Though I didn't have much computer time this weekend, I did have a relative abundance of reading time, so I got all the way through the Émilie section of the Arianrhod (though I haven't read the appendices... yet).
I am quite impressed by Arianrhod's ability as a science writer. I'm familiar with the physics she covers -- though not nearly as much with the history of the science -- and I thought she did a great job of making it clear and accessible and demonstrating what they were thinking about back then, and the different strains of thought, and what we think today relative to what they thought then. I really felt like I learned a lot about all that, which I enjoyed a lot. (The only exception is when she talked about the double-slit experiment, which I realize is really beyond the scope of this book, but as someone who is familiar with the experiment, her description seemed rather muddled to me.)
I also really liked the way she disentangled the threads of how Émilie was instrumental in interpreting and arguing for Newton, and how although obviously Newton was a genius and did amazing and genius-y things which arguably no one else at the time could have done except for Leibniz (just kidding, lol, calculus aside), all these physics developments really depended on all these other people too (Edmond Halley, basically sweet-talking Newton into writing all his stuff down? Did not realize he was such a hero until this book!) and it made me think about the kinds of things we prioritize in terms of the stories we tell and the people we remember, and how some of that is shifting and becoming more inclusive -- by which I don't mean of women/minorities, though that's also happening and is a really good thing, but concurrent with that, the idea that it's not just Lone Genius Man (or even woman, or nb person) who is worth remembering and talking about. Which is a really good thing!
A couple of various thoughts (trying not to wholly duplicate what selenak has already written about; thank you for covering this and for writing about Laura Bassi and Mme de Graffigny!)
-LOL to reading this after Zinsser; Arianrhod clearly likes Voltaire a lot more than Zinsser (this is not hard) and mostly seems to agree with Orieux that they had a rather tempestuous relationship but that both of them were... kind of like that, and actually soulmates in a "we decided at some point we'd rather have sex with other people but you're still the awesomest" sort of way
She was fiery, while he was prone to awful sulking moods. She could be imperious and controlling... he was egotistical, and he could be passively aggressive, deliberately hurting her... Sometimes he hurled awful words that made her cry for hours, and she occasionally threw at him a spoon or a plate. But always they made up. Usually, after a dreadful scene... soon all would be forgiven and they would be laughing together. It was an intimacy very few people understood.
VOLTAIRE. Voltaire's taste in soulmate relationships, man, he does seem to have a bit of a type ;) (Though maybe not Mme Denis as much? Though they seem to have fought a lot too, though differently, according to Orieux.)
-After our discussion on Orieux and Zinsser (she has read Zinsser's work, and at some point I may go through her notes), I was charmed to see this:
It had all gone so well, Voltaire told a friend, that although the mother was now sleeping, she was not as tired as he was, having recently delivered his Catalina.
Go Arianrhod :P (Émilie :(((( )
Of course, she may err on the side of liking Voltaire:
Walking around Paris today, it is hard not to like and admire Voltaire, whose kindly face smiles down from the many statues erected to this great poet, dramatist, essayist, and revolutionary hero.
I... have never thought of his face as kindly (though I know he could be kind). More "like he's laughing at you. Possibly in a mostly-kind way."
Loved the following quote, and I feel like this sums up the balanced view that Arianrhod takes towards Émilie:
[Émilie] broke so many stereotypes about women and about mathematicians, stereotypes that lingered until the eve of the twenty-first century. She showed it is possible to be both emotional and rational, both intellectual and sexy. She was truly the 'divine Émilie'.
I am quite impressed by Arianrhod's ability as a science writer.
So was I, but then unlike you I'm a complete laywoman in this regard, so I'm gratified to hear Arianrhod holds up to you!
Arianrhod clearly likes Voltaire a lot more than Zinsser (this is not hard) and mostly seems to agree with Orieux that they had a rather tempestuous relationship but that both of them were... kind of like that
Yep. As you say, Voltaire clearly had a type. Did Émilie, though? Her men seem to be pretty different from each other. I mean, two we don't actually know whether or not she had affairs with them or was just friends with romantic overtones, i.e. Maupertuis and Richelieu. Then there was The One With The Possible Suicide Attempt, about whom I recall nothing, personality wise. The three we know for sure she was romantically and sexually involved with are her husband, Voltaire and Saint-Lambert. While her marriage was mostly a sensible arrangement, she and her husband seem to have truly liked each other, and I doubt she'd have married him if she hadn't felt at least a tiny bit attracted at the point of marriage (enough to know producing offspring wouldn't be a hardship), so we shouldn't completely ignore him. Anyway, out of all these guys, the only two prone to diva behaviour and ready to argue fiercely were Voltaire and Maupertuis, and if she didn't have an affair with Maupertuis, this leaves Voltaire, while her husband and Saint-Lambert come across as more quietly supportive types. (Richelieu, whether or not they had a fling, clearly never was a serious romance.)
"Catalina": this reminds, not just Arianrhod spells the name like this, so do some other books. But the man in question still was called Lucius Sergius Catilina. There's also the anglisized "Catiline" in the offering. But "Catalina", as far as I know, is the Spanish version of the name Catherine, so who in Voltairian literature started to spell the Roman bad boy this way, I have no idea.
Of course, she may err on the side of liking Voltaire:
LOL, I thought the very same thing when coming across this very description of walking through Paris etc. And I definitely agree on Voltaire's expression, see also the icon. (Also, as I think you observed before: Voltaire is that rare case in the 18th century, someone whose portraits do provide an impression of his personality as it comes across in his writings and history. *g*)
Right?? I was definitely thinking about your icon when I read that line about walking through Paris :)
Hmm, yeah, I don't think Émilie really had a type. I feel like you could make an argument (though not a strong one, given the lack of data) that at least for some of her life, she subscribed to what my best friend (who is a mathematician, and the one I was thinking I should call "the divine geometer") once called the tendency to "pick the smartest guy in the room," which I think is a common inclination among technically-minded het women -- not all, for sure, and it's a trait that gets outgrown to a certain extent, but enough that it wouldn't surprise me to see it in Émilie, let's say. Now, Saint-Lambert doesn't seem to quite fit this mold, but by that time she may have been ready for someone who was a bit different than Voltaire :) (And her husband doesn't either, of course, but I imagine he also probably served as a good counterpoint to Voltaire...)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Arianrhod - some thoughts on the Émilie section
Date: 2021-04-12 05:45 am (UTC)I am quite impressed by Arianrhod's ability as a science writer. I'm familiar with the physics she covers -- though not nearly as much with the history of the science -- and I thought she did a great job of making it clear and accessible and demonstrating what they were thinking about back then, and the different strains of thought, and what we think today relative to what they thought then. I really felt like I learned a lot about all that, which I enjoyed a lot. (The only exception is when she talked about the double-slit experiment, which I realize is really beyond the scope of this book, but as someone who is familiar with the experiment, her description seemed rather muddled to me.)
I also really liked the way she disentangled the threads of how Émilie was instrumental in interpreting and arguing for Newton, and how although obviously Newton was a genius and did amazing and genius-y things which arguably no one else at the time could have done
except for Leibniz(just kidding, lol, calculus aside), all these physics developments really depended on all these other people too (Edmond Halley, basically sweet-talking Newton into writing all his stuff down? Did not realize he was such a hero until this book!) and it made me think about the kinds of things we prioritize in terms of the stories we tell and the people we remember, and how some of that is shifting and becoming more inclusive -- by which I don't mean of women/minorities, though that's also happening and is a really good thing, but concurrent with that, the idea that it's not just Lone Genius Man (or even woman, or nb person) who is worth remembering and talking about. Which is a really good thing!A couple of various thoughts (trying not to wholly duplicate what
-LOL to reading this after Zinsser; Arianrhod clearly likes Voltaire a lot more than Zinsser (this is not hard) and mostly seems to agree with Orieux that they had a rather tempestuous relationship but that both of them were... kind of like that, and actually soulmates in a "we decided at some point we'd rather have sex with other people but you're still the awesomest" sort of way
She was fiery, while he was prone to awful sulking moods. She could be imperious and controlling... he was egotistical, and he could be passively aggressive, deliberately hurting her... Sometimes he hurled awful words that made her cry for hours, and she occasionally threw at him a spoon or a plate. But always they made up. Usually, after a dreadful scene... soon all would be forgiven and they would be laughing together. It was an intimacy very few people understood.
VOLTAIRE. Voltaire's taste in soulmate relationships, man, he does seem to have a bit of a type ;) (Though maybe not Mme Denis as much? Though they seem to have fought a lot too, though differently, according to Orieux.)
-After our discussion on Orieux and Zinsser (she has read Zinsser's work, and at some point I may go through her notes), I was charmed to see this:
It had all gone so well, Voltaire told a friend, that although the mother was now sleeping, she was not as tired as he was, having recently delivered his Catalina.
Go Arianrhod :P (Émilie :(((( )
Of course, she may err on the side of liking Voltaire:
Walking around Paris today, it is hard not to like and admire Voltaire, whose kindly face smiles down from the many statues erected to this great poet, dramatist, essayist, and revolutionary hero.
I... have never thought of his face as kindly (though I know he could be kind). More "like he's laughing at you. Possibly in a mostly-kind way."
Loved the following quote, and I feel like this sums up the balanced view that Arianrhod takes towards Émilie:
[Émilie] broke so many stereotypes about women and about mathematicians, stereotypes that lingered until the eve of the twenty-first century. She showed it is possible to be both emotional and rational, both intellectual and sexy. She was truly the 'divine Émilie'.
Re: Arianrhod - some thoughts on the Émilie section
Date: 2021-04-12 08:05 am (UTC)So was I, but then unlike you I'm a complete laywoman in this regard, so I'm gratified to hear Arianrhod holds up to you!
Arianrhod clearly likes Voltaire a lot more than Zinsser (this is not hard) and mostly seems to agree with Orieux that they had a rather tempestuous relationship but that both of them were... kind of like that
Yep. As you say, Voltaire clearly had a type. Did Émilie, though? Her men seem to be pretty different from each other. I mean, two we don't actually know whether or not she had affairs with them or was just friends with romantic overtones, i.e. Maupertuis and Richelieu. Then there was The One With The Possible Suicide Attempt, about whom I recall nothing, personality wise. The three we know for sure she was romantically and sexually involved with are her husband, Voltaire and Saint-Lambert. While her marriage was mostly a sensible arrangement, she and her husband seem to have truly liked each other, and I doubt she'd have married him if she hadn't felt at least a tiny bit attracted at the point of marriage (enough to know producing offspring wouldn't be a hardship), so we shouldn't completely ignore him. Anyway, out of all these guys, the only two prone to diva behaviour and ready to argue fiercely were Voltaire and Maupertuis, and if she didn't have an affair with Maupertuis, this leaves Voltaire, while her husband and Saint-Lambert come across as more quietly supportive types. (Richelieu, whether or not they had a fling, clearly never was a serious romance.)
"Catalina": this reminds, not just Arianrhod spells the name like this, so do some other books. But the man in question still was called Lucius Sergius Catilina. There's also the anglisized "Catiline" in the offering. But "Catalina", as far as I know, is the Spanish version of the name Catherine, so who in Voltairian literature started to spell the Roman bad boy this way, I have no idea.
Of course, she may err on the side of liking Voltaire:
LOL, I thought the very same thing when coming across this very description of walking through Paris etc. And I definitely agree on Voltaire's expression, see also the icon. (Also, as I think you observed before: Voltaire is that rare case in the 18th century, someone whose portraits do provide an impression of his personality as it comes across in his writings and history. *g*)
Re: Arianrhod - some thoughts on the Émilie section
Date: 2021-04-14 05:12 am (UTC)Hmm, yeah, I don't think Émilie really had a type. I feel like you could make an argument (though not a strong one, given the lack of data) that at least for some of her life, she subscribed to what my best friend (who is a mathematician, and the one I was thinking I should call "the divine geometer") once called the tendency to "pick the smartest guy in the room," which I think is a common inclination among technically-minded het women -- not all, for sure, and it's a trait that gets outgrown to a certain extent, but enough that it wouldn't surprise me to see it in Émilie, let's say. Now, Saint-Lambert doesn't seem to quite fit this mold, but by that time she may have been ready for someone who was a bit different than Voltaire :) (And her husband doesn't either, of course, but I imagine he also probably served as a good counterpoint to Voltaire...)