Recent News & Articles
06/09/23
Dear readers, as pleasures, are greatest in anticipation, I would like to introduce my new novel which is to be published very soon.
Doubting Verity is very special to me for several reasons. Firstly, the novel raises the academic issues I, your humble servant, faced personally in my teaching career. Namely, the plot line is based on a true story that took place not so long ago and affected greatly the life of my friend and colleague.
So often, we hear about prosecutions where an offender is a person in a position of trust. Thus, we teach our society to see the matter in one way only and not to look at the other side of the coin when a senior person can be a victim. In doing so we frame our judgment and limit the social roles that may lead to a massive omission in the juvenile’s crime. Most of these situations evolve gradually, and both the adult offender and the juvenile one ensure that they mimic a normal courtship or natural affection. It’s often not until later that the minor realizes his or her naivety was exploited or a senior discovers, they have underestimated the cunning and ingenuity of the underage. This book contemplates the consequence of the underestimation of the actions of a juvenile in academic settings. The plot follows the story of a young prominent university professor, Michael Elliot, of English Literature who runs the international summer program course.
Secondly, I named one of the leading characters after myself. If you have not yet managed to decipher my poem from the author’s tab, that name of no eccentric whim is Emma. Statistically, the name has always been on the top ten list of most popular names in the UK and Europe since, well, ever, inevitably at least one of my works was literally doomed to feature Emma. So now, when I am done with all those Isabelas, Corinnes and Ashleys
I have the right, haven’t I? Since Emma’s character in the book depicts my real-life role in the story the book tells; the character bears many of my personal features, works my job and has my friends. However, she has a less dramatic surname than I do (seriously, characters have enough troubles along the plot so I simply couldn’t torture them through surnames in addition).
Well, I hope this teaser is intriguing enough to boost your anticipation. The video teaser is also on the way and, aw, you will love it, I promise! I believe that is enough of coming out for today and remember, the world is full of magical things patiently waiting for us to discover them as soon as they get published.
01/01/22
Why "Losing head" is no longer an idiom?
Why does the ignorant one pulls through?
The origin of the human brain belongs to the main mysteries of evolution and one of the most controversial topics in biological science. Why did evolution at some point in time chose to support brain development for one of the primate species? Why did the brain evolve so rapidly in such a short period? And why has homo sapiens' brains been constantly losing weight for 30,000 years?
To answer these questions, one will have to turn to the interesting metamorphoses that took place with the most favourable ancestors of mankind millions of years ago. Before the advent of Homo Sapiens, evolution took place in the traditional way. As we all know from our Anatomy and Biology school lessons The "fuel" of evolution is polymorphism, variability, variability within one species. If the external conditions of habitation did not change, the characteristics of the species remained more or less conservative, if the conditions underwent changes, then polymorphism was the only way for those creatures to survive. Adaptively of a gene turned out to be more suitable for the changed conditions and thus improved the species quality. When the variability of new genetic variations did not solve the necessity of adaptation to the new changed conditions, the population died out. Natural selection is the eternal opposition of a plurality of features and environmental pressure. The animals, who managed to find food, survive cold and procreate successfully, lived. Others became extinct.
The frontal lobe, which became the morphological basis of human intelligence, originally had the task of inhibiting animal instincts. This structure is in control of our innate and automatic self-preserving behaviour patterns, which ensure our survival and that of our species. The first of our three brain functions inherited from ancestors is what scientists call the reptilian cortex. This brain sustains the elementary activities of animal survival such as respiratory system, adequate rest and a beating heart. We are not required to consciously “think” about these activities. The reptilian cortex also houses the “startle centre”, a mechanism that facilitates swift reactions to unexpected occurrences in our surroundings. That panicked lurch you experience when a door slams shut, a looming silhouettes in darkness, weird squeaking sounds somewhere in the house, or the heightened awareness you feel when a twig cracks in a nearby bush while out on an evening stroll are all examples of the reptilian cortex at work. When it comes to our interaction with others, the reptilian brain offers up only the most basic impulses: aggression, mating, and territorial defence. There is no great difference, in this sense, between a crocodile defending its spot along the river and a turf war between two urban gangs.
Only thanks to frontal lobe work, we are able to restrain our instinctual will to grab the last piece of a cake in the plate and offer it kindly to a child. The evolved frontal lobe dictates our ability to share, to refuse food and thereby maintaining relationships within society. Now and then, we all hear stories about folks who are too concerned about losing weight try to eat as little as possible eventually developing a disease called anorexia. It is almost impossible to force a person with this disorder to eat, and modern medicine is powerless to help the matter. Interestingly, 60 years ago, when medicine was not so humane, patients with anorexia underwent a complex surgery that involved a sharp scalpel cutting off the frontal lobe in the lower part of the temporal region. After a while, these patients regained their appetite and returned to normal life. Oh, well, almost normal. Control over the animal instinct and its abuse were no longer in action and a thought of sharing food would never visit their heads again.
Another function of the frontal lobe was the support of social connections among the ancient hominids. Those who were unable to share food were either eaten/beaten or expelled. Therefore, in just a few million years, the frontal lobe of the human brain grew very quickly and eventually became the basis of mind. Man is a genuine part of nature and for a long time the evolution (If we follow Mr Darwin’s approach) of the human brain followed the same biological patters as it did with other primates. It didn’t go very fast, and the very appearance of primates (about 65 million years ago) cannot be considered some kind of a pinnacle of evolution — it’s nothing more than the adaptation of mammals to new environmental challenges. However, those were not the changed that could trigger the substantial development of human brain. What were those unusual conditions that arose, that radically changed the nature of the evolution? To explain the reason for these revolutionary transformations, scientists wrangle over different forms of the so-called speech-social-labour theories. Some say that since our ancestors developed the art of communication their brain took a radical change, others claim than there are many species of animals known to use sophisticated communication systems, and advanced community structures, but those have not led to the emergence of a large brain. So what happened?
Apparently, the archetype of the human brain was formed in a rather unique environment in the result of a long-lasting biological process. At some point in time, about 15 million years ago, very favourable conditions for the life of any mammals developed in eastern Africa. Then in the subtropics, in half-flooded places, in shallow flowing water bodies, some tasty and nutritious prey animals - invertebrates or fish - prospered in huge quantities. A not-less-in-its-quantity group of predators led a sate and fully satisfy life. Among the latter were our distant ancestors. To picture the ease of a hunting process we may look at Norway today. Where you can see how, during the spawning of herring, bears come on their hind legs and, standing there up to their chest, scoop up caviar with their paws and eat it until they are full. Similarly, our ancestors just had to enter the water and draw lightly with their paws in order to gorge themselves. All this led to the formation of a group of species that practically dropped out of the selection system: why change if the environmental conditions are close to perfect? However, as known, with an excess of food, animals are not interested in anything at all, except for reproduction. The abundance of food, thus, increased competition during reproduction and, as a result, became the reason for the race for dominance.
One of the consequences of this condition was development of speech, which, apparently, originated in that period. Speech could have arisen as a way of organizing joint actions, and perhaps began with simple sounds or, for example, singing, like among modern gibbons. It was possible to impress the female with real success in hunting and abundant prey, which added attractiveness to the male, increasing the chances of passing on his genome to future generations. With an art of speech, a male could just tell a female creature about it and get the same laurels of the winner in her eyes, without making any real efforts. In the biological world, the principle of any interaction is based on the following: the fewer actions and the greater the biological result. Therefore, imitation of action with the help of speech has become an invaluable quality among archaic anthropoids. Speech became a profitable product, and became a base of intense selection, as it allowed achieving a faster reproductive result. In fact, speech emerged as a form of deception, and deception was effective then and today.
To read more please request through the contact form
25/11/21
Antinomy Of Truth/Lie
Great but frightening Universe
Recently, I've had some interesting conversations with a few of my university colleagues
regarding the Science, as a field of study, representation in literature. There's a giddiness going
around all social channels and YouTube blogs, related to an outpouring of science love - the kind you
get from watching TV science shows, the kind that has stunning visuals, but is, well, a wee bit
simplistic (a sin that none of us could ever, ever be accused of, naturally). Well, most of us won’t
even understand what’re the talks about, or should I put it as wouldn’t bother understanding. It's all
very positive, commendable, and perfectly reasonable. But it leaves me feeling a little sad. You see,
the thing is, it's relatively easy to focus on what we know, yet to me the wonder of the Universe, the
awesomeness, is never greater than when we contemplate all that we don't know. And those are
topics of, oh, so many YouTube video, again with sparkling computerized effects and no substantial
information.
It's true that when we take note of the impossibly tiny chip of time that our entire species has
inhabited compared to the billions of years before, and the untold billions ahead, one can feel
refreshingly small. Or, if we contemplate the billions of trillions of other worlds that must exist
across the observable universe and septillions more across the Universe we can’t even observe, we
can grasp momentarily at just how miniscule our daily existence is. But for me nothing compares to
the perspective, the shock, or the excitement, of being reminded of what we are not even able to
imagine in our primitive human brains. If you want a small shake of your grey cells, here you go some
of the questions I desperately pondered while working ion Antinomy of truth/lie.
We don't know why the Universe exists:
This is really quite sad and somehow ridicule, and
could be grounds for doubting that the Universe knows what it’s doing and that there might be
some exalted sacred reason for all of us. But in terms of Physics and Astrophysics in particular,
although there are some really very appealing, very promising, theoretical frameworks that begin to
answer the question, the simple truth is that we're not sure which might be right. It may be that the
universe springs from an inherently unstable ‘Singularity’ (we still have no clue what it is but be gave
it a cute name). The most void-like void, prone to spontaneous generation of matter and energy in
proportions that always balance out to zero. Furthermore, this may not be the only universe (a
terrible linguistic fail, I know), but rather one of an impressive array of multiverses, part of another
multiverse of 100 to the power of 10 to the power of 16 distinguishable realities that continue
multiplying. But a big piece of the problem is that we're still waiting for the next generation of
cosmic measurements to chip away at the models, and we're still waiting for theories that provide
more readily testable hypotheses, not just mathematical elegance. So, we don't know why all that
exists if it does and what to we actually mean by existence.
We don't know what dark matter and dark energy are:
Big problem for science indeed but a
huge opportunity for SciFi writers to unleash their potential. Normal matter, the stuff of you, me,
planets, stars, and Subway sandwiches, amounts to only about 4.9% of the total matter and energy
content of the universe. 26.8% of matter is 'dark', we know it's there because on large, cosmic,
scales stuff moves around faster than it should and because the way that galaxies strew themselves
across space is consistent with the existence of vast amounts of slow-moving gravitating 'stuff' that
never turns into stars or planets or anything, just stays as diffuse, invisible, incredibly antisocial
particles. As it often happens with anything not matching expectations, laws of known nature in this
extend, we called it dark. Except we really have no idea what these particles truly are. That's already
scary enough to cause a protracted depression, but perhaps dark energy is even scarier. Something
is causing the expansion of the universe to accelerate. It didn't used to. Until about 5 or 6 billion
years ago (don’t worry if you failed to recall) the stretching of space following the Big Bang was in
decline, but then something started to counter that, another unseen component, perhaps a type of
vacuum energy density that fills up space as space itself grows. What exactly is it? We do not know.
We have lots of ideas though, which is great, always good to have ideas about 68.3% of the universe.
But let me state it clear: out of all those ideas of really creative minds, only 0.0000001% might be a
right guess. Again, this is a perfect working field for SciFi authors and an amazing topic for amateur
Astronomers at the dining table.
We don't know whether life exists anywhere else:
This fact is not only close to my heard but
also send shivers down our spines when we hear something like, “absolutely alone”. Here we are,
sacred beings on a planet blooming with life that's been busy sculpting and re-sculpting the physical
and chemical environment for much of the past 5 billion years. And now we're confident that there
are lots of planets out there, and that many of them could have had an equal winning ticket to host
some form of life. But we still don't know whether or not we're alone. That's quite a problem. Don't
get me wrong, it's a good problem, a juicy problem, one of the best. So, we continue to bumble
along in splendid isolation, the sole mind of the entire Universe, with only our teddy bears for
comfort us.
We probably haven't really figured out the quantum world:
While it's true that our present
mathematical framework of quantum mechanics can do wonders, from describing atoms and
molecules to the bizarre nature of entanglement and qubits, that doesn't mean that we've nailed the
case shut. Quite the contrary. One need only cast a look over the literature to see that the most
fundamental aspects of the quantum nature of the universe are still causing wrangles among
scientists and again become amazingly yummy topics at any friend gathering. People are still
reformulating the ways in which we cope with the quantum nature of reality so it's clearly too soon
to call this fully understood. Not only that, but the possibility of pure quantum effects reaching into
the realm of soft, wet, and warm biology has also a rather unnerving notion.
We don't understand our own biology:
It's not too radical to say this, after all, if
we did understand every detail of how we worked we'd presumably be able to eliminate disease,
eliminate it at the stage of conceiving, and more to that, adjust the characteristics of a new being.
We'd also be able to customize ourselves by reaching into to those 3 billion or so nucleic acids in our
DNA and doing a spot of molecular engineering, getting those violet eyes we've always wanted. But
we're not close to doing this any better than we can come up with 'engineered' crops - lots of misses
and a few hits. Want a good example of our pitiful lack of knowledge? It's the microbiome. Our ten
trillion human cells are augmented, exploited, nurtured, by a hundred trillion microbial cells - a
couple of pounds of bacteria and archaea that we all carry around and can't live without. They're in
our guts, our lungs, up our noses and in every other dank corner you could possibly thing of. We're
just cruise ships for the ultimate microbial world (much outnumbering our own), and we simply
don't know what that all means. Though learned to take them as our not so cute silent life
companions. Remember of them when feel lonely next time. You are never alone!
We don't know how the Earth works:
Let's head back to a grander scale. No human, or robot,
has ever physically travelled deeper that 40K ft into the Earth's crust, everything else is extrapolation
and interpolation from 'remote sensing' and clever physical analyses, at times, with a help of
scanners. It took us a ridiculously long time to figure out that the outer planetary layer is moving and
sliding around; plate tectonics was not generally accepted until the mid-20th century! We're still not
sure exactly how the inner core works, how rolls of convecting, conducting material in the outer core
generate our planetary magnetic field. We can’t even detect the volcano eruptions accurately
enough unless within several hours before the event takes place. There's also so much mess after
4.5 billion years of geophysics that some of our best information about the planet's origins come
from meteorites and the cratering of other worlds. Speaking of other worlds, we do not even
understand where the Moon came from, maybe there was a giant impact, maybe not. For an
allegedly clever species on a small yet mighty planet this is if not exactly but an epic failure.
We can't prove or solve many of our own mathematical conjectures and problems:
Ouch,
the pain of childhood to so many of us. Once, when a reader asked me whether there was a book
that ever made me cry, I said it was Maths 3 Grade study book. Even those of us who practice
Mathematical riddles every now and then to entertain ones Sunday even should remember they
have not either escaped this festival of ignorance. Just remind yourself that there's a long list of
unproven, unsolved problems and unproven conjectures and if some of those are ever proven they
might undermine the elegance of other beautiful laws we thought we understood. Perhaps it is
better to leave them untouched.
We don't know how to make an artificial intelligence:
I'm putting this here because it's an
eternal problem along with a group of other concomitant issues it drags along: the moral of AI self-
awareness, self-conscious and, my favourite, how to teach an emotionless machine to love us,
primitive biological beings, when our existence resamples life of vermin too much. Secondly, AI
speaks to our desire to understand ourselves (if you can make an artificial being you may find the
secret behind your own intelligence, even if it's just an emergent phenomenon) as well as to
understand what might be 'out there' in the vastness of the Universe, wrought by billions of years of
alien evolution, and really quite depressed by it all. Although we've come a long way with our
machines, it's not clear that predictive text or automated suggestions for shopping and movie
streaming are really assembling information in any way that resembles how our minds generate
ideas. This is truly a frontier I personally am very much eager to cross.
The verdict:
There's an awful lot we don't know (far more than just my examples here). But
the point is not to get discouraged, because this ignorance is a wonderful thing. It's what drives
science, and it's what makes the Universe truly awe-inspiring. After the hundreds of thousands of
years that Homo sapiens has loped around, the Universe can still elude our fidgety, inquisitive minds,
easily outracing our considerable imaginations. So, if any of these questions bother your too,
welcome to the world of Antinomy.
14/05/20
E M M A ?
In today's article, I would like to talk about the fresh adaptation of the cult Jane Austen’s novel “Emma”. Unfortunately, I will not be able to provide a comparative analysis with previous adoptions; perhaps,
I will do this later in a separate article, because… well, I want to say a lot about the version of 2020. I do not intend to offend anyone by my subjective opinion. I am writing the following just because my heart
is aching with sadness as Jane Austen (one of my favourite writers) deserves a more serious treatment in my opinion.
De Wilde, who made a name for herself as a rock photographer by shooting such stars like the Rolling Stones for publications including the New York Times, says she sought to bring the rock star spirit to the
characters in her adaptation of Jane Austen's famous novel Emma.
Ms Wilde and screenwriter Eleanor Catton, known for being the youngest person to win the Booker Prize (The Luminaries), tried not to think about previous versions of Emma (or the book itself) as they worked
on the script. According to de Wilde, she wanted to bring out completely different aspects of Austen’s work to the audience than previous adaptations bore. The main focus for her was the comedic aspect of the novel.
“Part of my pitch was to incorporate elements of a screwball comedy while keeping it in the period frames,” de Wilde says. Well, there are only the frames (of paintings on walls) that can be granted with the word
“period” after all.
This film will really take you some time from the very beginning to calm down from the first shock and continue to watch it with a slight condescension to the complete disregard for: the strict English
society rules, the complete mismatch of the props (mainly food, modern wheel chocks, the pinned jacket of Mr. Churchill (meant to look rich) and, of course, hairstyles of some of the characters). The frantically
intrusive musical soundtrack at the very beginning, the thundering insertions of a rural chorus without musical accompaniment (that literally made me shuddered with horror at how fast the impression worsens),
should have convinced us, we understand how sprightly and amusing the film is supposed to be.
There is also something I could identify as some startling buttock action. A despondent Mr Knightley is seen completely naked from the ... er ... rear right at the beginning. My favourite moment is his
close upped attempt to tuck the shirt into his trousers without… how shall we call it… exposing his main asset to the big screen. Emma herself, standing alone with her back to the fireplace, swiftly pulls her
skirts to get the full benefit of a roaring open fire, without obviously troubling herself to ascertain that the servants are not nearby. (Note she apparently does not wear drawers (naughty Emma), alternatively
the production budget was cut unexpectedly and poor Anya was left without any sort of panties).
Luckily, these indiscretions happen at the very beginning, after which the movie keeps its full period costume sedately in place and looks more or less decent, except for the strange panic attacks of Mr. Knightley
and the erotic
swallowing of strawberries by Emma. You know, watching poor strawberry finds it’s end in her mouth even a not faint-hearted one would get a heart attack under the terribly unblinking gaze of Anya Taylor-joy, which even in
relation to the strawberry, bears something calculating and predatory.
Taylor-joy plays unfamiliar Emma, not the one you were thinking of reading Jane Austen. You know, the author back in 1816 at the time of the first publication of her novel said, "I Think Emma is unlikely to be
liked by anyone but me." I do not think even she would have liked this Emma.
Anya is particularly good at the legendary unpleasant moments, outbursts of arrogance, annoyance, malice and sadism in which Taylor-joy clearly resembles the evil rich kid she played in Cory Finley's recent
Thriller "Thoroughbreds". Emma constantly humiliates the annoying old Miss Bates (Miranda Hart, who was brilliant by the way) in front of everyone, constantly demonstrates overplayed fatigue from the obsessive attention
of the unfortunate, who considers her as a friend. The most striking act of despicable cruelty during a picnic, for which Emma is known to be criticized by Mr. Knightley (at least someone) with too soft words, "this was bad."
However, Emma is so vain that later, when she seems to repent (very not much indeed), the sense of her supremacy is so pitchy that she cannot bring herself to apologize to Miss Bates, leaving us to wonder how deliberately this
revelation of the protagonist character has been exaggerated by the actress.
Sometimes the casting and production work well, sometimes not so well. The excellent actor Josh O'connor is forced to play the pantomime role of Mr. Elton, which is not really suitable for him. Maybe he would have
brought something more interesting to the role of Frank Churchill. Sometimes the look of the movie is a bit bland, and the “Gypsies” who at one stage attack Miss Smith are kept coyly off-camera.
Johnny Flynn is dubiously masculine, as Mr. Knightley (Jeremy Northam was more intelligent and status-oriented, in the 1996 version), with prickly morals that conflict with something sensual. He shows no interest
in Emma until he dances with her at one of the parties. And there, my dear friends, we can safely characterize the moment as: "He was suddenly hit by love." So abruptly and intense that it looks like acute heart failure,
but it turns out that the man was just overexcited with the unaccustomed, and then lays down on the icy floor of his living room to chill out, after scattering the clothes that he managed pull off without the help of servants.
However, the real revelation for me was Mia Goth as Harriet, a gawky, maladroit yet engaging and touching portrayal of a lonely and rather scared young woman who looks as if she has been crying herself to sleep.
I applaud her! The actress coped with her task brilliantly well. She could do a dishy sweet, good-natured Emma, if…if only...
Enhancing the foppish mannerisms of Elton and other characters, de Wilde also tried to make fun of the rigid class system—which Austen did with clever verbal duels, puzzles, and comic sketches in her work.
The Director chose a different path, a simpler one. A running joke throughout the film is that there are always beautiful desserts laid out (modern acid colourful macaroni), but only uncouth characters like Emma's
lowly protégé Harriet Smith eat them.
When Mr. Elton's new, nouveau riche wife (Tanya Reynolds) visits the Wodehouse stately home and brags about her money in an attempt to prove her status, Bill Nighy's alarmed hypochondriac (adore him) Mr. Woodhouse
is so incensed that he is unable to let go of his teacup, leaving a servant to pry it from his hands. The servant snatches it out of his hands (hardly a servant dared to do so back then). It would look funny if it were
a living room of the twenty first century.
Near the end of the film, in a moment that could have been pulled from a raunchy teen super bad comedy, Emma and Knightley seem to finally be about to kiss, but she gets a nosebleed. De Wilde says that this
scene took inspiration from her own experience of getting nosebleeds at the wrong time (what does it have to do with Austen’s Emma?). “This event also solves the problem in the film,” she claims. “There is one inherent
problem, which is that this story,” (it is about the work of Austen), “has a predetermined ending. Usually, when a scene of this kind takes place in a movie, you expect it to be over pretty quickly, but Emma still has
a lot to do after she agrees to be with Knightley, so I wanted something to always interrupt the possibility of a happy ending to their kisses," the director admits.
Another comedic element can be seen on the posters for the film. When the de Wilde was asked why she called the film "Emma.” (Yes, with a period at the end), de Wilde replied, "Well, because... it's a period piece!”
In general, this title is the only thing that features period in the entire work, despite the excellent work of the screenwriter in composing dialogues close to the book and the excellent work of the film crew,
who chose interesting angles and, in principle, the work is bursting with dynamics.
I like the earlier film adaptations of 1996 and 2009, but it is a matter of taste, of course. Perhaps, for those who have not read the book, the film will look like a good comedy based on some classic novel.
We will wait for the next adaptation of "Pride and Prejudice" which has already been announced for release this year.
05/04/20
Books that will kill you
I am sure that you’ve heard about dangerous books that can negatively affect the reader. I believe the first association that flashes across your thoughts is Death Note, the famous manga by Tsugumi Ohba. Truly, the majority of such books that are said can cause death, we saw only in horror films or in popular anime.
And yet, in Uncle Sam's country, there does indeed exist a 19th-century book called Shadows from the Walls of Death: Facts and Conclusions that will kill anyone who touches it.
The truth about this deadly book that kills its readers scares even the most daring fans of the Death Note manga.
However, the book I am telling you about right now is a very real hard copy (four of them to be precise). Originally, it was printed in an amount of 100 copies,
but almost all of them were destroyed later on as the deathly quality of the manuscript was revealed.
I believe you have already rightfully guessed that this work is not available to the general public, given the danger that it entails.
All four copies of it are located at Michigan State University in Bethesda, Maryland.
To find out the history of the creation of this literary weapon, I take you back to the year 1874. It was published by Dr Robert M. Kedzie (1823-1902),
who was a surgeon during the Civil War and later became a professor of Chemistry. We do always suspect there is something in doctors that makes them very
frightening even without a scalpel in their hands. Every time I remember the electric chair was invented by a smiley dentist, Alfred Southwick, I shudder in horror.
Well, Dr. Kedzie, unlike Alfred, decided to try himself in literature. In fact, Shadows from the Walls of Death contains 100 pages of wallpaper samples with descriptions,
86 of which are deadly because they are soaked in arsenic. Although in those years everyone knew about its deadly properties when ingested,
no one suspected that it could kill even being a part of the pigment that was used to colour wallpaper.
Dr Kedzie was one of the first to discover that the poison spreads through the air and significantly increases the number of diseases and deaths in the country.
Therefore, in order to draw attention to toxic wallpaper, he decided to print this book. Aw, that medical creativity. Let’s call it a hands-on experiment approach.
As historians suggest, during that period of the 19th century, approximately 65% of the wallpaper in the United States contained arsenic,
which they had been actively using for several decades, not even suspecting that in that form it posed a real threat to life.
After making 100 copies, Doctor Kedzie felt not really well despite the fact he took some measures to protect himself. Nevertheless,
the desire to deliver the message to the public was too strong and he donated those killing books to public libraries absolutely free of charge.
Largely due to that, the danger of wallpaper concerned society as nobody wanted to die in a public library reading a book.
Thus, the doctor’s theory was proved true through the experiment and later confirmed by other scientists. All libraries hastily rushed to destroy the copies they received.
It must be said that the handling and storage of the remaining four copies of this deadly book were carried out with great care. At the initial stage,
working with copies of the book required the wearing of special gloves, masks and other protective equipment.
A little later, each of the pages was wrapped in sealed plastic wrap to avoid any risk of poisoning.
These days, when the victims and most of their close relatives are long dead,
all experts consider that kind doctor’s action to be an incredibly effective method of raising awareness among the population.
In particular, that concerned the danger of living in a house with deadly wallpaper, which was very popular at that time.
Another book on my list of the deadly ones is Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury. Do not rush to throw away your copy.
To spot the right one we have to go all the way with the symbolism and pick up a copy of the 1953 limited edition bound in asbestos to prevent it from burning.
If you are not familiar with it,
Fahrenheit 451 is set in a dystopian version of the United States of America where all books are outlawed and characters called “firemen” are tasked with burning the homes and belongings of people who dare to read the illegal books.
Back in 1953, binding the book in asbestos seemed like a cool promotional gimmick. A bit like Curie’s fascination with radioactivity,
the publishing company had no idea about the dangers of asbestos. If there are any copies still available, you would have to take some serious safety precautions.
If you’re really determined to capture the same level of insanity, Holland-based Charles Nypels Laboratory has created a heat-sensitive edition of the book.
As part of the Jan van Eyck Academie and working with the graphic design collective, Super Terrain, the team has developed a book with lab-made pages covered in a soot-black, screen-printed layer. Once you apply direct heat at high temperatures, the soot disappears and reveals the words.
Without knowing what the black layer is made of, this book may still kill you. If the irony doesn’t first.
And finally, here we are at the final but, probably, the most killing book on the planet. We all must remember those Chemistry classes when our teachers shocked us with Marie Curie’s eccentric fascination over radium and polonium to the extent that she DID carry radioactive material around with her all the time. She even kept some next to her bed because it looked “like faint, fairy lights.” In fact, her notebooks (and almost everything else in her house) are radioactive and will be for about another 1500 years. That is a glowing glory, isn’t it?
This led to the ultimate conclusion: reading Marie Curie’s research notes can kill.
22/01/20
“Antinomy of truth”
- the first book of Antimony book series. Damien, a young smart French research fellow presents his findings that too revolutionary for the current understanding of laws of physics and mathematics. His works on time form and matter as well as his diploma thesis in zero vibrations role in quantum technologies open him a way to a dream job and world recognition. Little did he know that in a four hundred year period his works would cause an internecine confrontation between races of our Universe. Why would he care? Will he ever be able to change this future?
16/11/19
“More haste, less speed”
- the second book of the new Fantasy book series “The order of supreme power” is on Anabelle’s desk now. This one will focus our attention on another of magnificent Order warriors – the youngest of them all – Avite. Oh, poor man has no clue of what awaits him when he is heading to fulfil his duties. Rush always ends up in quality loss. Or does it not?
Popular
NO BRAINER, COULD YA COME AGAIN? - ALLIANCE OF MAGIC WORLDS
For a true daredevil Corinne, who always chose fun over boring history lessons...
NIGHT DAWN - DIABOLIC EDEN
British Museum historian and scientist Isabella is summoned to a National research team to analyse cryptic symbols seared into the ancient folio...