What is
Figuring by Maria Popova about?
Figuring explores the interconnected lives of scientists, artists, and writers across four centuries—including astronomers Maria Mitchell and Johannes Kepler, poet Emily Dickinson, and environmentalist Rachel Carson—to examine how love, curiosity, and creativity shape human legacy. Blending biography, history, and philosophy, Popova illuminates their struggles, triumphs, and often-overlooked queer relationships, revealing how their contributions transcended societal constraints.
Who should read
Figuring by Maria Popova?
This book appeals to readers of interdisciplinary nonfiction, history enthusiasts, and fans of Brain Pickings. Ideal for those interested in LGBTQ+ narratives, feminist perspectives on science/art, and lyrical storytelling. Its dense, associative style suits readers who enjoy deep dives into niche historical figures and existential themes.
Is
Figuring worth reading?
Yes—Figuring offers a unique blend of poetic prose and rigorous research, weaving lesser-known stories of pioneers like sculptor Harriet Hosmer and astronomer Caroline Herschel. While lengthy, its exploration of how “figures” shape culture through science, art, and activism provides fresh insights into resilience and intellectual legacy.
What are the main themes in
Figuring?
- Interconnectedness: How lives across eras influence one another (e.g., Kepler’s astronomy inspiring Carson’s environmentalism).
- Queer narratives: Recovering historical LGBTQ+ relationships, like astronomer Maria Mitchell’s bond with actress Fanny Kemble.
- Art-science synergy: Goethe’s poetic approach to biology and Dickinson’s scientific metaphors.
How does Maria Popova connect science and poetry in
Figuring?
Popova frames scientists as poets of reality—e.g., Rachel Carson’s lyrical environmental writings or Johannes Kepler’s musical model of planetary motion. She highlights Emily Dickinson’s use of astronomical metaphors, arguing that truth-seeking unites both disciplines.
What historical figures are featured in
Figuring?
Key profiles include:
- Maria Mitchell: First female U.S. astronomer and suffragist.
- Margaret Fuller: Transcendentalist journalist and women’s rights advocate.
- Harriet Hosmer: Queer neoclassical sculptor challenging 19th-century gender norms.
- Rachel Carson: Marine biologist and author of Silent Spring.
How does
Figuring address LGBTQ+ history?
The book highlights queer relationships often erased from mainstream narratives, such as sculptor Harriet Hosmer’s romances with women and Emily Dickinson’s passionate letters to her sister-in-law. Popova frames these bonds as catalysts for creative and scientific breakthroughs.
What writing style does Maria Popova use in
Figuring?
Popova employs a lyrical, associative style reminiscent of her Brain Pickings blog—blending primary sources (letters, diaries) with reflective commentary. Her sentences sprawl with vivid details, like describing Einstein’s brain “bathing in formaldehyde” alongside Bulgarian shepherdesses’ songs.
How does
Figuring critique traditional biographies?
The book rejects linear storytelling, instead using “constellations” of figures to show how legacies intertwine. Popova prioritizes emotional truth over factual chronology, speculating on inner lives through archival fragments.
What is the significance of the title
Figuring?
It plays on dual meanings: “figuring out” existential questions and honoring marginalized “figures” who shaped culture. Popova argues that understanding ourselves requires grappling with these interconnected lives and ideas.
How does
Figuring relate to modern readers in 2025?
Its themes of resilience and interdisciplinary curiosity resonate amid current debates on climate action, LGBTQ+ rights, and AI ethics. The book’s celebration of unconventional thinkers offers a blueprint for navigating complex, rapidly changing worlds.
Are there criticisms of
Figuring?
Some readers may find its 578-page length daunting and its nonlinear structure disorienting. Critics note that Popova’s poetic tangents occasionally overshadow historical analysis, leaning more toward impressionism than rigorous scholarship.