Want to write about science?

Brian speaking - this event will be less formal...

I spend most of my time writing books and articles on science topics. I've been given the chance to put on a workshop in Cambridge (UK) to help others with the necessary skills. It's on Saturday 30 June 2012 at the St John's Innovation Centre in Cowley Road and runs from 9.30 to 3.30 including lunch.

As well as my imparting words of wisdom there will be practical experience in choosing topics, getting together a pitch for an article or a book proposal and the whys and wherefores of science writing. Each attendee will be given free copies of two ebooks: Non Fiction Agent, which gives detailed guidance on putting together a non fiction book proposal and getting it submitted, and Upgrade Me, one of my popular science titles, which we will use to take a look at book proposals and the whole process of writing a science book in the workshop.

Attendees will also get a free review from me of a magazine article or book proposal, giving tips on improving it, after the event by email.

It costs £145 (set by the local organizers) but I think this is a realistic going rate for a professional hands-on workshop like this, which I think would be very useful both for anyone wanting to get a science book/articles published or working in science who would like to publicize their work.

If you would like any further details, you can drop me an email at brian@brianclegg.net - or take a look at the website, where you can also book a ticket (booking is essential as places are limited).

Comments

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's recent gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some ex

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5. However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor

Which idiot came up with percentage-based gradient signs

Rant warning: the contents of this post could sound like something produced by UKIP. I wish to make it clear that I do not in any way support or endorse that political party. In fact it gives me the creeps. Once upon a time, the signs for a steep hill on British roads displayed the gradient in a simple, easy-to-understand form. If the hill went up, say, one yard for every three yards forward it said '1 in 3'. Then some bureaucrat came along and decided that it would be a good idea to state the slope as a percentage. So now the sign for (say) a 1 in 10 slope says 10% (I think). That 'I think' is because the percentage-based slope is so unnatural. There are two ways we conventionally measure slopes. Either on X/Y coordiates (as in 1 in 4) or using degrees - say at a 15° angle. We don't measure them in percentages. It's easy to visualize a 1 in 3 slope, or a 30 degree angle. Much less obvious what a 33.333 recurring percent slope is. And what's a 100% slope

Search This Blog