/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12913369]

Can /lit/ recommend any good science writers? It's a genre I want to start writing in, because I like the idea of translating esoteric concepts and jargon into an engaging article for the average layperson. Most of the science writers I know are scientists first and writers second, and I wanna know if there are any with a decent literary talent.

[Anonymous No.12913447]

>>12913369
>translating esoteric concepts and jargon into an engaging article for the average layperson.
>literary talent.

Writing shallow articles doesn't need talent. There is no audience for that. What are you smoking anyway? Are you a woman by chance? You sound like it. Just as retarded.

[Anonymous No.12913524]

>>12913447

The idea is longform science essays for the average person to enjoy. There absolutely is an audience for that. I don't smoke. I'm not a woman. You can't hear text. That was unnecessary.

Thanks for the bump, though.

[Anonymous No.12913812]

>>12913369
If you aren't a scientist first you will get the science wrong, so what's the fucking point?

[Anonymous No.12913884]

>>12913812

Researching the topic and having conversations with actual scientists help to keep the science accurate. There's an entire field of journalism devoted to this, it's not new.

Why is /lit/ so full of lazy contrarians?

[Anonymous No.12913892]

Go read actual scientific journals and dissertation, goon

[Anonymous No.12914081]

>>12913369
[Throws bone]
>Dawkins

[Anonymous No.12914143]

>>12913884
>wasting everyone's time
>getting paid
have you ever had a job?

[Anonymous No.12914729]

>>12913892

I intend to, but I was just hoping SOMEBODY on this board read science writing on occasion. Every writer has role models.

[Anonymous No.12914813]

>>12913812
uhh

[Anonymous No.12914816]

>>12913369
David Deutsch is pretty good

[Anonymous No.12914846]

>>12913447
>what are you smoking
How is 6th grade these days?

[Anonymous No.12914894]

>>12913884
>Why is /lit/ so full of lazy contrarians?
It's just "pop-science reporters" are always Tyson-tier trainwreck. Reporting is only skin deep, no matter how much you "study" your interviewed subject, everyone in the field will call you out for blatantly misinforming the public because to them it reads like gossip rag.

The only pop science of any worth is that done by someone actually in that field. Of course they need decent writing skill in order to dumb it down and communicate properly.

[Anonymous No.12914896]

>>12913369
You won't find much help here OP, /lit/ is full of teenagers and failed liberal arts undergrads.

Try these:
>Stephen Jay Gould
>E. O Wilson
>Lewis Thomas
>Oliver Sacks
>Feynman (His 3 volume lectures are quite readable, but try his Easy Pieces if you're looking for something shorter)

A few more technical works:
>AI: Modern Approach by Norvig
>What Is Mathematics by Richard Courant

[Anonymous No.12914902]

>>12914894
you do know it's possible to right a good story with hard science, right?

[Anonymous No.12914922]

>>12914902
>hard science
Yes, hard scifi is pop sci. In those instances, the author is often intimately acquainted. A competent dabbler at least, or actually having work experience in there.

What you probably mean is soft scifi. For that, you can just throw random technobabble to make it work for the story as a set piece. On that point authors play it safe and invent completely fictional stuff, so as to prevent cringey "its a unix sytem" moments.

[Anonymous No.12914951]

>>12914922
>hard scifi is pop sci.
wha- no?

[Anonymous No.12915024]

>>12914951
On the really hard end of scifi, exposition sits within existing scientific understanding, and any extrapolation in the future is explicitly delineated. Think Greg Egan or Daniel Suarez, not Gibson or Banks.

[Anonymous No.12915084]

[Anonymous No.12915317]

>>12913369
Science is fake read Bruno Latour