Evolutions by Owen Harman is one of the quirkiest popular science books I’ve read, for both good and ill (mostly good), and while it’s not the book I’d offer up as the go-to for learning about the history of the universe and life, it’s a lyrical look a’slant at those things in a mythic style (somewhat akin, roughly, to Italo Calvino’s Cosmiccosmics) whose different take is worth a look.

Harman begins with a straightforward introduction about myth and science—how they contrast and interact. Myths, he writes, “are humankind’s stories about what we all feel in our guts is fundamental to our humanity but know with our brains can never truly be plumbed. Shifting to science and more modern times, he tells us that “science pretends to be a replacement for mythology, but in reality is driven by the same hunger for understanding that brought us the gods and the afterlife . . and it too is shaped by tales.” The problem with science he argues is that it has an arrogance that it promises “the only mysteries worth revealing will succumb” to it in time, but Harman begs to disagree: there are many worthy mysteries not on the path to resolution. Science gives us knowledge [but not] wisdom.”

The intent (or at least one intent) of Evolutions is to tell today’s scientific stories in the language and style of myth, “to reclaim an age-old task for our flamboyant mother tongue” so today’s science can “help us live more comfortably with the uncertainty of wonder.” The stories themselves, fifteen in all, include: the Big Bang, formation of the solar system, the creation of the moon and its relationship to Earth, beginning of life and then its subsequent evolution, including rise of multicellularity, movement to land, the start of language.

The tales are told in differing styles and from differing perspectives. The opening section on the Big Bang has an old-time mythic, semi-Biblical style: “They would be named the Weak Force and the Strong Force and the force of the fields, Magnetic and Electric . . . After that the forces demanded to separate.” That last part similar to so many myths of how Earth and Sky were separated—sometimes willingly sometimes not.

The moon segment, meanwhile, is a direct address from a personified Earth to the Moon as from mother to child: “In the beginning you were so close, just 22, 400 kilometers away. What days those were!” This mother-child relationship sometimes offers up a bit of wry humor, as when the Earth notes how the Moon is slowly, inexorably drifting away: “you seem determined . . . to gain your independence,” a child’s trait any one will recognize. On the other hand, being born of a collision, the description of the moon’s creation: “ramming violently into my side . . . like a bully taking me by surprise” has an unfortunate nearness to a rape that quickly turns to being overjoyed “despite the agony and my beaten body”—I’m not sure that’s the best metaphor here.

Sometimes the lyricism, the points-of-view (another is from a whale—a creature who ventured from the sea to land then returned millennia later), the mythic style, the figurative language clearly convey both the concrete details and the inherent sense of wonder in modern scientific theories. At other times though they do the opposite, muddying the science and making it less easy to follow rather than easier. The section on the Web of Life (rise of bacteria, Eukarya, etc.) is one such segment, the one on how/why sex originated is another. Generally, I found the earlier and later sections to be a stronger balance of lucidity and lyricism, while the middle segments became clouded by style’s dominance over communication of information.

Finally, the last section is an extended narrative bibliography that also includes some further, more straightforward/concrete explanation of some of the topics covered in the book. It’s an excellent resource for those looking to learn more about any of the areas.

Evolutions is an ambitious book and certainly takes lots of chances. It doesn’t always hit; in fact, I confess it missed a bit more than I would have liked. And sometimes it can feel a bit strained; I wouldn’t call Harman quite the consistent poetic stylist of either Calvino or, perhaps a somewhat closer analogue, Alan Lightman. But the strong segments are quite good and even if the weaker ones muddy the science, I applaud Harman for the variety and risk in them. The good outweighs the bad by a solid if not huge amount, and the last segment makes a recommendation easier. (3.5 stars)

This was such a pleasant read especially for one who is a fan of mythology, history and science and modern day science. Evolutions is a one of a kind read.

This book is exactly what it states on the cover - 15 myths that explain our world - but it is not a comparative mythology text or a book that refutes misconceptions of evolution. In this book, Oren Harman takes some of the current scientific knowledge (about the formation of the universe, Earth, and evolution of various organisms) and formulates it into 15 mythological "stories", usually from someone's perspective (e.g. Mother Earth, a trilobite). The writing style is fanciful and lyrical, occassionally overly verbose.

I'm really not sure who the target audience of this book is supposed to be. If you have knowledge of the topics the author covers, you might find this book amusing, though you won't find any new information. If your scientific knowledge is limited, then most of these 15 myths will probably be confusing to you. Personally I found the Chapter "Illuminations", which provides references and explains where the author got his information, more interesting than all the fuzzy mythological stories. In my opinion, this book is either very clever or very silly, depending on the readers mood and inclination for expecting something more substantial than wierd stories touted as myths. I really was hoping for more meat and less fluffiness.

Quite frankly, this book wasn't quite what I was expecting insofar as myths go. However, it was interesting and uniquely done.

I was extremely disappointed by this book.

When I first received the arc from the publisher I was very excited for this. I am an avid reader of mythology, as you can see from my Goodreads reviews of myths and legends from around the world comprise over 50% of my reading these days. I am also a physicists and read a lot of cosmology, astrophysics, and planetary astronomy scientific literature. I'm also a huge fan of all sciences, and read whatever I can get my hands on in terms of biology and other sciences as well. Basically I would be the target audience for this book, I agree with the author that the concept of the book is a great idea.

In spite of a rather wordy and flowery introduction the book got off to a decent start. The big bang, formation of the stars, the sun, and the Earth and Moon go off without a hitch. Early life is fine too. An early highlight for me was "Life straightens the will of the defiant" Which I believe came from the start of multicellular life. I have no idea what the author means here, but it sounds nice and made me think for a while. Another gem was "ever since, fear and faith have been companions, like grotesque parasitic twins", however the book is already starting to unravel here. History of science references begin to creep in unnecessarily. And it only gets worse from here.

In "ON TO LAND" We have what is the greatest missed opportunity of the entire book. You'd think that in a book titled evolutions we'd get myths that really drive home the concept of natural selection. The slime mold myth perhaps comes the closest by touching on the competition of individualism and greed vs. the survival of the whole. But what better place to bring in natural selection than that central point of the Darwinian mythos, the evolution of land-based vertebrade life. The fish that crawls onto land. the Darwin fish is a symbol of free thinkers and scientists everywhere. In Oren's rendering of this pivotal moment in natural history "the bones began elongating" and "heads falttened" and so forth. Nice one, this is Lamarckian evolution at it's worst.

Perhaps I was already thrown off by the first sections of this "myth" which dissolves instantly from section 1 into a discussion of the history of the study of embryos in the 1800s. I found this boring and unnecessary, why not save it for the large appendices which take up the entire second half of the book?

Unfortunately this book just doesn't deliver for me. I feel like the work was far too personal for the author, I noticed in the autobiographical blurb just now that he studies history of science. Well that would explain why so much history of science got jammed into what should be myths and legends about the long ago, not Victorian era science.

In XV Tricks of the mind, the author writes a nice little autobiographical essay, which is fine. However by this point I'm so tired of the book the every little thing jumps out at me. For instance when in section 5 of this 'myth' (And who splits myths into sections?) the age of the universe is given as 13.799 +/- 0.021 years old (thats right years, not billions of years, not Gya. Years.) I realize it's just a typo, but in a book like this? Geez. but it makes sense, even the author was beginning to get tired of his own book, and the errors crept in. I've seen this happen many times in a work of literature where the author bites off more than they can chew. They struggle at the end when there's nothing but a ball of gristle in their mouth and they just want to spit it out and be done with it. Focus on the myths, move the extra stuff to the appendices. Or better yet write a history of science book, and get it out of your system.

I give it two stars only because I like the concept and I hope one day someone else gives this a shot or the author issues a revised edition.

Thanks.