as if chance connections have woven together the marvels of technology. I am not surprised that this pandering to mediocrity is a commercial success and enjoys glowing reviews--after all, we are all as good as great genius, right? And has not Newton confessed that he stood on the shoulders of giants? (He also said his life's greatest achievement was life-long celibacy.) Burke digs up obscure inventions and events to make dubious connections and say, well, it is all technological drift after all. Extraordinary talent is not necessary. The methodology of this book is a collection of anectodes that can be interpreted to support a predetermined conclusion. This book shows no understanding of the importance of the role of mathematics and science in technological development. And as already suggested, the issue of the importance of genius is never even fairly addressed. It is simply dismissed from the very beginning. I could not finish this tedious book. This book in reality talks down to its reader, for it is written to make you feel good in case you feel intellectually challenged. It robs the reader of the real fascination with the obscure and the accidental--for both have their role--because it refuses to give its due to greatness. The absurdity of Burke's thesis comes from the extreme ideological recesses to which egalitarianism has been pushed
Rating: 
Summary: An interesting look at history
Review: This book encourages the reader to consider how the creators of even the most significant of inventions can be lost in history without the right connections and a whole lot of luck. I couldn't help thinking about the loses - The pyramids of Egypt are technological marvels yet the individuals who developed the techniques that made the pyramids possible are lost in history along with the technology they created. How many school books tell about Nikola Tesla? - The fact is, some of our most famous historical figures are famous not just for their genius, but because they were in the right place at the right time. This book also invites the reader to explore how one little moment in history can profoundly affect the next. Just think - How might history have been different if Hitler had been accepted to the art school he applied to in his youth, instead of being rejected?
Rating: 
Summary: The "Law of Unintended Consequences" writ large.
Review: This book is an engaging, often humorous in the British style, account of the serendipitous results of inventions and discoveries. It serves to illustrate the permanence of the "Law of Unintended Consequences" inasmuch as inventions or discoveries in one era or location quite often lead to totally unrelated or undreamed-of uses in another. I would give the book a "10" except for the bizarre discussion, at the end of the book, of the problems of "planned obsolescence" and "energy crisis" rhetoric. Otherwise, you cannot go wrong giving this book to any thinking friend or relative.
Rating:
Summary: Disconnected
Review: This book should be subtitled: "Coffee Table History" because it is the kind of history book that belongs in the waiting rooms of doctors, dentists, barbershops, and in the family living room next to the copies of Time, Newsweek, and other Magazines. Written in true journalism style, the chapters are choppy, disconnected, and often unitelligible with James Burke going off on tangents, returning much later to the orignal subject matter; sometime after the reader has fallen asleep. In want of real history, one should go to school.
Rating:
Summary: Can a writer string a line of arbitrary facts together . . .
Review: This book suffers from comparisons to Burke's PBS series by the same name probably because this is more of a sampler of his perspectives than a comprehensive treatment. Still, it is an absolutely fascinating look at the history of technology and how a break in the smallest link in the chain of technological development might preclude an invention from ever coming forth. I enjoyed Burke's presentation style, written a bit like a mystery novel, giving us the pieces of the puzzle one at a time leading to the ultimate technology as we know it today. It leaves the reader guessing at each step as to what indispensable modern technology will result. Burke postulates that major technological advancements are not the result of geniuses slaving away in laboratories, but instead the amalgamation of numerous small inventions, mostly created by average folks trying to adapt to everyday problems. While I accept that premise prior to the 19th century and perhaps in certain cases through to the 20th century, I believe that with few exceptions (like Gates invention of DOS for example), most major technological breakthroughs now result from concerted and organized R&D efforts that result from government grants and the corporate profit motive. The only difference today is that the geniuses are working in their den on a PC, and not in a lab. However, with the sophistication and innovativeness necessary to reach the next level in today's complex scientific fields, such breakthroughs are no longer the within the capabilities of the average person. Though one might point to the proliferation of dot com companies as support of Burke's position, I would argue that these are not average people, but rather the geniuses next door. This is a book that makes one ponder the fabric of life and the importance of each individual strand. It is light reading with a heavy point and in that regard it is extraordinarily elegant. I rated it a 9/10. I highly recommend it to anyone with a curious mind.
Rating:
Summary: A fascinating book
Review: This book suffers from comparisons to Burke's PBS series by the same name probably because this is more of a sampler of his perspectives than a comprehensive treatment. Still, it is an absolutely fascinating look at the history of technology and how a break in the smallest link in the chain of technological development might preclude an invention from ever coming forth. I enjoyed Burke's presentation style, written a bit like a mystery novel, giving us the pieces of the puzzle one at a time leading to the ultimate technology as we know it today. It leaves the reader guessing at each step as to what indispensable modern technology will result. Burke postulates that major technological advancements are not the result of geniuses slaving away in laboratories, but instead the amalgamation of numerous small inventions, mostly created by average folks trying to adapt to everyday problems. While I accept that premise prior to the 19th century and perhaps in certain cases through to the 20th century, I believe that with few exceptions (like Gates invention of DOS for example), most major technological breakthroughs now result from concerted and organized R&D efforts that result from government grants and the corporate profit motive. The only difference today is that the geniuses are working in their den on a PC, and not in a lab. However, with the sophistication and innovativeness necessary to reach the next level in today's complex scientific fields, such breakthroughs are no longer the within the capabilities of the average person. Though one might point to the proliferation of dot com companies as support of Burke's position, I would argue that these are not average people, but rather the geniuses next door. This is a book that makes one ponder the fabric of life and the importance of each individual strand. It is light reading with a heavy point and in that regard it is extraordinarily elegant. I rated it a 9/10. I highly recommend it to anyone with a curious mind.
Rating:
Summary: Enlightening And Entertaining
Review: This delightful book is what we all wish all our Science classes were like. Mr. Burke shows amazing correlations between events and inventions, from the button to the Bomb and back again. The book starts out with the subtle events leading to a huge Northeast blackout. We observe how technology is a double-edged sword which first frees us, then ultimately makes us entirely dependent on our own conveniences. Many everyday expressions and ideas such as "lime light" are traced to their anachronist origins. Lots of fun!
Rating: 
Summary: Disappointing
Review: Will someone explain to me what this book is really about? I get the general premise, that scientific discoveries are often the result of unconnected work, people looking for one thing but finding another, etc.. The problem is, I don't agree with that and the author doesn't really prove it.
Did crop rotation and the invention of the stirrup really bring about northern Europe's rise to power? If it did, Burke doesn't explain how. Did chimney flues really change society, because people could spend more time indoors? That's not likely, and such a statement really needs more proof and documentation than Burke gives us.
These are some of the lame theories that Burke uses to explain major scientific developments in Europe and America.
It's true for example, that Bell was trying to invent a hearing device, but instead invented the telephone. But so what? Both kinds of devices involved vibrating graphite and other loose materials by means of electric surges. In fact, the telephone receiver actually is a hearing device that you put to your ear.
At one point in his career, Einstein said "How do I work? I grope." Okay, but he probably said a lot of other things as well, like, "It's cold today".
Sometimes half the ideas a writer or painter or software developer comes up with occur while he or she is writing, painting or coding. But that's part of the creative process, which writers and painters have understood for centuries. No doubt the same thing happens when inventors and scientists are working, except that they often have to test hundreds of materials, chemicals, formulas to arrive at a solution. Newton compared this process to the way a small boy sifts through sand to find the shiniest pebble.
On the other hand, Burke's attempts to connect inconsequential events, people and theories are confusing, obscure and ultimately boring. I always thought that Newton's "I have stood on the shoulders of giants," meant that he based his work on that of people like Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, etc. He built on their discoveries, and let their work be his initial guide to make discoveries of his own. Generally speaking, I always thought this was how most scientists work, although some of them (like Einstein) did rebel against contemporary opinions.
Hmmmm...
Maybe the cure for cancer will be discovered by a chef in New York who notices that blue cheese causes a certain type of rat to grow twice its size. The chef then tells this story to his dentist who studied animal husbandry at Dartmouth and remembers an experiment in which a pound of bleu cheese could keep an ant colony feed for six months. But then the telephone rings and...
| 
