Skip to main content

Get started on your book!

I'd like to draw your attention to the 'Writing a popular science book' Masterclass organised by the Guardian on 20 July in London.

Whether you are a scientist who would like to get wider public interest in your field, or just someone who has always wanted to write a book, this is a great opportunity to gain the necessary know-how on everything from choosing topics to selling your idea and the publishing process.

With talks from scientist and communicator Professor Stephen Curry, TV presenter and author Angela Saini, former science book publisher and author Simon Flynn, award winning science writer Brian Clegg and former biologist and author M G Harris, plus the opportunity to pitch your book ideas to an expert panel for instant feedback, it should be a brilliant day. 

To ensure a place, tickets need to be booked by 7 July - you can find all the details on the Guardian website.


Here's a little more about the team:

Brian Clegg is a popular science writer with 20 books in print who has written for publications from the Observer to Playboy. After degrees in Natural Sciences and Operational Research, he worked at British Airways before leaving to set up a company giving training in business creativity. These days, most of his time is taken up writing popular science books and giving talks. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts. Find out more on Brian's website.

Angela Saini is a British science journalist and author, whose first book Geek Nation: How Indian Science is Taking Over the World was published in 2011. Angela has also been published in Science, Wired, the Guardian and New Scientist and is a frequent presenter on BBC radio, for shows including Material World and More or Less. In 2008, she carried out an investigation into bogus universities which was broadcast on the BBC TV's flagship Ten O'Clock News.

Simon Flynn has degrees in chemistry and philosophy and worked for a good number of years in publishing, becoming managing director of leading UK independent publisher Icon Books. He recently left the publishing world to become a science teacher.

MG Harris is the author of the popular Joshua Files series of novels. Born in Mexico and brought up in Manchester, she studied biochemistry at St Catherine's College, Oxford University, before pursuing a doctorate at St Cross College, Oxford. MG spent several years working in research laboratories before setting up her own internet company. She is a successful young adult fiction author and will bring to the panel a mix of expertise in biology and in the narrative style so important for good popular science. In an attempt to cover up the fact that at heart she's a bit of a geek, MG spends as much time as possible going out to salsa clubs to dance.

Stephen Curry is a Professor of Structural Biology at Imperial College. His main research interests are in structural analysis — using X-ray crystallography— of the molecular basis of replication RNA viruses such as foot-and-mouth disease virus and noroviruses (which include the infamous 'winter vomiting bug'). Since 2008 Curry has written regularly about his research and the scientific life past and present on his Reciprocal Space blog and at the Guardian, Curry is also a founder member and vice-chair of Science is Vital, a UK group that campaigns on scientific issues, and is on the board of directors of the Campaign for Science and Engineering.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp...

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor...

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense...