Explanation:
Comparing TDS and Duelling Neurosurgeons demonstrates how Kean’s writing style has developed over time. TDS-era Kean is less flashy, in terms of how he describes people and situations. Still erudite, and still fond of wordplay, alliteration, and colourful analogies, but without the bordering-on-arrogance sometimes seen in Duelling Neurosurgeons. So people who found Duelling Neurosurgeons a little too flippant would probably prefer the more straightforward tone used here. However, TDS faltered a little in terms of structure. Kean jumped from idea to idea so rapidly, and with so many layers of callbacks, digressions and call-forwards, that sometimes the patterns he tried to make clearer were instead obscured.
Having said that, the patterns were my favourite part of TDS. Seeing how individual scientists helped, hindered, and annoyed each other, and how scientists’ past inventions affected their future inventions, was really informative. The “great man” view of science can always do with being poked at and countered, especially now that major discoveries are rarely made by individuals, so having these concrete examples here was helpful. Similarly, I enjoyed the stories which showed how chemistry and physics moved from being intertwined to independent. While I factually knew that the two topics used to be part of the same area of knowledge, the examples and stories helped me understand that more clearly. The one thing TDS lacks here is a way to keep the relationships between people in focus. A visual timeline of events, or even a Wait But Why-style horizontal history approach, would have been incredibly useful.
Overall, I’d say that if you already have solid background knowledge about chemistry and an interest in its history, or in the history of science more generally, then you’ll gain plenty of knowledge from TDS. For chemistry novices, the beginning and end of TDS might be hard to follow; however, the human side of chemical history is still worth a read.
