What do you think?
Rate this book
The Glass Universe: How the Ladies of the Harvard Observatory Took the Measure of the Stars
In the mid-nineteenth century, the Harvard College Observatory began employing women as calculators, or “human computers,” to interpret the observations their male counterparts made via telescope each night. At the outset this group included the wives, sisters, and daughters of the resident astronomers, but soon the female corps included graduates of the new women’s colleges—Vassar, Wellesley, and Smith. As photography transformed the practice of astronomy, the ladies turned from computation to studying the stars captured nightly on glass photographic plates.
The “glass universe” of half a million plates that Harvard amassed over the ensuing decades—through the generous support of Mrs. Anna Palmer Draper, the widow of a pioneer in stellar photography—enabled the women to make extraordinary discoveries that attracted worldwide acclaim. They helped discern what stars were made of, divided the stars into meaningful categories for further research, and found a way to measure distances across space by starlight. Their ranks included Williamina Fleming, a Scottish woman originally hired as a maid who went on to identify ten novae and more than three hundred variable stars; Annie Jump Cannon, who designed a stellar classification system that was adopted by astronomers the world over and is still in use; and Dr. Cecilia Helena Payne, who in 1956 became the first ever woman professor of astronomy at Harvard—and Harvard’s first female department chair.
Elegantly written and enriched by excerpts from letters, diaries, and memoirs, The Glass Universe is the hidden history of the women whose contributions to the burgeoning field of astronomy forever changed our understanding of the stars and our place in the universe.
The “glass universe” of half a million plates that Harvard amassed over the ensuing decades—through the generous support of Mrs. Anna Palmer Draper, the widow of a pioneer in stellar photography—enabled the women to make extraordinary discoveries that attracted worldwide acclaim. They helped discern what stars were made of, divided the stars into meaningful categories for further research, and found a way to measure distances across space by starlight. Their ranks included Williamina Fleming, a Scottish woman originally hired as a maid who went on to identify ten novae and more than three hundred variable stars; Annie Jump Cannon, who designed a stellar classification system that was adopted by astronomers the world over and is still in use; and Dr. Cecilia Helena Payne, who in 1956 became the first ever woman professor of astronomy at Harvard—and Harvard’s first female department chair.
Elegantly written and enriched by excerpts from letters, diaries, and memoirs, The Glass Universe is the hidden history of the women whose contributions to the burgeoning field of astronomy forever changed our understanding of the stars and our place in the universe.
336 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 6, 2016
732 people are currently reading
12970 people want to read
About the author
Dava Sobel
44 books944 followersDava Sobel is an American writer of popular expositions of scientific topics. Her books include Longitude, about English clockmaker John Harrison; Galileo's Daughter, about Galileo's daughter Maria Celeste; and The Glass Universe: How the Ladies of the Harvard Observatory Took the Measure of the Stars about the Harvard Computers.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 723 reviews
December 12, 2016
I wanted to love this book. It has all the hallmarks of things I love: strong woman, intelligent women, women in science, astronomy, a little known factoid of history, etc. This book is successful in the sense that Sobel has obviously done a lot of research into the facts and it able to relay them clearly, while also plainly explaining the science. However, I found this book no more than a recitation of those facts. None of the characters seemed to have a personality, and only a few had physical descriptions (although there is a photo section). We know almost nothing about most of the women outside of their education and work at the Harvard observatory. Were they married? Did they have children? Other family members? What did their family members think of their work? Where they supported or demonized for stepping out of social norms at the time? Most distressing is that Sobel presents these women's work in a vacuum. There is almost no discussion of wage disparity, sexual harassment, theft and degrading of their intelligential property, and the general misogyny at the time. Even if these ladies were lucky enough to live and work in an unlikely Victorian utopia without these problems, shouldn't at least a paragraph have been devoted to explaining that anomaly? I read this immediately after reading Hidden Figures, which excels at examining the work of those later female computers within the broader social contexts that history, and women - all women - deserve.
June 6, 2017
This book covers not only the seminal work of the ladies of the Harvard Observatory, from Annie Jump Cannon and Cecelia Payne on down, but also its directors, Edward Pickering (director 1877-1919) and Harlow Shapley (1922-1951). Most time is given from the 1880s through the 1930s. Some of the ladies of Harvard made great discoveries, from astronomy's first "true candle" of relative distance, the Cepheid variables, to the stellar classification scheme that is still in use, to name only two of the most important.
It is notable that women not only did the great grunt work of the Harvard Observatory, which hired them in great numbers (it was considered genteel work for graduates of the new women's colleges - who were also less expensive to hire than men of the same qualifications), but that women paid for much of it.
The Harvard Observatory had two notable donors in the last quarter of the 19th century (in the 20th, much of their money came from the Rockefellers), both women. Mrs. Draper chose to memorialize the work of her late husband, Dr. Draper, whose private passion had been stellar photography (he could afford it, for he married an heiress), and the Harvard Observatory therefore became one of the first to switch from observing in person, while sketching pictures of what the astronomer thought they saw, to photographic astronomy.
And then Miss Bruce, whose main interest and patronage was in the arts, became incensed while reading an article on astronomy that claimed there were no more great questions to answer there. And made a major donation to the Harvard Observatory in an attempt to answer the great questions she felt sure were still out there. The half million glass plates at Harvard are the result of these ladies' gifts, and the women "computers" work, and still provide work for researchers. (Harvard's collection of half a million glass photographs covers over a century of observations, from the first efforts in 1850, up until 1992 and the digital revolution.)
Both ladies sponsored scientific awards that are still given (the Draper and Bruce Awards). Few of the winners have been women. (Pickering and Shapely won both medals. Annie Jump Cannon won the Draper - the first woman - of two - to do so. None of the women of Harvard won the Bruce, which would not be awarded to a woman until 1982.)
It is notable that women not only did the great grunt work of the Harvard Observatory, which hired them in great numbers (it was considered genteel work for graduates of the new women's colleges - who were also less expensive to hire than men of the same qualifications), but that women paid for much of it.
The Harvard Observatory had two notable donors in the last quarter of the 19th century (in the 20th, much of their money came from the Rockefellers), both women. Mrs. Draper chose to memorialize the work of her late husband, Dr. Draper, whose private passion had been stellar photography (he could afford it, for he married an heiress), and the Harvard Observatory therefore became one of the first to switch from observing in person, while sketching pictures of what the astronomer thought they saw, to photographic astronomy.
And then Miss Bruce, whose main interest and patronage was in the arts, became incensed while reading an article on astronomy that claimed there were no more great questions to answer there. And made a major donation to the Harvard Observatory in an attempt to answer the great questions she felt sure were still out there. The half million glass plates at Harvard are the result of these ladies' gifts, and the women "computers" work, and still provide work for researchers. (Harvard's collection of half a million glass photographs covers over a century of observations, from the first efforts in 1850, up until 1992 and the digital revolution.)
Both ladies sponsored scientific awards that are still given (the Draper and Bruce Awards). Few of the winners have been women. (Pickering and Shapely won both medals. Annie Jump Cannon won the Draper - the first woman - of two - to do so. None of the women of Harvard won the Bruce, which would not be awarded to a woman until 1982.)
February 4, 2017
God only knows why this book is an incredibly dry read, but it really, really was. In comparison to another book about female mathematicians and scientists, Hidden Figures, this book both dragged and didn't drag enough. It throws people and lives at you in fast motion, leaving you unable to settle or focus on anyone except Pickering and arguably Draper to some extent. I can pick out some other names, such as Maury, Cannon and so on, but ask me about anecdotes about them specifically or their daily lives and I come up flat. Other than that they were prodigious minds of their generation and field it's hard to remember them as personal figures, which makes them hard to keep track of.
That's the main problem - when it talks about the glass, a lack of visual assistance makes it difficult to keep interested. When it talks about people, people are introduced, married, ignored, forgotten, reintroduced with such speed that it's hard to tell what's going on and who we're focusing on in the current moment. This may not be a problem for some people, but I found myself drifting off and having to reread pages over and over again. This book would have taken me half the time if I had been able to focus on it, but it did almost everything it could to make it impossible. I felt like I could replace names with variables like in algebra and it would have made MORE sense, and I don't feel like I need a backstory to x, y, and z to appreciate their importance.
Hidden Figures fixates on three particular people, and in doing so manages to weave in everyone's lives. Glass Universe, in whatever way, made it difficult for me to keep track of what had happened. Considering the several deaths that happen in the book - that I had to go back and reread because I was a paragraph into mourning and didn't notice that Pickering's wife had passed away, for example? This was one of the most damning realizations - that the book hadn't kept me focused enough to notice that people had died. I had a hard time visualizing or feeling any interactions - they were merely things that happened. And one thing just happens after another and another - one could argue, I suppose, that this is all history is, but it lacked any dimension, and the connections would stray so far from the central point that it would all seem a little pointless.
The chapter titles seem loose and broad, making the book seem even more scattered than it was. There were huge portions of chapters that I didn't feel were focused to the title at all, diverging so much that I would just stare at the top of the page wondering what was happening and if this had anything to do with anything.
A fascinating topic, to be sure, and this isn't to say there wasn't stuff about it was interesting. I retained a lot more than I initially thought I did, but I felt like I was reading this book in a stupor, like I was going in and out of sleep even while I stared directly at the page.
That's the main problem - when it talks about the glass, a lack of visual assistance makes it difficult to keep interested. When it talks about people, people are introduced, married, ignored, forgotten, reintroduced with such speed that it's hard to tell what's going on and who we're focusing on in the current moment. This may not be a problem for some people, but I found myself drifting off and having to reread pages over and over again. This book would have taken me half the time if I had been able to focus on it, but it did almost everything it could to make it impossible. I felt like I could replace names with variables like in algebra and it would have made MORE sense, and I don't feel like I need a backstory to x, y, and z to appreciate their importance.
Hidden Figures fixates on three particular people, and in doing so manages to weave in everyone's lives. Glass Universe, in whatever way, made it difficult for me to keep track of what had happened. Considering the several deaths that happen in the book - that I had to go back and reread because I was a paragraph into mourning and didn't notice that Pickering's wife had passed away, for example? This was one of the most damning realizations - that the book hadn't kept me focused enough to notice that people had died. I had a hard time visualizing or feeling any interactions - they were merely things that happened. And one thing just happens after another and another - one could argue, I suppose, that this is all history is, but it lacked any dimension, and the connections would stray so far from the central point that it would all seem a little pointless.
The chapter titles seem loose and broad, making the book seem even more scattered than it was. There were huge portions of chapters that I didn't feel were focused to the title at all, diverging so much that I would just stare at the top of the page wondering what was happening and if this had anything to do with anything.
A fascinating topic, to be sure, and this isn't to say there wasn't stuff about it was interesting. I retained a lot more than I initially thought I did, but I felt like I was reading this book in a stupor, like I was going in and out of sleep even while I stared directly at the page.
March 18, 2017
Preface: If you're only going to read one book by Dava Sobel, my advice is: don't start here. Read her beloved classic, Longitude. Having said that, this book is worth it, as long as you're aware of what it is.
This is an incredibly informative book (with, among other things, extremely helpful supplementary materials, such as a glossary, cast of characters, and timeline), about a fascinating topic (the stars, and how we came to begin to understand them), centered around a research project of enormous scale (mapping more than the universe), played out over a lengthy period of time (decades lifetimes, and more), all built upon what might otherwise be an unrelated topic (empowerment, achievement, and recognition of (smart) women in a previously closed field of endeavor).
As a history of the stars, it's first rate work. (OK, I admit I took my share of astronomy/astrophysics classes in college, so I'm partial to the topic.) But the beauty of the book is chronicling the individuals (and their successors) who created and seized unique opportunities for a small group of talented women , nurtured and respected and promoted them, and together made innumerable discoveries, created an extraordinarily valuable resource and library of information, and achieved global recognition - individually and collectively.
It's a period piece, in which you need to get used to the word "computers" describing humans who did math, crunched numbers, all day, every day, and did it ... well ... like machines. It's a story about philanthropy and generosity and investment in causes people believed in - each for their own incredibly quirky and personal reasons. It's even got a whiff of Devil in the White City, if you were intrigued by how the Colombian Exposition brought the world together (when the world was both a larger and a smaller place). It's remarkable how - in a former time - "everyone who was anyone" might come together for causes, events, and endeavors....
Alas - a reader's warning: I fear that most "mere mortals" (and casual readers) will find much of the book dry (and some might claim boring). The project's greatness lay in its patience, its steady accumulation of observation (nay, photographs), night after night, not for days or weeks or years or decades ... but for generations. It's about tireless women (and those that enabled them) to meticulously study and calculate (OK, compute) and organize and dissemble information day by day ... by day ... by day ... until the accumulation of their work exposed insights that were impossible without the creation of one of the most unique data sets imaginable.
As long as you know what you're getting into, the book is well worth your time.
This is an incredibly informative book (with, among other things, extremely helpful supplementary materials, such as a glossary, cast of characters, and timeline), about a fascinating topic (the stars, and how we came to begin to understand them), centered around a research project of enormous scale (mapping more than the universe), played out over a lengthy period of time (decades lifetimes, and more), all built upon what might otherwise be an unrelated topic (empowerment, achievement, and recognition of (smart) women in a previously closed field of endeavor).
As a history of the stars, it's first rate work. (OK, I admit I took my share of astronomy/astrophysics classes in college, so I'm partial to the topic.) But the beauty of the book is chronicling the individuals (and their successors) who created and seized unique opportunities for a small group of talented women , nurtured and respected and promoted them, and together made innumerable discoveries, created an extraordinarily valuable resource and library of information, and achieved global recognition - individually and collectively.
It's a period piece, in which you need to get used to the word "computers" describing humans who did math, crunched numbers, all day, every day, and did it ... well ... like machines. It's a story about philanthropy and generosity and investment in causes people believed in - each for their own incredibly quirky and personal reasons. It's even got a whiff of Devil in the White City, if you were intrigued by how the Colombian Exposition brought the world together (when the world was both a larger and a smaller place). It's remarkable how - in a former time - "everyone who was anyone" might come together for causes, events, and endeavors....
Alas - a reader's warning: I fear that most "mere mortals" (and casual readers) will find much of the book dry (and some might claim boring). The project's greatness lay in its patience, its steady accumulation of observation (nay, photographs), night after night, not for days or weeks or years or decades ... but for generations. It's about tireless women (and those that enabled them) to meticulously study and calculate (OK, compute) and organize and dissemble information day by day ... by day ... by day ... until the accumulation of their work exposed insights that were impossible without the creation of one of the most unique data sets imaginable.
As long as you know what you're getting into, the book is well worth your time.
March 9, 2023
¡Tremenda historia!
Puede que muchas personas no lo encuentren muy emocionante, pero no creo que ese haya sido sea tampoco el objetivo de su autora, la periodista y divulgadora científica Dava Sobel. Después de leerlo completo debo reconocer que para sacarle el "jugo" hay que saber previamente un poco de astronomía y astrofísica y algo sobre su historia. Si se cumplen esas condiciones no dudo que experimentaran algo parecido a lo que describo a continuación.
Venía procrastinando desde hace unos años con este libro –como lo hago con casi todos– hasta que finalmente se presentó la oportunidad perfecta para leerlo. En el momento en el que escribo esta reseña estoy dictando un curso divulgativo de astrofísica estelar y quiero presentar una perspectiva histórica realista de cómo llegamos a saber lo que sabemos hoy sobre las estrellas. Es claro que este no es el único libro que debo leer, pero después de terminarlo he obtenido una visión panorámica de la historia de la disciplina que me permitirá navegar mejor por otros textos.
"The Glass Universe" es una historia fascinante y profundamente humana sobre el nacimiento de la astrofísica observacional a finales del siglo xix y principios del siglo xx. El libro está enfocado en algunas de las personas que lo hicieron posible (especialmente en Estados Unidos e Inglaterra), y muy particularmente en un grupo de extraordinarias astrónomas que con tesón e ingenio sentaron las bases del área, trabajando, casi toda una vida, con salarios y posiciones muy por debajo de las de sus colegas masculinos.
Quiénes conocen un poco del tema sabrán que nos referimos naturalmente al equipo de astrónomas del Observatorio de la Universidad de Harvard de principios del sigo xx, conocido en algún momento con el sexista y muy poco honroso apelativo del "Harem de Pickering".
Insisto en que cualquiera que conozca un poco de astronomía y su historia habrá oído hablar de ellas. Si no lo ha hecho de esta manera, tal vez los nombres de Henrietta Leavitt, Annie Jump Canon o Williamina Flemming les refresque un poco la memoria.
¿Qué dice la leyenda sobre el "harem de Pickering"? –leyenda propagada por la mayoría de textos y que yo mismo y muchas personas seguimos repitiendo como loros en nuestras charlas y cursos.
Afirma que este ecléctico grupo de mujeres consistía en un principio de personas sin trabajo y en la mayoría sin educación que vivieron en una época en la que el destino de casi cualquier mujer era casarse y tener hijos, pero que vieron en la astronomía una oportunidad para desempeñarse en un área de la ciencia que tenía blindado el acceso a las mujeres. Todas ellas, sigue diciendo la leyenda, tenían habilidades extraordinarias pero muy "subutilizadas" como tareas del hogar, coser o cocinar. Un destacado astrónomo, sigue la fábula, Edward Pickering, aprovechando las habilidades subutilizadas de esas mujeres, especialmente su paciencia, cuidado con los detalles e ingenio, y valiéndose además del hecho de que no le costaría mucho contratarlas (tan solo tendría que pagarles 25 centavos de dólar la hora, aproximadamente el 25% de lo que le pagaría a un empleado calificado) utilizo su trabajo para examinar pacientemente miles de placas fotográficas con imágenes del cielo que él y sus colegas habían tomado. Los datos pacientemente extraídos de esas placas por las "mujeres de Pickering" –recuerden que estoy repitiendo la leyenda– se convirtieron a la larga en información astronómica y astrofísica muy relevante que, por un lado, mejoró nuestra comprensión del universo, pero por el otro permitió fortalecer la carrera de Pickering y de otros hombres en la astronomía a costa del trabajo mal pago de las mujeres. Finalmente, la leyenda afirma que algunas de esas mujeres, una vez superadas las pruebas más tediosas de su trabajo, hicieron descubrimientos originales y a la larga, con dificultad pero con paciencia, algunas se convirtieron en reconocidas astrónomas.
Y colorín colorado este cuento, mal se ha contado.
Bueno, aunque hay que decir que algunos detalles sí son ciertos.
La primera sorpresa que me lleve al leer el ilustrativo y emocionante relato de Dava Sobel, es que las mujeres que trabajaron en el observatorio de la Universidad de Harvard, en el período comprendido aproximadamente entre 1880 y 1940, no eran para nada mujeres sin educación o sin conocimientos científicos; mujeres esclavizadas en sus hogares haciendo astronomía para conseguir unos centavos –tal vez exagero con lo de la leyenda pero juraría que lo he leído en algunas partes.
Si bien la autora no describe la vida de todas ellas, en realidad las más destacadas mujeres de ese grupo eran egresadas de prestigiosos colleges femeninos y otras instituciones educativas en Estados Unidos y en el exterior; las menos, también eran jóvenes con educación, algunas de ellas venían de familias con alguna tradición intelectual o al menos en las que se valoraba la formación académica de sus hijas.
Es cierto que muchas no habían tenido un trabajo en la academia. En esto la leyenda no se equivoca: hoy como ayer obtener una posición en una universidad, un instituto de investigación o un observatorio es más difícil para las mujeres. En la historia, una de ellas, a decir verdad la más destacada del grupo, Williamina Flemming, había trabajado como criada; ¡pero atención! no por no tener educación sino, por ser una mujer inmigrante (era de origen Irlandés) y tener hijos –y un esposo, que es más o menos lo mismo– a los cuales cuidar.
Lamentablemente, hoy todavía muchas mujeres inmigrantes y con educación se ven obligadas a realizar tareas como estas por falta de oportunidades.Algunas como Williamina Flemming logran superar su situación y convertirse en exitosas y reconocidas científicas. La mayoría, lamentablemente, nunca lo consiguen.
La segunda sorpresa que me lleve es que Edward Pickering, director del Observatorio de Harvard durante los años en los que se junto este increíble grupo humano, no era un hombre despótico y machista que se aprovechó de la situación de las mujeres de la época para explotarlas –sí, repito, puede que este exagerando un poco.
Al contrario, el Pickering que se revela en el relato de Sobel, es el de un buen ser humano –y aún así un hombre con privilegios y sesgos como todos los hombres de su época... y del presente– que se valió de su posición de poder para dar acceso a decenas de mujeres jóvenes al trabajo práctico de "investigación" en astronomía que estaba normalmente reservado para los hombres. En palabras del presente, Edward Pickering fue un verdadero aliado que a lo largo de los años consiguió establecer en una institución científica prestigiosa, un grupo más equitativo de profesionales.
Siempre me he preguntado por qué la astronomía es una de las ciencias físicas, en marcado contraste con la física misma, en la que el número de mujeres profesionales es casi tan grande como el de hombres. Me atrevería a decir, después de leer "The Glass Universe", que el origen de esta afortunada situación se puede rastrear hasta el trabajo de este grupo extraordinario de mujeres a principios del siglo xx en Harvard, y a Edward Pickering como indiscutido pionero.
No quiero tampoco dar la impresión de que –otra vez– un hombre lo hizo todo posible, incluso darle a las mujeres un mejor lugar en el mundo de la astronomía. No sólo no quiero dar esa impresión equivocada e injusta, sino que tampoco es cierto: esta fue mi tercera sorpresa.
Muy poco de lo que se narra en esta increíble historia, que a ratos se me antojo como una entretenida novela, habría sido posible sin la visión y generosidad de una mujer: Mary Anna Palmer.
El nombre de la señora Palmer no aparece en los anales de la astronomía. Tampoco se la encuentra en los comentarios históricos de los libros de texto de astronomía y astrofísica, y juraría que muy pocas veces ha sido mencionada en un aula de clase. Aún así a Mary Anna le debemos tanto como a Pickering la revolución de la astrofísica observacional de principios del xx que se gestó en Estados Unidos.
Como es común, el nombre de su esposo si que es inconfundible en astronomía: Henry Draper. Cualquiera que haya estudiado astronomía conoce el afamado catálogo de Draper (HD) con el que casi medio millón de estrellas en el cielo reciben su nombre.
Draper fue un afamado observador astronómico del siglo xix; en realidad se trataba, para mi sorpresa –ya me vengo acostumbrando– de un astrónomo aficionado –su profesión principal era médico–; el doctor Draper fue el pionero de la fotografía de espectros estelares, la base justamente de la revolución sobre la que trata este libro.
Pues bien, Henry no estaba solo. Su espora, la señora Palmer, no solamente fue su compañera de vida, sino que también fungió por años como su colega de afición y de trabajo observacional. Sí, también con los Drapers se produjo otro de los innumerables casos en los que grandes mujeres que, compartiendo el trabajo de sus compañeros o familiares –piensen en el caso de Caroline Herschel, Mary Anne Lavoisier o Mileva Maric– se vieron desplazadas a un lugar secundario por el rancio androcentrismo de la historia ciencia.
Pero la actividad como astrónoma aficionada de Mary Anna concluyó lamentablemente con la muerte de su esposo en 1882, mucho antes de los eventos más importantes de esta "novela". Sin embargo, el dinero de la señora Palmer –que era heredera de una incalculable fortuna– financió por casi 40 años la actividad científica del observatorio de la Universidad de Harvard, actividad que en aquel entonces recibía muy poca financiación de la universidad misma o del gobierno. Sin el interés de la señora Palmer por, primero, continuar la labor que había iniciado con su esposo de fotografiar el espectro del mayor número de estrellas posible, y segundo de apoyar económicamente a mujeres jóvenes para que, bajo la dirección de Pickering, trabajaran analizando los datos tomados allí, la astrofísica observacional se habría demorado mucho más en despegar.
Sí, fue una mujer, astrónoma y multimillonaria –¡que bella combinación!– la que puso el combustible para esta guachafita.
La lista de sorpresas podría continuar, pero la paciencia de ustedes como lectores o lectoras de esta reseña seguramente no da para tanto. Además, no deberían estar perdiendo el tiempo leyendo una reseña y más bien deberían ocuparlo en comenzar el libro.
Termino señalando que muchos de los descubrimientos, datos personales, accidentes, muertes, romances, y eventos que siguieron a este fantástico despegar y que marcaron la historia de la astrofísica por aquel entonces son el corazón de casi todo este libro. Desde el descubrimiento de las binarias espectroscópicas (Antonia Maury), el origen de la clasificación espectral (Williamina Fleming, Annie Jump Cannon), el descubrimiento de la relación período-luminosidad de las variables pulsantes (Henrieta Leavitt ¡gracias Dava por hablar de la "Ley de Leavitt"!), la composición de las estrella (Cecilia Payne), pasando por la medida de la distancia a los cúmulos globulares, el tamaño de la Vía Láctea (Harlow Shapley, que no sabía fue el sucesor de Edward Pickering y otro honorable aliado de la causa femenina en astronomía) y el descubrimiento del medio interestelar, hasta llegar a la astrofísica estelar del presente, desfilan por las páginas de "The Glass Universe".
Repito lo que dije al principio: puede que este no sea un libro del agrado de todas las personas. Pero si estudian o enseñan astrofísica y en especial si son mujeres en la disciplina, TIENEN –así en mayúscula– que leer "The Glass Universe".
Puede que muchas personas no lo encuentren muy emocionante, pero no creo que ese haya sido sea tampoco el objetivo de su autora, la periodista y divulgadora científica Dava Sobel. Después de leerlo completo debo reconocer que para sacarle el "jugo" hay que saber previamente un poco de astronomía y astrofísica y algo sobre su historia. Si se cumplen esas condiciones no dudo que experimentaran algo parecido a lo que describo a continuación.
Venía procrastinando desde hace unos años con este libro –como lo hago con casi todos– hasta que finalmente se presentó la oportunidad perfecta para leerlo. En el momento en el que escribo esta reseña estoy dictando un curso divulgativo de astrofísica estelar y quiero presentar una perspectiva histórica realista de cómo llegamos a saber lo que sabemos hoy sobre las estrellas. Es claro que este no es el único libro que debo leer, pero después de terminarlo he obtenido una visión panorámica de la historia de la disciplina que me permitirá navegar mejor por otros textos.
"The Glass Universe" es una historia fascinante y profundamente humana sobre el nacimiento de la astrofísica observacional a finales del siglo xix y principios del siglo xx. El libro está enfocado en algunas de las personas que lo hicieron posible (especialmente en Estados Unidos e Inglaterra), y muy particularmente en un grupo de extraordinarias astrónomas que con tesón e ingenio sentaron las bases del área, trabajando, casi toda una vida, con salarios y posiciones muy por debajo de las de sus colegas masculinos.
Quiénes conocen un poco del tema sabrán que nos referimos naturalmente al equipo de astrónomas del Observatorio de la Universidad de Harvard de principios del sigo xx, conocido en algún momento con el sexista y muy poco honroso apelativo del "Harem de Pickering".
Insisto en que cualquiera que conozca un poco de astronomía y su historia habrá oído hablar de ellas. Si no lo ha hecho de esta manera, tal vez los nombres de Henrietta Leavitt, Annie Jump Canon o Williamina Flemming les refresque un poco la memoria.
¿Qué dice la leyenda sobre el "harem de Pickering"? –leyenda propagada por la mayoría de textos y que yo mismo y muchas personas seguimos repitiendo como loros en nuestras charlas y cursos.
Afirma que este ecléctico grupo de mujeres consistía en un principio de personas sin trabajo y en la mayoría sin educación que vivieron en una época en la que el destino de casi cualquier mujer era casarse y tener hijos, pero que vieron en la astronomía una oportunidad para desempeñarse en un área de la ciencia que tenía blindado el acceso a las mujeres. Todas ellas, sigue diciendo la leyenda, tenían habilidades extraordinarias pero muy "subutilizadas" como tareas del hogar, coser o cocinar. Un destacado astrónomo, sigue la fábula, Edward Pickering, aprovechando las habilidades subutilizadas de esas mujeres, especialmente su paciencia, cuidado con los detalles e ingenio, y valiéndose además del hecho de que no le costaría mucho contratarlas (tan solo tendría que pagarles 25 centavos de dólar la hora, aproximadamente el 25% de lo que le pagaría a un empleado calificado) utilizo su trabajo para examinar pacientemente miles de placas fotográficas con imágenes del cielo que él y sus colegas habían tomado. Los datos pacientemente extraídos de esas placas por las "mujeres de Pickering" –recuerden que estoy repitiendo la leyenda– se convirtieron a la larga en información astronómica y astrofísica muy relevante que, por un lado, mejoró nuestra comprensión del universo, pero por el otro permitió fortalecer la carrera de Pickering y de otros hombres en la astronomía a costa del trabajo mal pago de las mujeres. Finalmente, la leyenda afirma que algunas de esas mujeres, una vez superadas las pruebas más tediosas de su trabajo, hicieron descubrimientos originales y a la larga, con dificultad pero con paciencia, algunas se convirtieron en reconocidas astrónomas.
Y colorín colorado este cuento, mal se ha contado.
Bueno, aunque hay que decir que algunos detalles sí son ciertos.
La primera sorpresa que me lleve al leer el ilustrativo y emocionante relato de Dava Sobel, es que las mujeres que trabajaron en el observatorio de la Universidad de Harvard, en el período comprendido aproximadamente entre 1880 y 1940, no eran para nada mujeres sin educación o sin conocimientos científicos; mujeres esclavizadas en sus hogares haciendo astronomía para conseguir unos centavos –tal vez exagero con lo de la leyenda pero juraría que lo he leído en algunas partes.
Si bien la autora no describe la vida de todas ellas, en realidad las más destacadas mujeres de ese grupo eran egresadas de prestigiosos colleges femeninos y otras instituciones educativas en Estados Unidos y en el exterior; las menos, también eran jóvenes con educación, algunas de ellas venían de familias con alguna tradición intelectual o al menos en las que se valoraba la formación académica de sus hijas.
Es cierto que muchas no habían tenido un trabajo en la academia. En esto la leyenda no se equivoca: hoy como ayer obtener una posición en una universidad, un instituto de investigación o un observatorio es más difícil para las mujeres. En la historia, una de ellas, a decir verdad la más destacada del grupo, Williamina Flemming, había trabajado como criada; ¡pero atención! no por no tener educación sino, por ser una mujer inmigrante (era de origen Irlandés) y tener hijos –y un esposo, que es más o menos lo mismo– a los cuales cuidar.
Lamentablemente, hoy todavía muchas mujeres inmigrantes y con educación se ven obligadas a realizar tareas como estas por falta de oportunidades.Algunas como Williamina Flemming logran superar su situación y convertirse en exitosas y reconocidas científicas. La mayoría, lamentablemente, nunca lo consiguen.
La segunda sorpresa que me lleve es que Edward Pickering, director del Observatorio de Harvard durante los años en los que se junto este increíble grupo humano, no era un hombre despótico y machista que se aprovechó de la situación de las mujeres de la época para explotarlas –sí, repito, puede que este exagerando un poco.
Al contrario, el Pickering que se revela en el relato de Sobel, es el de un buen ser humano –y aún así un hombre con privilegios y sesgos como todos los hombres de su época... y del presente– que se valió de su posición de poder para dar acceso a decenas de mujeres jóvenes al trabajo práctico de "investigación" en astronomía que estaba normalmente reservado para los hombres. En palabras del presente, Edward Pickering fue un verdadero aliado que a lo largo de los años consiguió establecer en una institución científica prestigiosa, un grupo más equitativo de profesionales.
Siempre me he preguntado por qué la astronomía es una de las ciencias físicas, en marcado contraste con la física misma, en la que el número de mujeres profesionales es casi tan grande como el de hombres. Me atrevería a decir, después de leer "The Glass Universe", que el origen de esta afortunada situación se puede rastrear hasta el trabajo de este grupo extraordinario de mujeres a principios del siglo xx en Harvard, y a Edward Pickering como indiscutido pionero.
No quiero tampoco dar la impresión de que –otra vez– un hombre lo hizo todo posible, incluso darle a las mujeres un mejor lugar en el mundo de la astronomía. No sólo no quiero dar esa impresión equivocada e injusta, sino que tampoco es cierto: esta fue mi tercera sorpresa.
Muy poco de lo que se narra en esta increíble historia, que a ratos se me antojo como una entretenida novela, habría sido posible sin la visión y generosidad de una mujer: Mary Anna Palmer.
El nombre de la señora Palmer no aparece en los anales de la astronomía. Tampoco se la encuentra en los comentarios históricos de los libros de texto de astronomía y astrofísica, y juraría que muy pocas veces ha sido mencionada en un aula de clase. Aún así a Mary Anna le debemos tanto como a Pickering la revolución de la astrofísica observacional de principios del xx que se gestó en Estados Unidos.
Como es común, el nombre de su esposo si que es inconfundible en astronomía: Henry Draper. Cualquiera que haya estudiado astronomía conoce el afamado catálogo de Draper (HD) con el que casi medio millón de estrellas en el cielo reciben su nombre.
Draper fue un afamado observador astronómico del siglo xix; en realidad se trataba, para mi sorpresa –ya me vengo acostumbrando– de un astrónomo aficionado –su profesión principal era médico–; el doctor Draper fue el pionero de la fotografía de espectros estelares, la base justamente de la revolución sobre la que trata este libro.
Pues bien, Henry no estaba solo. Su espora, la señora Palmer, no solamente fue su compañera de vida, sino que también fungió por años como su colega de afición y de trabajo observacional. Sí, también con los Drapers se produjo otro de los innumerables casos en los que grandes mujeres que, compartiendo el trabajo de sus compañeros o familiares –piensen en el caso de Caroline Herschel, Mary Anne Lavoisier o Mileva Maric– se vieron desplazadas a un lugar secundario por el rancio androcentrismo de la historia ciencia.
Pero la actividad como astrónoma aficionada de Mary Anna concluyó lamentablemente con la muerte de su esposo en 1882, mucho antes de los eventos más importantes de esta "novela". Sin embargo, el dinero de la señora Palmer –que era heredera de una incalculable fortuna– financió por casi 40 años la actividad científica del observatorio de la Universidad de Harvard, actividad que en aquel entonces recibía muy poca financiación de la universidad misma o del gobierno. Sin el interés de la señora Palmer por, primero, continuar la labor que había iniciado con su esposo de fotografiar el espectro del mayor número de estrellas posible, y segundo de apoyar económicamente a mujeres jóvenes para que, bajo la dirección de Pickering, trabajaran analizando los datos tomados allí, la astrofísica observacional se habría demorado mucho más en despegar.
Sí, fue una mujer, astrónoma y multimillonaria –¡que bella combinación!– la que puso el combustible para esta guachafita.
La lista de sorpresas podría continuar, pero la paciencia de ustedes como lectores o lectoras de esta reseña seguramente no da para tanto. Además, no deberían estar perdiendo el tiempo leyendo una reseña y más bien deberían ocuparlo en comenzar el libro.
Termino señalando que muchos de los descubrimientos, datos personales, accidentes, muertes, romances, y eventos que siguieron a este fantástico despegar y que marcaron la historia de la astrofísica por aquel entonces son el corazón de casi todo este libro. Desde el descubrimiento de las binarias espectroscópicas (Antonia Maury), el origen de la clasificación espectral (Williamina Fleming, Annie Jump Cannon), el descubrimiento de la relación período-luminosidad de las variables pulsantes (Henrieta Leavitt ¡gracias Dava por hablar de la "Ley de Leavitt"!), la composición de las estrella (Cecilia Payne), pasando por la medida de la distancia a los cúmulos globulares, el tamaño de la Vía Láctea (Harlow Shapley, que no sabía fue el sucesor de Edward Pickering y otro honorable aliado de la causa femenina en astronomía) y el descubrimiento del medio interestelar, hasta llegar a la astrofísica estelar del presente, desfilan por las páginas de "The Glass Universe".
Repito lo que dije al principio: puede que este no sea un libro del agrado de todas las personas. Pero si estudian o enseñan astrofísica y en especial si son mujeres en la disciplina, TIENEN –así en mayúscula– que leer "The Glass Universe".
October 6, 2017
My mind kept wandering as I listened to this. I did not get any sense of the women profiled in what I did listen to. I also got no sense of the larger socio-cultural-political environment that surrounded these women.
A far, far better book is Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race by Margot Lee Shetterly; Hidden Figures was fascinating and engaging and interesting and I understood what was supporting the employment of women as Computers. And why the hired women were vital to the development of a number of technological innovations.
A far, far better book is Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race by Margot Lee Shetterly; Hidden Figures was fascinating and engaging and interesting and I understood what was supporting the employment of women as Computers. And why the hired women were vital to the development of a number of technological innovations.
Read
October 30, 2019DNF at 30%.
I probably should have read Hidden Figures instead. This book, even though it has 'ladies' in its title, is not about the ladies, but more about a dude, with ladies surrounding him.
There are very few notes about the women's journey and tribulation in their Harvard astronomy days back in late 19th century. Once there was a story about a very competent female staff - who's already making such important discoveries - wanting to have higher salary, but it went nowhere. It seemed that she just left her fate to her boss and her boss - despite having most of his funding from female benefactors - did not do anything. Nominating her for an award just won't do, you know, she also got family to feed and bills to pay.
Aside from those, the story is unlike other Dava Sobel books I read. This one reads like a laundry list of this and that happening. It does not help that the lack of visuals is making it difficult (for me) to understand the spectrometry stuff.
When I reached the chapter titled "Pickering's Harem", I decided to quit.
I probably should have read Hidden Figures instead. This book, even though it has 'ladies' in its title, is not about the ladies, but more about a dude, with ladies surrounding him.
There are very few notes about the women's journey and tribulation in their Harvard astronomy days back in late 19th century. Once there was a story about a very competent female staff - who's already making such important discoveries - wanting to have higher salary, but it went nowhere. It seemed that she just left her fate to her boss and her boss - despite having most of his funding from female benefactors - did not do anything. Nominating her for an award just won't do, you know, she also got family to feed and bills to pay.
Aside from those, the story is unlike other Dava Sobel books I read. This one reads like a laundry list of this and that happening. It does not help that the lack of visuals is making it difficult (for me) to understand the spectrometry stuff.
When I reached the chapter titled "Pickering's Harem", I decided to quit.
January 25, 2023
Es war mal wieder nötig, ein Sachbuch zu lesen und Dava Sobel ist immer lesenswert.
Im Buch geht es um das Harvard-College-Observatorium, insbesondere um die "Computer" an diesem Observatorium, also um Frauen, die für astronomische Berechnungen und Auswertungen zuständig waren. Diese Frauen haben dabei bedeutende astronomische Entdeckungen gemacht und einige von ihnen sind auch heute noch bekannt, wie z.B. Henrietta Swan Leavitt, oder Annie Jump Cannon.
Das Buch ist in drei Teile eingeteilt. Die ersten zwei Teile des Buches schildern die Zeit, in der Edward Charles Pickering Direktor des Harvard Observatoriums war. Er engagiert Anfang der 1880er Jahre viele Frauen als “Computer”, als Rechnerinnen. Die Bezahlung ist schlecht, die Tätigkeit oft monoton, aber die Begeisterung der Frauen für die Astronomie ist groß. Sie analysieren fotografische Aufnahmen des Sternenhimmels, die auf Glasplatten gemacht werden. Im Rahmen des "Draper-Projekts" wird der Himmel systematisch fotografiert und es werden Sternspektren erstellt. Dabei entstehen zehntausende Glasplatten mit Fotos von Sternen und es eröffnen sich völlig neue Möglichkeiten: Wird etwas entdeckt, so können Bilder aus dem Archiv herausgesucht, verglichen und analysiert werden. Es können Zusammenhänge gefunden und verifiziert werden, es ist der Beginn der Astrophysik. Mit Hilfe der Spektren kann der Aufbau der Sterne analysiert werden, es werden Doppelsternsysteme entdeckt und Veränderliche Sterne. Einige der Frauen machen bedeutende astronomische Entdeckungen und einige werden weltberühmt.
Die Frauen sind ehrgeizig und möchten auch Anerkennung und es ist eine ständige Auseinandersetzung um Gehalt (nicht alle Tätigkeiten werden bezahlt und wenn, dann ist es wenig und weniger, als die Männer bekommen) und Anerkennung (es dauert, bis sie bei Veröffentlichungen mit aufgeführt werden). Pickering ist zwar sehr fortschrittlich für seine Zeit, doch er muss ständig um Geld für das Observatorium kämpfen.
Zum Glück gibt es immer wieder reiche Witwen, die mit ihrem Geld die astronomische Forschung fördern (Draper, Bruce). Die Summen, die sie spenden, sind enorm und Miss Bruce stiftet z.B. einen Preis, der unabhängig von Staatsbürgerschaft und Geschlecht vergeben werden sollte. Sie stiftet auch ein Teleskop und es dauert Jahre, die Glaskörper herzustellen und zu schleifen. Hier wird zumindest im Anhang klargestellt, dass die 50000$, die für ein Teleskop gespendet wurden, heute mehr als eine Million Dollar wert sind. Solche Einordnungen hätte ich mir öfter gewünscht, denn es wird durchaus öfter erklärt, wer wie viel bzw. wie wenig verdient.
Im zweiten Teil geht es unter anderem um Williamina Fleming, die sich um Sternklassifikation kümmert und Veränderliche Sterne entdeckt. Sie und auch Annie Jump Cannon entwickeln die heute noch benutzten Spektralklassen der Sterne: O, B, A, F, G, K, M. Spannend fand ich auch, dass damals schon sehr viele Amateure wichtige Beiträge zur Forschung leisteten. Henrietta Swan Leavitt entdeckt die Perioden-Leuchtkraft-Beziehung bestimmter veränderlicher Sterne (der Cepheiden), die auch heute noch enorm wichtig ist zur Entfernungsbestimmung von Sternen und seit 2009 "Leavitt-Gesetz" heißt.
Im letzten Teil geht es unter anderem um den langen Weg zur Erkenntnis, wie groß das Universum ist und dass die Milchstraße nur eine von vielen Galaxien ist. Entscheidend dafür war die Entdeckung von Cepheiden im Andromedanebel durch Edwin Hubble und die Anwendung des Leavitt Gesetzes. Damit konnte dann die Entfernung des Andromedanebels bestimmt werden. Außerdem wird mit den Daten des "Glas-Universums" (nämlich aus den Spektrallinien) von Cecilia Helena Payne gezeigt, dass Sterne hauptsächlich aus Wasserstoff und Helium bestehen. Dies konnte man damals kaum glauben, weil man noch nicht genug über den inneren Aufbau der Sterne wusste.
Was mir daran gefällt ist, dass es mir bewusst macht, wie bestimmte Erkenntnisse, die heute selbstverständlich erscheinen (Milliarden von Galaxien im Universum, Sterne bestehen vor allem aus Wasserstoff und Helium), ursprünglich gewonnen wurden. Irgendwann gibt es dann doch die eine oder andere Auszeichnung für die Frauen und inzwischen wird das “Glas-Universum", inzwischen bestehend aus hunderttausenden Glasplatten mit fotografischen Himmelsaufnahmen und Sternspektren, digitalisiert. Es ist ein großer Schatz, der noch viele Überraschungen enthalten dürfte
Mir hat das Buch sehr gut gefallen. Ich hätte mir allerdings mehr Bilder gewünscht, die auch einmal in den Text integriert sein könnten, statt nur als Block in der Mitte. Manchmal wirft Dava Sobel auch zu viel mit Namen um sich, aber sie will an so viele Frauen erinnern. Dann fehlte mir auch etwas der allgemeine Überblick zur Rolle der Frau, insbesondere an der Universität. War Pickering der Einzige, der Frauen förderte? Wie war das Leben der Frauen? In der zweiten Hälfte und in der Erinnerung von Annie Jump Cannon (S. 232ff) kommt davon zumindest etwas vor.
Wer sich für die Geschichte der Astronomie interessiert oder wem “Hidden Figures” gefiel, für den sollte dieses Buch eine Fundgrube sein.
Im Buch geht es um das Harvard-College-Observatorium, insbesondere um die "Computer" an diesem Observatorium, also um Frauen, die für astronomische Berechnungen und Auswertungen zuständig waren. Diese Frauen haben dabei bedeutende astronomische Entdeckungen gemacht und einige von ihnen sind auch heute noch bekannt, wie z.B. Henrietta Swan Leavitt, oder Annie Jump Cannon.
Das Buch ist in drei Teile eingeteilt. Die ersten zwei Teile des Buches schildern die Zeit, in der Edward Charles Pickering Direktor des Harvard Observatoriums war. Er engagiert Anfang der 1880er Jahre viele Frauen als “Computer”, als Rechnerinnen. Die Bezahlung ist schlecht, die Tätigkeit oft monoton, aber die Begeisterung der Frauen für die Astronomie ist groß. Sie analysieren fotografische Aufnahmen des Sternenhimmels, die auf Glasplatten gemacht werden. Im Rahmen des "Draper-Projekts" wird der Himmel systematisch fotografiert und es werden Sternspektren erstellt. Dabei entstehen zehntausende Glasplatten mit Fotos von Sternen und es eröffnen sich völlig neue Möglichkeiten: Wird etwas entdeckt, so können Bilder aus dem Archiv herausgesucht, verglichen und analysiert werden. Es können Zusammenhänge gefunden und verifiziert werden, es ist der Beginn der Astrophysik. Mit Hilfe der Spektren kann der Aufbau der Sterne analysiert werden, es werden Doppelsternsysteme entdeckt und Veränderliche Sterne. Einige der Frauen machen bedeutende astronomische Entdeckungen und einige werden weltberühmt.
Die Frauen sind ehrgeizig und möchten auch Anerkennung und es ist eine ständige Auseinandersetzung um Gehalt (nicht alle Tätigkeiten werden bezahlt und wenn, dann ist es wenig und weniger, als die Männer bekommen) und Anerkennung (es dauert, bis sie bei Veröffentlichungen mit aufgeführt werden). Pickering ist zwar sehr fortschrittlich für seine Zeit, doch er muss ständig um Geld für das Observatorium kämpfen.
Zum Glück gibt es immer wieder reiche Witwen, die mit ihrem Geld die astronomische Forschung fördern (Draper, Bruce). Die Summen, die sie spenden, sind enorm und Miss Bruce stiftet z.B. einen Preis, der unabhängig von Staatsbürgerschaft und Geschlecht vergeben werden sollte. Sie stiftet auch ein Teleskop und es dauert Jahre, die Glaskörper herzustellen und zu schleifen. Hier wird zumindest im Anhang klargestellt, dass die 50000$, die für ein Teleskop gespendet wurden, heute mehr als eine Million Dollar wert sind. Solche Einordnungen hätte ich mir öfter gewünscht, denn es wird durchaus öfter erklärt, wer wie viel bzw. wie wenig verdient.
Im zweiten Teil geht es unter anderem um Williamina Fleming, die sich um Sternklassifikation kümmert und Veränderliche Sterne entdeckt. Sie und auch Annie Jump Cannon entwickeln die heute noch benutzten Spektralklassen der Sterne: O, B, A, F, G, K, M. Spannend fand ich auch, dass damals schon sehr viele Amateure wichtige Beiträge zur Forschung leisteten. Henrietta Swan Leavitt entdeckt die Perioden-Leuchtkraft-Beziehung bestimmter veränderlicher Sterne (der Cepheiden), die auch heute noch enorm wichtig ist zur Entfernungsbestimmung von Sternen und seit 2009 "Leavitt-Gesetz" heißt.
Im letzten Teil geht es unter anderem um den langen Weg zur Erkenntnis, wie groß das Universum ist und dass die Milchstraße nur eine von vielen Galaxien ist. Entscheidend dafür war die Entdeckung von Cepheiden im Andromedanebel durch Edwin Hubble und die Anwendung des Leavitt Gesetzes. Damit konnte dann die Entfernung des Andromedanebels bestimmt werden. Außerdem wird mit den Daten des "Glas-Universums" (nämlich aus den Spektrallinien) von Cecilia Helena Payne gezeigt, dass Sterne hauptsächlich aus Wasserstoff und Helium bestehen. Dies konnte man damals kaum glauben, weil man noch nicht genug über den inneren Aufbau der Sterne wusste.
Was mir daran gefällt ist, dass es mir bewusst macht, wie bestimmte Erkenntnisse, die heute selbstverständlich erscheinen (Milliarden von Galaxien im Universum, Sterne bestehen vor allem aus Wasserstoff und Helium), ursprünglich gewonnen wurden. Irgendwann gibt es dann doch die eine oder andere Auszeichnung für die Frauen und inzwischen wird das “Glas-Universum", inzwischen bestehend aus hunderttausenden Glasplatten mit fotografischen Himmelsaufnahmen und Sternspektren, digitalisiert. Es ist ein großer Schatz, der noch viele Überraschungen enthalten dürfte
Mir hat das Buch sehr gut gefallen. Ich hätte mir allerdings mehr Bilder gewünscht, die auch einmal in den Text integriert sein könnten, statt nur als Block in der Mitte. Manchmal wirft Dava Sobel auch zu viel mit Namen um sich, aber sie will an so viele Frauen erinnern. Dann fehlte mir auch etwas der allgemeine Überblick zur Rolle der Frau, insbesondere an der Universität. War Pickering der Einzige, der Frauen förderte? Wie war das Leben der Frauen? In der zweiten Hälfte und in der Erinnerung von Annie Jump Cannon (S. 232ff) kommt davon zumindest etwas vor.
Wer sich für die Geschichte der Astronomie interessiert oder wem “Hidden Figures” gefiel, für den sollte dieses Buch eine Fundgrube sein.
January 21, 2018
I have read much better tellings of Henrietta Swan Levitt and Cecilia Payne. This history was surprisingly dry. However, in the very first part of the book (that I thought was reflective of how the rest of the book would go), Sobel retold the history of the remarkable Mary Ann Palmer Draper and her husband Henry, two passionate astronomers and patrons of science.
Mary Anna Palmer Draper was a rare spouse (one of only 2 known in the nation) who collaborated with her husband Henry Draper, whose passion in life was trying to figure out the composition of stars. When Henry died, Mary Anna vowed to keep Henry's work of discovering the composition of stars alive. It seems at that time, they were one of only 2 married couples, nationwide, who shared a love of astronomy. Most male astronomers, for whatever reason, married partners who did not share their passion for science. But Mary Anna and Henry bonded over it and it seems to be what made their particular marriage so exciting and fulfilling. An heiress, Mary Anna turned the 3 rd floor of the home her father had left to her into an astronomy lab for Henry. At that home, they hosted intellectual dinners for famous scientists and the president, the most notable of which was for the solar eclipse of 1878.
When Henry died at the age of 45, she took her limited knowledge of astronomy and her not so limited passion and love for science and her husband, along with her not so limited funds, and her efforts to honor her husbands scientific worked in her helping found the Mount Wilson Observatory. Receiving help from one of her husband's best friends Mr. Pickering, Mary Anna worked with the Harvard computers (women) to create a team to carry on Henry's work. Of particular interest was how some of the women came to work as computers. One woman, Willimina Flemming, was hired as a maid. Prior to working as a made, she had gotten pregnant and her husband took off, saddling her with the responsibility of figuring out how to care for their child. As a result, she was pretty desperate for a job. Cleaning seemed as good a job as any, and about all she was qualified for. But when Mrs. Pickering (fill in later) recognized that she had a talent for numbers, she gave her a job as a computer. She had the baby shortly after she started and could only work again once she got her mother and grandmother to raise her child. In order to keep a job as a computer, she had to move to another state and leave the baby she loved. This made me wonder about why it has been so hard for women to form a network of care. Many species do communal parenting, in which the females chip in to watch each other's babies. There has been far too much stigma in our society, even today, for that kind of model to work enough to afford women freedom. I wonder where that stigma came from and why it was so horrible to have others care for you baby, if you are woman, but it was somehow completely acceptable for a man to relegate the care of his child to others.
The story of Cecilia Payne could have been just as engaging as the story of the Palmer-Drapers. But it was a lot less exciting, informative, or awe inspiring as I had hoped. A book I read many years ago really brought Payne to life. I wish I had taken better notes because now I sadly cannot recall which author it was, thought I suspect it was David Bodanis' book e=mc2. (Now that was a captivating book).
The book started out strong but didn't quite hold up as it progressed.
Mary Anna Palmer Draper was a rare spouse (one of only 2 known in the nation) who collaborated with her husband Henry Draper, whose passion in life was trying to figure out the composition of stars. When Henry died, Mary Anna vowed to keep Henry's work of discovering the composition of stars alive. It seems at that time, they were one of only 2 married couples, nationwide, who shared a love of astronomy. Most male astronomers, for whatever reason, married partners who did not share their passion for science. But Mary Anna and Henry bonded over it and it seems to be what made their particular marriage so exciting and fulfilling. An heiress, Mary Anna turned the 3 rd floor of the home her father had left to her into an astronomy lab for Henry. At that home, they hosted intellectual dinners for famous scientists and the president, the most notable of which was for the solar eclipse of 1878.
When Henry died at the age of 45, she took her limited knowledge of astronomy and her not so limited passion and love for science and her husband, along with her not so limited funds, and her efforts to honor her husbands scientific worked in her helping found the Mount Wilson Observatory. Receiving help from one of her husband's best friends Mr. Pickering, Mary Anna worked with the Harvard computers (women) to create a team to carry on Henry's work. Of particular interest was how some of the women came to work as computers. One woman, Willimina Flemming, was hired as a maid. Prior to working as a made, she had gotten pregnant and her husband took off, saddling her with the responsibility of figuring out how to care for their child. As a result, she was pretty desperate for a job. Cleaning seemed as good a job as any, and about all she was qualified for. But when Mrs. Pickering (fill in later) recognized that she had a talent for numbers, she gave her a job as a computer. She had the baby shortly after she started and could only work again once she got her mother and grandmother to raise her child. In order to keep a job as a computer, she had to move to another state and leave the baby she loved. This made me wonder about why it has been so hard for women to form a network of care. Many species do communal parenting, in which the females chip in to watch each other's babies. There has been far too much stigma in our society, even today, for that kind of model to work enough to afford women freedom. I wonder where that stigma came from and why it was so horrible to have others care for you baby, if you are woman, but it was somehow completely acceptable for a man to relegate the care of his child to others.
The story of Cecilia Payne could have been just as engaging as the story of the Palmer-Drapers. But it was a lot less exciting, informative, or awe inspiring as I had hoped. A book I read many years ago really brought Payne to life. I wish I had taken better notes because now I sadly cannot recall which author it was, thought I suspect it was David Bodanis' book e=mc2. (Now that was a captivating book).
The book started out strong but didn't quite hold up as it progressed.
June 3, 2017
Another relatively new book uncovering the hidden histories and contributions of women in science. If I were to compare it to the most popular of those titles I'd say that the only things that The Glass Universe has in common with Hidden Figures, other than the women in science theme, are that both could be subtitled "When Computers Were Human" and both books offer women the respect of not calling them "Girls" (to wit: Rise of the Rocket Girls, Girls of Atomic City, Radium Girls, Lab Girl, Rocket Girl, and the forthcoming Code Girls).
But Margot Shetterly's book (and the film) focused and relied heavily on the stories of the lives and personalities of three women and racial prejudice in science, so the cultural events and personalities drove that story. By contrast, The Glass Universe is about many women over 75 years or so, and Sobel is writing a historical account, not a personal story or a cultural biography, so she has chosen not to embellish, extrapolate, or imagine. In fact, she hews so closely to the historical record that the book has very little personality on display at all. Which is fine, I must add, because the late 19th-century record apparently contained few personal details about these particular women, and the twentieth-century records not much more. So to tell her history (not a "story"), Sobel quotes correspondence, ledgers, travel itineraries, conference minutes, and financial documents - and she virtually never deigns to imagine the lives of the women beyond what the record shows.
Again, that's fine. But the result is that the book was pretty dry (for me). First, for pages and pages it seemed like a book about Pickering, the male first director of the Observatory, and the other men, and not the women, because the earliest women involved were benefactors and wives. Interesting, engaged, rich, educated wives and benefactors, certainly. But that shows something about gender structures and traditions in turn-of the-century America, and I kept expecting Sobel to step back and broaden the scope to describe women's roles or gender relations in this time, or even the popular understandings of astronomy, to supply context. (Have I just come to expect that in books I read?)
I found myself wondering whether Sobel had originally proposed or even completed a history of the Harvard Observatory, and then her agent/editor/publisher asked her to rewrite/re-cast it by highlighting the women - to exploit the popular interest in the hidden histories? Probably not, though I got the sense she was straining to find the women's contributions in the early pages. But I respect her research, so I assume she wasn't sifting or distorting the record. So the women never do drive the story - that's just how the world was. Okay. But I began to confuse the women, they were mostly vague to me - "Miss X" did this and "Miss Y" did that. Not all of them: Mrs. Draper is relatively clear to me, and Miss Maury, and perhaps a few others, but I couldn't keep many of the others - or their work - straight .
Pickering was fascinating to me because he is so supportive of the women in science. He doesn't hesitate to employ women or nominate them for awards, or lobby to get them higher pay. Was it as simple as that? Or did his respect simply begin as obsequious behavior toward a wealthy widow with deep pockets? If the historical record never showed any controversies or dissension then Sobel won't theorize that it existed. She makes one nod to differing perceptions when she writes: "Pickering stands accused of giving [the women] scut work that no man would stoop to do, yet this is far from true." I wanted to hear more about how he was accused of taking advantage of the women, but the book doesn't explore that.
There is paragraph near the end that could serve as Dava Sobel's rebuttal to the readers like myself who complain of the dullness of the book:
Positives: The eclipse viewing events were interesting, and I learned about how the photographic plates of stars were created and painstakingly subjectively judged by the categorizers of the plates (they must have had very tired eyes). And as I keep repeating, Sobel's careful collecting and collating of the historical data was admirable. I first gave it two stars but will bump it up to a low 3 after writing this review.
But Margot Shetterly's book (and the film) focused and relied heavily on the stories of the lives and personalities of three women and racial prejudice in science, so the cultural events and personalities drove that story. By contrast, The Glass Universe is about many women over 75 years or so, and Sobel is writing a historical account, not a personal story or a cultural biography, so she has chosen not to embellish, extrapolate, or imagine. In fact, she hews so closely to the historical record that the book has very little personality on display at all. Which is fine, I must add, because the late 19th-century record apparently contained few personal details about these particular women, and the twentieth-century records not much more. So to tell her history (not a "story"), Sobel quotes correspondence, ledgers, travel itineraries, conference minutes, and financial documents - and she virtually never deigns to imagine the lives of the women beyond what the record shows.
Again, that's fine. But the result is that the book was pretty dry (for me). First, for pages and pages it seemed like a book about Pickering, the male first director of the Observatory, and the other men, and not the women, because the earliest women involved were benefactors and wives. Interesting, engaged, rich, educated wives and benefactors, certainly. But that shows something about gender structures and traditions in turn-of the-century America, and I kept expecting Sobel to step back and broaden the scope to describe women's roles or gender relations in this time, or even the popular understandings of astronomy, to supply context. (Have I just come to expect that in books I read?)
I found myself wondering whether Sobel had originally proposed or even completed a history of the Harvard Observatory, and then her agent/editor/publisher asked her to rewrite/re-cast it by highlighting the women - to exploit the popular interest in the hidden histories? Probably not, though I got the sense she was straining to find the women's contributions in the early pages. But I respect her research, so I assume she wasn't sifting or distorting the record. So the women never do drive the story - that's just how the world was. Okay. But I began to confuse the women, they were mostly vague to me - "Miss X" did this and "Miss Y" did that. Not all of them: Mrs. Draper is relatively clear to me, and Miss Maury, and perhaps a few others, but I couldn't keep many of the others - or their work - straight .
Pickering was fascinating to me because he is so supportive of the women in science. He doesn't hesitate to employ women or nominate them for awards, or lobby to get them higher pay. Was it as simple as that? Or did his respect simply begin as obsequious behavior toward a wealthy widow with deep pockets? If the historical record never showed any controversies or dissension then Sobel won't theorize that it existed. She makes one nod to differing perceptions when she writes: "Pickering stands accused of giving [the women] scut work that no man would stoop to do, yet this is far from true." I wanted to hear more about how he was accused of taking advantage of the women, but the book doesn't explore that.
There is paragraph near the end that could serve as Dava Sobel's rebuttal to the readers like myself who complain of the dullness of the book:
Before astronomy morphed into astrophysics around the turn of the twentieth century, both men and the few women engaged in the science were willing slaves to routine. Arthur Searle, [the acting director...] tries to explain this reality to a journalist intent on chronicling the excitement of observatory life. "It is only fair to warn you," Searle admonished Thomas Kirwan of the Boston Herald, "that your proposed article cannot be at once true and entertaining. The work of an astronomer is as dull as that of a book-keeper, which it closely resembles. Even the results reached by astronomical work, although they relate to more dignified subjects than the ordinary affairs of trade, are far less interesting than the result of book-keeping, at least to the general reader, unless they are so disguised by fancy as to have little to do with science."So... not every book can be both true and entertaining - that's right. And some out there (the girls books?) are so disguised by fancy as to have little to do with science .... possibly. Those are good things to remember, I'm happy that she worked this quote in.
Positives: The eclipse viewing events were interesting, and I learned about how the photographic plates of stars were created and painstakingly subjectively judged by the categorizers of the plates (they must have had very tired eyes). And as I keep repeating, Sobel's careful collecting and collating of the historical data was admirable. I first gave it two stars but will bump it up to a low 3 after writing this review.
January 19, 2017
Sigh....astronomically dull (get it?). I was interested in the topic but this was just too dry for me.
May 7, 2020
Ich breche das Buch bei gut der Hälfte ab - es ist für mich unlesbar.
Man lernt leider kaum etwas interessantes über die Technik, die die Frauen anwenden und wenn dann ist es so versteckt zwischen -"XY hat Fördergelder für irgendwas locker gemacht", das es nicht auffällt. Auf Niemanden wird persönlich eingegangen. Man lernt zwar die groben Details vereinzelter Biografien, aber jeder Wikipedia Artikel ist da aufschlussreicher. Es gibt kaum persönliche Zitate, auch keine aus zweiter Hand (Verwandte und Freunde). Die Fakten sind zwar interessant, halten mich aber null bei der Stange. Wenn es wenigstens technische Fakten wären, würde ich das Buch vielleicht später nochmal zur Hand nehmen. Aber mich interessiert die Geschichte dieses Instituts in dem Maße leider nicht, wie es hier beschrieben wird.
Schade.
Man lernt leider kaum etwas interessantes über die Technik, die die Frauen anwenden und wenn dann ist es so versteckt zwischen -"XY hat Fördergelder für irgendwas locker gemacht", das es nicht auffällt. Auf Niemanden wird persönlich eingegangen. Man lernt zwar die groben Details vereinzelter Biografien, aber jeder Wikipedia Artikel ist da aufschlussreicher. Es gibt kaum persönliche Zitate, auch keine aus zweiter Hand (Verwandte und Freunde). Die Fakten sind zwar interessant, halten mich aber null bei der Stange. Wenn es wenigstens technische Fakten wären, würde ich das Buch vielleicht später nochmal zur Hand nehmen. Aber mich interessiert die Geschichte dieses Instituts in dem Maße leider nicht, wie es hier beschrieben wird.
Schade.
May 1, 2021
Sobel discusses the admission of women to the Harvard Observatory even in the day when Harvard's student population consisted of males only. The women cataloged and observed the stars, making important contributions to the field of astronomy. While it is nice to see women play an important role beginning in the late nineteenth century, the book suffers from a dry narrative which takes us mainly through the end of the World War II with the main subjects. The book discusses astronomy prizes in the women's honors which continues their legacy to the near present. Although a handful of footnotes pepper its pages, the book mainly includes two sections of narrative notes for each chapter. It also includes a glossary of astronomic terms, short biographies of persons who worked at the Harvard Observatory, both male and female, and a timeline. It also included a section of photographs. Perhaps the saddest photograph shows the now idle observatory refractor. The city's expansion means it never grows dark enough in the evening to make observations. The author includes an extensive bibliography, but the lack of documentation throughout the book limits its academic appeal. The dry narrative will not engage a popular audience. Only those with a genuine interest in astronomy will likely complete their attempted read of this one.
December 18, 2021
The science sometimes went over my head (pun intended) :) but I really enjoyed this account of female and male astronomers in the late 19th and early 20th century. Their intelligence, dedication and attention to detail are presented against the background of the pre-digital times they lived in.
February 7, 2017
https://novelsandnonfiction.com/2017/...
What I Liked
The focus on the scientific breakthroughs and contributions to astronomy/astrophysics accomplished by the female scientists in the book. By reading The Glass Universe I learned a lot about the evolution of the science of stellar spectroscopy, which was absolutely fascinating. From advances in telescope size and power, to the first photographs taken of stars, to the discovery that these photographs could reveal so many of the hidden mysteries of the universe like star composition, distance and the size of the universe itself – I soaked up all the scientific details with glee. Most of the discoveries made in this history were either wholly or in part the work of the female scientists that make up the book’s principal cast, several of whom actually attended the same liberal arts college I went to (Wellesley) though over a hundred years before me. If you’re interested in learning about the early history of modern astronomical investigation, The Glass Universe is a beautifully written and accessible source of information.
The detailing of the personal lives and friendships of the scientists. The Glass Universe primarily revolves around the work done at the Harvard Observatory in the late 1800s and early 1900s by a group of increasingly tight-knit men and women who developed both professional and personal relationships through the years. Sobel brings these historical characters to life, including their animosities, their envies, their friendships, their love affairs and their eccentricities. I loved the inclusion of segments of letters sent from one scientist to the other, providing a primary source through which to witness their now long-past interactions. Despite writing about people who lived over a hundred years ago, Sobel was able to make them feel real and relatable to me. I desperately wanted to sit overnight at the Harvard Observatory with these women and help them glean secrets from the stars.
What I Didn’t Like
Not enough analysis of the ways in which the female scientists struggled against societal expectations in the atypical path they chose. Unlike Hidden Figures, The Glass Universe is not light on scientific details. On the other hand, The Glass Universe fails to provide a real analysis of the gender discrimination these female astronomers experienced in the pursuit of their scientific careers. Beyond a few mentions of it taking longer for a female astronomer to be awarded a particular medal or position and two paragraphs of hurried analysis at the end, the book misses the opportunity to delve into what difficulties these women experienced that their male counterparts never had to face. They must have struggled to reconcile a busy career life with having a family and children. They must have faced skepticism from parents, friends and strangers about their very unusual life choices for the times. They must have struggled economically from being paid so much less than their male counterparts. There’s very little discussion of any of this unfortunately in the book and I found it a glaring omission.
Final Verdict
A beautifully written history of the development of stellar spectroscopy and of the work of the female scientists who contributed to the discoveries that it enabled. Unfortunately lacking in analysis of the gender discrimination experienced by the women involved.
What I Liked
The focus on the scientific breakthroughs and contributions to astronomy/astrophysics accomplished by the female scientists in the book. By reading The Glass Universe I learned a lot about the evolution of the science of stellar spectroscopy, which was absolutely fascinating. From advances in telescope size and power, to the first photographs taken of stars, to the discovery that these photographs could reveal so many of the hidden mysteries of the universe like star composition, distance and the size of the universe itself – I soaked up all the scientific details with glee. Most of the discoveries made in this history were either wholly or in part the work of the female scientists that make up the book’s principal cast, several of whom actually attended the same liberal arts college I went to (Wellesley) though over a hundred years before me. If you’re interested in learning about the early history of modern astronomical investigation, The Glass Universe is a beautifully written and accessible source of information.
The detailing of the personal lives and friendships of the scientists. The Glass Universe primarily revolves around the work done at the Harvard Observatory in the late 1800s and early 1900s by a group of increasingly tight-knit men and women who developed both professional and personal relationships through the years. Sobel brings these historical characters to life, including their animosities, their envies, their friendships, their love affairs and their eccentricities. I loved the inclusion of segments of letters sent from one scientist to the other, providing a primary source through which to witness their now long-past interactions. Despite writing about people who lived over a hundred years ago, Sobel was able to make them feel real and relatable to me. I desperately wanted to sit overnight at the Harvard Observatory with these women and help them glean secrets from the stars.
What I Didn’t Like
Not enough analysis of the ways in which the female scientists struggled against societal expectations in the atypical path they chose. Unlike Hidden Figures, The Glass Universe is not light on scientific details. On the other hand, The Glass Universe fails to provide a real analysis of the gender discrimination these female astronomers experienced in the pursuit of their scientific careers. Beyond a few mentions of it taking longer for a female astronomer to be awarded a particular medal or position and two paragraphs of hurried analysis at the end, the book misses the opportunity to delve into what difficulties these women experienced that their male counterparts never had to face. They must have struggled to reconcile a busy career life with having a family and children. They must have faced skepticism from parents, friends and strangers about their very unusual life choices for the times. They must have struggled economically from being paid so much less than their male counterparts. There’s very little discussion of any of this unfortunately in the book and I found it a glaring omission.
Final Verdict
A beautifully written history of the development of stellar spectroscopy and of the work of the female scientists who contributed to the discoveries that it enabled. Unfortunately lacking in analysis of the gender discrimination experienced by the women involved.
August 29, 2017
This was the first science book I have read in some time. I've always done well and been successful in science, in school, and I admire books on astronomy, cosmology, natural history, evolution, and string theory. I received a few recommendations that I should read some books by Dava Sobel. This was the first book of hers that I have ever read. She is systematic and comprehensive both in presenting an orderly history of the undertakings of the Harvard Observatory and its staff, and also in explaining the science behind what is going on relative to the historical background of the Teddy Roosevelt and World War I eras.
I just so happened to select this book (which I decided to read a month or two before) during the buildup of excitement surrounding the epic solar eclipse which occurred during August 2017. There are multiple solar eclipses that are mentioned in this book, along with who witnessed them, where they stood, and what they recorded in the Annals as well as in their correspondence, diaries, and journals. In fact, the subject of solar eclipses can be directly the impetus for the funding of the Harvard Observatory, because Henry Draper and his wife witnessed one (she was counting the seconds of totality of the eclipse) and, after he died, she supplied an enormous amount of money to fund the research going on at the Harvard Observatory, both in America and in South America.
We learn about the labors of women who scrutinized photographic plates (hence the "glass" universe) and carefully described and recorded the spectra, appearance, magnitude, luminosity, brilliance, period of these stars. There was a lot of research into variable stars, globular clusters, and binary stars. There was also the discovery of mathematical relationships between period and luminosity, as well as the realization that there were other galaxies besides the Milky Way. Also, the spiral structure of our galaxy was revealed. All of the work the women did for some time occurred before they had the right to vote, and there were no women professors of astronomy yet, no graduate school in astronomy yet, and no Ph.D. in astronomy yet at Harvard. All of these absences were remedied, and gradually the scholarship of graduate-level degrees and research were given to women, as well as men. The first woman professor of astronomy also occurred. So this is a book of "firsts," as much as it is a book of science. And many of these firsts involved women and women's minds. The book was enjoyable and mind-blowing, and so was the 2017 solar eclipse, which I witnessed myself within the path of totality over Nashville, Tennessee.
I just so happened to select this book (which I decided to read a month or two before) during the buildup of excitement surrounding the epic solar eclipse which occurred during August 2017. There are multiple solar eclipses that are mentioned in this book, along with who witnessed them, where they stood, and what they recorded in the Annals as well as in their correspondence, diaries, and journals. In fact, the subject of solar eclipses can be directly the impetus for the funding of the Harvard Observatory, because Henry Draper and his wife witnessed one (she was counting the seconds of totality of the eclipse) and, after he died, she supplied an enormous amount of money to fund the research going on at the Harvard Observatory, both in America and in South America.
We learn about the labors of women who scrutinized photographic plates (hence the "glass" universe) and carefully described and recorded the spectra, appearance, magnitude, luminosity, brilliance, period of these stars. There was a lot of research into variable stars, globular clusters, and binary stars. There was also the discovery of mathematical relationships between period and luminosity, as well as the realization that there were other galaxies besides the Milky Way. Also, the spiral structure of our galaxy was revealed. All of the work the women did for some time occurred before they had the right to vote, and there were no women professors of astronomy yet, no graduate school in astronomy yet, and no Ph.D. in astronomy yet at Harvard. All of these absences were remedied, and gradually the scholarship of graduate-level degrees and research were given to women, as well as men. The first woman professor of astronomy also occurred. So this is a book of "firsts," as much as it is a book of science. And many of these firsts involved women and women's minds. The book was enjoyable and mind-blowing, and so was the 2017 solar eclipse, which I witnessed myself within the path of totality over Nashville, Tennessee.
May 6, 2018
In an interview, Arthur Searle, acting director of the Harvard College Observatory, told a journalist, "It is only fair to warn you that your proposed article cannot be at once true and entertaining. The work of an astronomer is as dull as that of a book-keeper, which it closely resembles." It turns our that he was quite wrong!
Dava Sobel has written an interesting, engaging, historical, and emotional story of the dedicated women who revolutionized Astronomy. In fact, it is fair to say that without the "ladies of the Harvard Observatory", knowledge of what stars are made of, how far away they are, their life cycles, and much more would have been delayed by at least several decades.
Sitting in front of viewing screens for tedious hour after hour, they examined photographic plates taken by telescopes from both the Northern and Southern hemispheres looking to unlock the universe's secrets. Analyzing spectral images, they discovered that stars are made of different elements, burn at different rates, and can be grouped into defined types and subgroups. Using this information, astronomers from around the world could, for the first time, learn about the twinkling lights in the night sky that had fascinated mankind for thousands of years.
This book details how the door to the male only field of astronomy was first cracked and slowly flung open by a dedicated group of women who knew that they should have an equal part in discovering the mysteries of the universe. While a book about the history of astronomy and of the women "computers" might be interesting, Sobel brings a love of the subject to his writing. The reader will feel a close connection to each of the people in the book, gain an understanding of their lives and what drove them, and share in the excitement of their discoveries. You will thrill at their accomplishments, both personal and professional, and mourn at their passings. To paraphrase an ad line, "this is not your father's astronomy book".
Dava Sobel has written an interesting, engaging, historical, and emotional story of the dedicated women who revolutionized Astronomy. In fact, it is fair to say that without the "ladies of the Harvard Observatory", knowledge of what stars are made of, how far away they are, their life cycles, and much more would have been delayed by at least several decades.
Sitting in front of viewing screens for tedious hour after hour, they examined photographic plates taken by telescopes from both the Northern and Southern hemispheres looking to unlock the universe's secrets. Analyzing spectral images, they discovered that stars are made of different elements, burn at different rates, and can be grouped into defined types and subgroups. Using this information, astronomers from around the world could, for the first time, learn about the twinkling lights in the night sky that had fascinated mankind for thousands of years.
This book details how the door to the male only field of astronomy was first cracked and slowly flung open by a dedicated group of women who knew that they should have an equal part in discovering the mysteries of the universe. While a book about the history of astronomy and of the women "computers" might be interesting, Sobel brings a love of the subject to his writing. The reader will feel a close connection to each of the people in the book, gain an understanding of their lives and what drove them, and share in the excitement of their discoveries. You will thrill at their accomplishments, both personal and professional, and mourn at their passings. To paraphrase an ad line, "this is not your father's astronomy book".
May 3, 2017
I have enjoyed reading a number of Sobel’s books such as “Galileo’s Daughter”. This book is about the women who worked at the Harvard College Observatory in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They were called computers. After reading “Rocket Girls” and “Hidden Figures”, I know this is a term applied to women who did the math and analytical work for scientists. These women at the Observatory were math, physics and astronomy majors and some were Ph.Ds. These women studied, compared, classified and catalogued data about stars that had been photographed by male astronomers on glass plates. At this time women were not allowed to be astronomers. The women were assigned the work that demanded both scrupulous attention to detail and could be considered tedious work.
Edward Pickering and Harlow Shapley were directors of the Observatory from 1877 to 1952. These men were willing to hire women and even created research grants and academic fellowships for women via the patronage of two women heiresses, Anna Palmer Draper and Catherine Wolfe Bruce, who provided the funding. Some of the women Sobel presents are Williamina Fleming, Annie Jump Cannon, and Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin. These women’s stories are absolutely fascinating.
The book is well written and meticulously researched. Sobel reviewed diaries, letters and memories and included excerpts from these sources into the story. Sobel writes with clarity and has an easy to read style.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is approximately thirteen hours long. Cassandra Campbell does a good job narrating the book. Campbell is a stage actress, voice over artist and an award-winning audiobook narrator.
Edward Pickering and Harlow Shapley were directors of the Observatory from 1877 to 1952. These men were willing to hire women and even created research grants and academic fellowships for women via the patronage of two women heiresses, Anna Palmer Draper and Catherine Wolfe Bruce, who provided the funding. Some of the women Sobel presents are Williamina Fleming, Annie Jump Cannon, and Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin. These women’s stories are absolutely fascinating.
The book is well written and meticulously researched. Sobel reviewed diaries, letters and memories and included excerpts from these sources into the story. Sobel writes with clarity and has an easy to read style.
I read this as an audiobook downloaded from Audible. The book is approximately thirteen hours long. Cassandra Campbell does a good job narrating the book. Campbell is a stage actress, voice over artist and an award-winning audiobook narrator.
March 3, 2017
Even Cassandra Campbell's clear and thoughtful reading couldn't save this book for me. Perhaps my expectations were too high, but I've liked Sobel's books before, and I was excited about this, having read an historical romance back in the late 70s, early 80s that featured astronomer Maria Mitchell. She's not present here, except for a mention. Perhaps the focus was to narrow for me--primarily the women at Harvard--and perhaps had it focused on women in astronomy it would have been livelier with more diverse and interesting women to follow. Lots of science/astronomy--it reminds me why I didn't take astronomy in college: too much math! Can't fault the prose but the topic never worked for me.
Read
December 2, 2017I only read a third of this book and lost interest. The details are not as captivating as knowing that this history exists.
December 13, 2016
I have really enjoyed the writing of Dava Sobel, especially in her books The Planets and Longitude: The True Story of a Lone Genius Who Solved the Greatest Scientific Problem of His Time. She combines a clear writing style with excellent scientific research, which allows the reader to grasp ideas that stretch the mind. http://www.davasobel.com/
On her website, she says:
"Even before the publication of Longitude twenty-one years ago, I learned about a group of women who worked at the Harvard College Observatory in the nineteenth century, analyzing images of the stars to fantastic effect. These ladies of “Pickering’s harem” aroused my curiosity, but I put them off while pursuing Galileo’s Daughter, exploring The Planets, and turning Copernicus’s idea for A More Perfect Heaven into a stage play called And the Sun Stood Still. After several years’ research and writing, I’m happy to report that The Glass Universe will be published by Viking in December, and officially “launched” at an event in the old observatory building, among the half-million glass photographic plates still treasured by the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics."
Powell's review says:
http://www.powells.com/book/the-glass...
"In the mid-nineteenth century, the Harvard College Observatory began employing women as calculators, or human computers, to interpret the observations their male counterparts made via telescope each night. At the outset this group included the wives, sisters, and daughters of the resident astronomers, but soon the female corps included graduates of the new women's colleges Vassar, Wellesley, and Smith. As photography transformed the practice of astronomy, the ladies turned from computation to studying the stars captured nightly on glass photographic plates. The glass universe of half a million plates that Harvard amassed over the ensuing decades through the generous support of Mrs. Anna Palmer Draper, the widow of a pioneer in stellar photography, enabled the women to make extraordinary discoveries that attracted worldwide acclaim."
And certainly this book brings the names of these "computers" into our awareness. They usually earned between 25 and 50 cents per hour, more than a factory worker but less than a clerical one. This book took my breath away in terms of the DEDICATION exhibited by both Pickering and his "harem", as they were called. The personal stories of the long hours spent studying these glass plates--as well as all the information about the process--made me really aware of how dependent our own world has become on mechanical "computers", rather than the human eye and mind.
The central figures of the book for me are Anna Palmer Draper, who funded the entire project in honor of her late husband. Without her loyalty and generosity, none of this could have happened. Her close friendship with Edward Charles Pickering, director of Harvard College Observatory from 1877 to his death in 1919, was the base from which the entire project grew. "At Harvard, he recruited over 80 women to work for him, including Annie Jump Cannon, Henrietta Swan Leavitt, and Antonia Maury. These women, the Harvard Computers (also described as "Pickering's Harem" by the scientific community at the time), made several important discoveries at HCO. Leavitt's discovery of the period-luminosity relationship for Cepheids, published by Pickering, would prove the foundation for the modern understanding of cosmological distances."
However, as much as I respect Sobel and am glad I read this book, I have to agree with one reviewer who said that, at times, his eyes "glazed over"--and so did mine. I'm sure Sobel grasps all the scientific information in this book--but this time I simply couldn't wrap my mind around all the details of HOW the work was done. I come away with a realization of just how immense the universe is, while we try to grasp our place in it.
Possibly the most poignant paragraph in the book comes at the end. After all those years of collecting over 500,00 of these glass photography plates, a water main burst on January 18, 2016, and 61,000 of the plates were submerged. Volunteers took the plates outside in the freezing temperatures, which kept mold from developing. Then the plates were driven to the Polygon Document Restoration Services in North Andover, where they were vacuum-freeze-dried, to be later thawed out and cleaned, one by one. Sobel's last paragraph says:
"One by one, the way the stars emerge as evening falls, the drowned, muddied plates will revive the vivid skyscapes that impressed them when they were sensitive to light. Once again they will reveal the stellar spectra, the variable stars, the star clusters, the spiral galaxies, and all the other luminous sights they first conveyed to a small but dedicated circle of women."
Such passionate dedication is an endangered species, requiring incredible patience--a quality our time often lacks. One of the "computers" has captured my mind: Henrietta Swan Leavitt, so my next book will be Miss Leavitt's Stars: The Untold Story Of The Woman Who Discovered How To Measure The Universe by George Johnson. The blurb in the front of the book says: "With the grace and skill that have made him one of today's most distinguished writers on science, George Johnson poignantly contrasts the magnitude of Leavitt's discovery to the quiet near-obscurity of her short life. is both a masterly account of how we measure the universe and the moving story of a neglected genius."
On her website, she says:
"Even before the publication of Longitude twenty-one years ago, I learned about a group of women who worked at the Harvard College Observatory in the nineteenth century, analyzing images of the stars to fantastic effect. These ladies of “Pickering’s harem” aroused my curiosity, but I put them off while pursuing Galileo’s Daughter, exploring The Planets, and turning Copernicus’s idea for A More Perfect Heaven into a stage play called And the Sun Stood Still. After several years’ research and writing, I’m happy to report that The Glass Universe will be published by Viking in December, and officially “launched” at an event in the old observatory building, among the half-million glass photographic plates still treasured by the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics."
Powell's review says:
http://www.powells.com/book/the-glass...
"In the mid-nineteenth century, the Harvard College Observatory began employing women as calculators, or human computers, to interpret the observations their male counterparts made via telescope each night. At the outset this group included the wives, sisters, and daughters of the resident astronomers, but soon the female corps included graduates of the new women's colleges Vassar, Wellesley, and Smith. As photography transformed the practice of astronomy, the ladies turned from computation to studying the stars captured nightly on glass photographic plates. The glass universe of half a million plates that Harvard amassed over the ensuing decades through the generous support of Mrs. Anna Palmer Draper, the widow of a pioneer in stellar photography, enabled the women to make extraordinary discoveries that attracted worldwide acclaim."
And certainly this book brings the names of these "computers" into our awareness. They usually earned between 25 and 50 cents per hour, more than a factory worker but less than a clerical one. This book took my breath away in terms of the DEDICATION exhibited by both Pickering and his "harem", as they were called. The personal stories of the long hours spent studying these glass plates--as well as all the information about the process--made me really aware of how dependent our own world has become on mechanical "computers", rather than the human eye and mind.
The central figures of the book for me are Anna Palmer Draper, who funded the entire project in honor of her late husband. Without her loyalty and generosity, none of this could have happened. Her close friendship with Edward Charles Pickering, director of Harvard College Observatory from 1877 to his death in 1919, was the base from which the entire project grew. "At Harvard, he recruited over 80 women to work for him, including Annie Jump Cannon, Henrietta Swan Leavitt, and Antonia Maury. These women, the Harvard Computers (also described as "Pickering's Harem" by the scientific community at the time), made several important discoveries at HCO. Leavitt's discovery of the period-luminosity relationship for Cepheids, published by Pickering, would prove the foundation for the modern understanding of cosmological distances."
However, as much as I respect Sobel and am glad I read this book, I have to agree with one reviewer who said that, at times, his eyes "glazed over"--and so did mine. I'm sure Sobel grasps all the scientific information in this book--but this time I simply couldn't wrap my mind around all the details of HOW the work was done. I come away with a realization of just how immense the universe is, while we try to grasp our place in it.
Possibly the most poignant paragraph in the book comes at the end. After all those years of collecting over 500,00 of these glass photography plates, a water main burst on January 18, 2016, and 61,000 of the plates were submerged. Volunteers took the plates outside in the freezing temperatures, which kept mold from developing. Then the plates were driven to the Polygon Document Restoration Services in North Andover, where they were vacuum-freeze-dried, to be later thawed out and cleaned, one by one. Sobel's last paragraph says:
"One by one, the way the stars emerge as evening falls, the drowned, muddied plates will revive the vivid skyscapes that impressed them when they were sensitive to light. Once again they will reveal the stellar spectra, the variable stars, the star clusters, the spiral galaxies, and all the other luminous sights they first conveyed to a small but dedicated circle of women."
Such passionate dedication is an endangered species, requiring incredible patience--a quality our time often lacks. One of the "computers" has captured my mind: Henrietta Swan Leavitt, so my next book will be Miss Leavitt's Stars: The Untold Story Of The Woman Who Discovered How To Measure The Universe by George Johnson. The blurb in the front of the book says: "With the grace and skill that have made him one of today's most distinguished writers on science, George Johnson poignantly contrasts the magnitude of Leavitt's discovery to the quiet near-obscurity of her short life. is both a masterly account of how we measure the universe and the moving story of a neglected genius."
March 9, 2023
Learning how to see and to learn
Limited resources always complicate and process or business. When the mix of government, educational, charity, investment, religious, scientific, military, family, multicultural, international, experimental, research, weather, and youth combine to develop an opportunity for learning and exploring a visible puzzle with unlimited possibilities for learning and exploring the universe while trying to understand the extents and limitations of the components of universe with its powerful forces, brilliant lights, high speed movements over amazing distances beyond measurement between the stars while trying to fit everything into limited scientific understanding that provides the rules for matter from the tiny components of the atom to molecules to components of worlds and stars that make up the universe. A very few people with limited knowledge and education were able to make major assumptions and develop reasonable interim theories to explain what they were seeing and recording as they observed the space around them.
The ideas and patterns derived were checked, challenged, verified, and modified by others to build an accepted method for determining the operation and characteristics of the components of everything.
Limited resources always complicate and process or business. When the mix of government, educational, charity, investment, religious, scientific, military, family, multicultural, international, experimental, research, weather, and youth combine to develop an opportunity for learning and exploring a visible puzzle with unlimited possibilities for learning and exploring the universe while trying to understand the extents and limitations of the components of universe with its powerful forces, brilliant lights, high speed movements over amazing distances beyond measurement between the stars while trying to fit everything into limited scientific understanding that provides the rules for matter from the tiny components of the atom to molecules to components of worlds and stars that make up the universe. A very few people with limited knowledge and education were able to make major assumptions and develop reasonable interim theories to explain what they were seeing and recording as they observed the space around them.
The ideas and patterns derived were checked, challenged, verified, and modified by others to build an accepted method for determining the operation and characteristics of the components of everything.
April 12, 2019
Just as I finished listening to this excellent history of women photographing and studying the stars, Katie Bouman took the first ever picture of a black hole. My timing could not have been better.
May 14, 2020
Too long, very monotone.
Read
May 15, 2019Interesting. I am trying to decide whether I like or am offput by Sobel’s use of Miss or Mrs every time she mentions one of the women researchers, while using the standard John Smith or Smith for all the men.
At first I was quite distressed, because I noticed it when I started to wonder why even a firm feminist like myself was still feeling as though these were kind of secondary contributions. So I was irate. Even at the end, with Sobel outlining all their accomplishments and recognition, I felt that all the ‘Miss’es degraded their status. But I have to acknowledge that it emphasizes that ‘Miss’ is the way they would have been addressed by all the men, no matter how ling they worked together. It also emphasized that most of them, especially the early ones, stayed single for decades. And lastly, it helps the reader keep straight which astronomers were women and which men, which, with so many individuals who worked over the eighty or so years covered, might have been a challenge if all were referred to by last names.
Anyway , it was an enjoyable read. I know nothing about astronomy, and this was pitched perfectly for me: a challenge, but a good one, not overwhelming. Based on the brief articles and reviews I’d read, I started this book thinking the women were taken advantage of (in terms of recognition and pay). I emerged with a more nuanced view.
Financially: definitely underpaid relative to the men for their expertise. Recognition: all over the map. Generally the leader of the observatory at any point in time promoted their work with their name attached, and argued with the powers-that-be at Harvard for suitable appointments for them, but the leadership of that hidebound institution were glued to an all male faculty and administration. But the wealthy women who funded much of the observatory’s work helped find financing for their work and higher degrees. The women also attended international conferences and while it seems they seldom addressed big groups, astronomers around the world recognizes their pioneering work. Even today, there is a move afoot to change the name of a law with Hubbel’s name on to Leavitt, in recognition of the woman researcher who first pointed it out.
I listened to this, and it worked pretty well.
At first I was quite distressed, because I noticed it when I started to wonder why even a firm feminist like myself was still feeling as though these were kind of secondary contributions. So I was irate. Even at the end, with Sobel outlining all their accomplishments and recognition, I felt that all the ‘Miss’es degraded their status. But I have to acknowledge that it emphasizes that ‘Miss’ is the way they would have been addressed by all the men, no matter how ling they worked together. It also emphasized that most of them, especially the early ones, stayed single for decades. And lastly, it helps the reader keep straight which astronomers were women and which men, which, with so many individuals who worked over the eighty or so years covered, might have been a challenge if all were referred to by last names.
Anyway , it was an enjoyable read. I know nothing about astronomy, and this was pitched perfectly for me: a challenge, but a good one, not overwhelming. Based on the brief articles and reviews I’d read, I started this book thinking the women were taken advantage of (in terms of recognition and pay). I emerged with a more nuanced view.
Financially: definitely underpaid relative to the men for their expertise. Recognition: all over the map. Generally the leader of the observatory at any point in time promoted their work with their name attached, and argued with the powers-that-be at Harvard for suitable appointments for them, but the leadership of that hidebound institution were glued to an all male faculty and administration. But the wealthy women who funded much of the observatory’s work helped find financing for their work and higher degrees. The women also attended international conferences and while it seems they seldom addressed big groups, astronomers around the world recognizes their pioneering work. Even today, there is a move afoot to change the name of a law with Hubbel’s name on to Leavitt, in recognition of the woman researcher who first pointed it out.
I listened to this, and it worked pretty well.
January 20, 2018
This is the second audio book I've listened to in 2018 and it's a mixed bag.
There's endlessly cool amounts of information about the players in late 19th Century astronomy and I loved reading the letters that Sobel shared through her research. The importance of women to the field in defining classification systems and developing our current understanding of the universe is outstanding. The deftly and very gently delves into the glass ceiling as well as the glass universe in discussing different job positions and salaries the women were granted and how so often that they were not comensurate with their work or with their achievements.
All of that is really good.
What doesn't work for me is that too much of the book feels like a laundry list. This happened. Then, this happened. After that, this happened. It's a timeline without much conflict or emotional insight. The story of these women and men are limited to Who, What, and When. The questions I love best How and Why are not given the attention they deserve. I would have liked more about the discovery, the work, I would lie to feel the wonder and love for their work. I want to leave a book like this desperate to grab a telescope, visit an observatory, or at the least go to a planetarium.
I didn't catch the enthusiasm or passion of these early scientists. I did get a good sense of the tedium of their work. I got a great sense of their dedication, but I think the book could have offered more.
The Glass Universe discusses something endlessly interesting and it provides beautiful facts and details... it just failed me as story. I don't know if that's fair, but it's mostly true. I really wanted to enjoy this book, but as much as I like it... I didn't.
There's endlessly cool amounts of information about the players in late 19th Century astronomy and I loved reading the letters that Sobel shared through her research. The importance of women to the field in defining classification systems and developing our current understanding of the universe is outstanding. The deftly and very gently delves into the glass ceiling as well as the glass universe in discussing different job positions and salaries the women were granted and how so often that they were not comensurate with their work or with their achievements.
All of that is really good.
What doesn't work for me is that too much of the book feels like a laundry list. This happened. Then, this happened. After that, this happened. It's a timeline without much conflict or emotional insight. The story of these women and men are limited to Who, What, and When. The questions I love best How and Why are not given the attention they deserve. I would have liked more about the discovery, the work, I would lie to feel the wonder and love for their work. I want to leave a book like this desperate to grab a telescope, visit an observatory, or at the least go to a planetarium.
I didn't catch the enthusiasm or passion of these early scientists. I did get a good sense of the tedium of their work. I got a great sense of their dedication, but I think the book could have offered more.
The Glass Universe discusses something endlessly interesting and it provides beautiful facts and details... it just failed me as story. I don't know if that's fair, but it's mostly true. I really wanted to enjoy this book, but as much as I like it... I didn't.
December 18, 2016
I would like to thank NetGalley, Penguin Publishing, and Dava Sobel for the advanced digital copy in exchange for an honest review. This is the story of the women of Harvard's astronomy program. It began in the mid-nineteenth century when Harvard College Observatory began hiring women as "human computers". They studied thousands of glass photographic plates which consisted of magnified images of the cosmos. I felt this book was a bit too scientific. Sobel was unable to connect her "characters" to her audience, whereas the novel "Hidden Figures" by Margot Lee Shetterly, not only contained the full body of work that was discover by these amazing women but the author was also able to incorporate the struggles, friendships, and dreams of the scientists/mathematicians she was writing about.
January 8, 2018
Fascinating read about the lives of the women that catalogued, classified, and calculated the astronomy discoveries of the mid-nineteenth century. Also interesting to a native Pittsburgher to hear such familiar names Buhl and Carnegie intertwined in this narrative.
While there's a profuse use of astronomy history and terminology, I found it easy to follow along many years after college Astronomy 101.
While there's a profuse use of astronomy history and terminology, I found it easy to follow along many years after college Astronomy 101.
February 11, 2019
Not exactly what I expected. The focus was more on the research being done than on the women doing the research. Part of that was very interesting but most was over my head.
Of interest to probably no one other than myself...I listen to audiobooks on cross-country road trips with my cat. Some narrators are displeasing to him as evidenced by increased meowing and general restlessness. He seemed to find the narrator for this audiobook, Cassandra Campbell, quite soothing. I liked her voice, too.
Of interest to probably no one other than myself...I listen to audiobooks on cross-country road trips with my cat. Some narrators are displeasing to him as evidenced by increased meowing and general restlessness. He seemed to find the narrator for this audiobook, Cassandra Campbell, quite soothing. I liked her voice, too.
November 11, 2021
DNF at around 70%.
I wanted to love this, honestly. But from the very beginning, I felt like I was missing crucial information. I didn’t know what was happening, and the women weren’t written in a way that I could really distinguish between them. I’m glad that someone tried to write this, as the contributions of women in science are often ignored, but I just couldn’t finish this one.
I wanted to love this, honestly. But from the very beginning, I felt like I was missing crucial information. I didn’t know what was happening, and the women weren’t written in a way that I could really distinguish between them. I’m glad that someone tried to write this, as the contributions of women in science are often ignored, but I just couldn’t finish this one.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 723 reviews