My Brief History

Let me begin by reviewing my own education.  I was educated in private schools for most of my life, and in well-reputed, academically rigorous private schools to boot.  I graduated a semester early from my undergraduate studies at one of the top public liberal arts universities in the Midwest, and I earned a Master’s degree in Education the following year; in both programs, I maintained a 3.75 or beyond GPA and graduated both with honors.  I teach in one of the top 5 districts in my city, at the top high school in the district. I am currently enrolled in a second Master’s program at the #4 university for Secondary Education Counseling in the country, and I plan on pursuing a Ph.D. when that program concludes.

I start this way not to show off my own credentials but to emphasize my point when I say that I am very well educated. 

So when I picked up Stephen Hawking’s autobiography, titled My Brief History, I felt pretty well prepared to deal with the intricacies he was bound to present.  The science of it, which takes up the vast majority of the book, is in laymen’s terms but still pretty complex; when Hawking eventually delves into some complicated stuff about the quantum mechanics behind the possibility of time travel, I ended up a little lost. 

I understand the basics of physics overall and a little bit of general relativity – enough that Interstellar, Christopher Nolan’s most recent film, made total sense and I didn’t even have to look anything up.  Perhaps that’s a better representation of my credibility on this topic (my English degree, well-earned as it was, may not be the best proof that I understand physics).

The average person would probably agree with me.  I know Hawking works hard to put his work into colloquial language; he’s famous for A Brief History of Time, which I have not yet read but understand that it is meant to be fairly easy to understand.  However, having read this book, I have to question a little how much science you must already ‘get’ in order for that to be true.  No matter how much you try to get things into basic language, when you are so far beyond the average person, I doubt there’s a huge chance of success.  I spend a fair amount of time discussing physics with my brother, who recently graduated from yet another prestigious school (far more prestigious than mine) with a dual degree in theoretical math and applied physics, and I think that background helped me a lot.

With all that being said, this book was absolutely fascinating. 

I picked it up because I am also reading his ex-wife’s memoir, Travelling to Infinity, which was recently adapted into the movie The Theory of Everything.  While interesting, her memoir is a little dry, and as it discussed their relationship, I started wondering what Hawking himself is like.  Jane Hawking paints him very differently depending on the page and story; sometimes he is frail and dependent, sometimes aloof, sometimes cruel, and sometimes loving.  She’s probably accurate I imagine, but I was still curious. 

So I dug it out of my school’s library (where I learned that a student request we purchase it, which is really cool) and plowed through it in about a day and a half; it’s fascinating but only about 100 pages.  As it unfolds with surprisingly deep insight into his scientific life, I was surprised at times by the straightforward logic with which he writes about his family. His autobiography offers his life up with such an unusual light, one that could be flattering or cruel, depending on the reader’s perspective. 

There was one moment that stood out to me to illustrate this style. 

The chapter was discussing Hawking’s work with black holes, one of his most famous areas of expertise, and it says: “My work on on black holes began with a eureka moment in 1970, a few days after the birth of my daughter, Lucy.  While getting into bed, I realized that I could apply to black holes the causal structure theory I had developed for singularity theorems” (pg 69). 

While I won’t pretend to understand the theory he’s discussing (he’s too far beyond me at this point), I do understand the emotional significance of these sentences. 

Hawking doesn’t spend much time in his book discussing his family; in fact, the births of his children are largely skimmed over. That is most clearly demonstrated here, where he gives this one mention of his daughter’s birth.  Its significance, as opposed to being tied to his child, is largely found in its ability to date a moment of discovery in his work. 

This can be read several ways. 

The obvious is that he’s neglecting his family/children in favor of science.  This seems like the simplest explanation, the most clear and easy to quantify. 

Then there’s the possibility of his genius coming into play – this man has so much going on in his brain, more than you or I could fathom (remember too that he has to do everything mentally since he cannot write on his own),that his family is really more of a footnote to his life. 

Both of these possibilities are judgment calls against him, depending on perspective.

From reading though, I think it’s neither.  He spends so little time on any members of his family, including himself; his diagnosis with motor neuron disease or its progression arealmost nonexistent , and he barely mentions his wife at all, even in the chapter where they get married. Instead, much of his book is about his work and the process behind all of it – the big moments of science.

Truly, I think perhaps this is a man who is uncomfortable with the emotions of life, the family life, and instead prefers what he better understands, which is the science he’s spent years chasing down.  I mentioned this to my brother, who said that Hawking has a reputation for being a little cold toward people (as my brother put it, “a douche,” but I prefer to pretty that up).  Maybe Hawking just isn’t comfortable with emotions; it’s clear that he isn’t comfortable discussing his illness, so maybe he prefers to keep his relationships intimate as well.  The man clearly possesses a sharp sense of humor – one need only look at his guest appearances on Futurama or The Big Bang Theory to see that – but he seems removed from his family regardless.  

There’s no argument that he’s a brilliant man, one of the brightest of the current scientific world.  It’s not so far-fetched to argue that perhaps that brilliance doesn’t fully extend to his emotional side. 

I enjoyed this book.  I may never read A Brief History of Time, but I understand people, and Hawking is a fascinating person to explore.  His story makes a good companion to his ex-wife’s memoir, which one day in the future of time, I may actually finish.