RIP Roger Angell (1920–2022)

Famed writer and editor Roger Angell has died at age 101. Take a look at this article. I hadn't realized it before reading this article, but Angell is from quite a famous family.

Here is Angell's Wikipedia entry.

Heinlein's Checklist for Answering Mail

This is brilliant.

I particularly like that there is a box labeled "Please do not write to me again."

(Tip of the cap to Giuseppe Paleologo, who was responding to Steve Strogatz.)

RIP Harlan Ellison (1934–2018)

The great writer Harlan Ellison (who contributed much to science fiction, as well as other genres) died today.

Here is a picture with him at Dragon*Con in 2003. He complimented me on the shirt I was wearing, and rolled his eyes to signal to me (while I was waiting patiently at the front of the line) that the person in front of me in line for his autograph (who gave him tons and tons of things to sign) was an idiot. For me, he signed a well-read copy of the 35-year retrospective of his work, and he agreed to be in the picture below. Unlike recent Dragon*Cons, Ellison's autograph was free. He seemed to appreciate the fact that I had obviously read the book that I asked him to sign.

Update: Here is an obituary from The Nerdist.

New Hall of Fame Managers

Today, this year's version of the committee formerly known as the Veterans Committee elected Bobby Cox, Tony La Russa, and Joe Torre to Major League Baseball's Hall of Fame. All three former managers were elected unanimously, and all three of them richly deserve this honor.

There are others who were considered this time around that also deserve a spot in the Hall of Fame, but they will have to wait a few years (during the next time that candidates from the "Expansion Era" are considered).

Update (sort of; 12/10/13): Roger Angell has finally won the Hall of Fame's J.G. Taylor Spink Award for baseball writing. About damn time.

Writers and Voting for Baseball's Hall of Fame

T. J. Quinn has written a very nice and intelligent article about why he has given up his annual vote for Major League Baseball's Hall of Fame. I approve!

RIP Martin Gardner (1914-2010)

Renowned mathematics and science writer (and mathematics puzzler and purveyor of recreational mathematics) Martin Gardner has died.

Update (5/24/10): Here is some more reading material about Martin Gardner (courtesy Scientific American).

(Tip of the cap to Jesús Cuevas Maraver.)

Peter Gammons retires from ESPN

It was announced on Tuesday that Peter Gammons, one of my favorite sports writers, is leaving ESPN to pursue other things. I am under the impression that this won't include much baseball writing, and I'm really going to miss reading his words. One particular aspect of what I occasionally do in expository articles was actually influence a bit by his writing, though I don't know if anybody has particularly noticed that. Here is Buster Olney's tribute to Peter Gammons, and here are some other words of appreciation.

Here is what Peter Gammons writes.

Tales from the arXiv: Dickens versus Bulwer-Lyton

The following paper showed up on the arXiv mailing list this morning:

Title: Scientific evaluation of Charles Dickens

Author: M.V. Simkin

Abstract: I report the results of the test, where the takers had to tell the prose of Charles Dickens from that of Edward Bulwer-Lytton, who is considered by many to be the worst writer in history of letters. The average score is about 50%, which is on the level of random guessing. This suggests that the quality of Dickens' prose is the same as of that of Bulwer-Lytton. Previously I reported similar results for the case of Modern Art (physics/0703091).



I have several comments:

1. This was posted under 'physics and society'. I looked at the paper. Where is the physics? (I have no issue with applying physics techniques to such things---obviously, because I do that myself quite a bit---but I just see a survey and simple statistics here.)

2. The results are interesting, but in what way does this constitute a scientific evaluation of Charles Dickens. The title is very misleading. I think doing this kind of study is worthwhile, but be careful about what you can actually conclude from it!

3. Statements such as "Edward Bulwer-Lytton is the worst writer in history of letters." are not exactly scientific in nature. That's pure opinion---the bad fiction contest be damned.