A classic view of drama
is that it relies on the audience's willingness deliberately to suspend
their disbelief in a story that is incredible by ordinary standards. Were
it drama rather than biography, the story of John Nash would fit this view.
Nash earned his Ph.D. in mathematics
at the normal age for earning an undergraduate degree. In his research as
a graduate student and subsequently as an assistant professor, he made the
sort of major contributions to pure mathematics and also to economic theory
that tend to occur in these entire fields only a handful of times in each
decade.
He was on the verge of being recognized
as one of the world's leading mathematicians before he was 30 years old.
Then, quite abruptly and at the very time when his mathematical career was
flourishing, his behavior became so bizarre that he was involuntarily committed
to a mental institution and was diagnosed as being schizophrenic. Although
he had several temporary remissions during which he continued to make outstanding
contributions to mathematics, he spent most of the next three decades as
an entirely dysfunctional person. In fact, he plausibly would have wound
up being a "street person" if it were not for the sustained, charitable
care that he received from his ex-wife and, to some extent, from his former
colleagues and their academic institutions. Remarkably, in the seventh decade
of his life his mental condition has steadily and substantially improved.
Concurrently the full magnitude of
his contribution to economic theory has become clear beyond a tight research
community of specialists. This understanding has led to Nash being awarded
the 1994 Nobel Prize for Economics jointly with two economists who had deepened
one of his insights.
In choosing Nash as her subject, Sylvia
Nasar has had to forgo the expository advantage that the biographer of an
important scientist usually enjoys. Typically such a scientist not only
has the idea that defines a new approach to a field, but he or she also
champions that idea against the opposition of the conservative wing of a
scientific discipline, mentors a group of followers who extend its influence
and applicability, and in many cases founds a "school," comprising
some university departments and scientific publications that advocate the
new approach, that provides institutional support for the idea as an ongoing
paradigm. Thus, chronicling the life of an important scientist tends to
provide the biographer with the opportunity to teach readers a great deal
about the science itself. Although Nash has had first-rate, creative ideas
in several fields, though, he has played no
significant role in their subsequent propagation or extension.
In this situation, Nasar has had to
make a stricter choice than most scientific biographers face between focusing
on the subject's personal story vs. the story of the development and impact
of the subject's scientific work. She has chosen, understandably in view
of the remarkable facts of Nash's life, to focus predominantly on his personal
story. She has documented this story with painstaking care (especially in
having interviewed hundreds of persons, including a high proportion of the
most outstanding mathematicians of Nash's generation) and has told it with
skill that makes the book hard to put down.
Beyond being a well-told story of
an individual, the book has two general themes. They are not obviously related
but turn out to be complementary. One theme has to do with the moral value
of a person. Two arguments that run through much of Western thinking about
this issue are that persons deserve moral respect because of their rationality
and in reciprocity for their efforts to accord respect to others. But Nash
as a young man seems to have been less consistent than most of us in his
efforts to accord respect to others, and by his 30s he had ceased to be
consistently rational in thought or action either, so these arguments do
not go far in his case. Nasar reminds the reader again and again, yet without
becoming gratingly repetitive, that Nash was a majestic person despite his
flaws. She evidently finds in that majesty a ground for moral respect. From
this perspective, she raises tough issues such as what is appropriate treatment
of a mentally ill person who is disruptive in the workplace or the community;
under what circumstances, if any, is involuntary commitment to psychiatric
treatment justifiable; and particularly, can there ever be justification
for involuntary administration of treatments such as shock therapy and psycho-active
drugs that have extremely unpleasant and detrimental physical or psychological
side effects. She succeeds in raising these questions in a skilful way that
explores their complexities and does not impose preconceived answers. On
this account, I can imagine this book being a useful case study in a university
course in law or medical ethics.
The other general theme of the book
is the relationship of a community-in this case, a scientific community-to
a troubled member of that community. More accurately, two scientific communities-mathematics
and economics-are described. The economics community is viewed indirectly,
through the lens of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences where the award
of the 1994 Economics Prize to Nash was made only after fierce and acrimonious
internal dispute. Nasar brings this dispute to light in a tour de force
of investigative reporting.
Although it is less flashy, Nasar's
sustained examination of the culture that exists within outstanding mathematics
departments and research institutes is an even more impressive feat. The
picture that she draws of the life of a promising young mathematician certainly
has some unattractive features. A very risky career, which the best people
typically enter with ambitions of making breakthroughs that will almost
certainly be beyond their reach, is conducted in a highly competitive atmosphere
that exacerbates the serious psychological strain of adjusting those ambitions
to reality. Until well into his or her career, the research mathematician's
life is a sustained tournament akin to the selection process for star athletes
and concert pianists, and where a cliquishness among the top competitors
is tolerated that makes the tournament nastier than it apparently needs
to be. This situation seems odd since, in contrast with athletic and musical-soloist
virtuosity, mathematics is a field where the great discoveries largely reflect
cumulative, collaborative effort. In view of Nasar's observation that many
of the most significant contributors to mathematics lose their edge while
they are still quite young, I wonder whether such a short period of creativity
might be a byproduct of an environment that leads predictably to "burn-out,"
and whether the obvious advantage of such an environment in identifying
talented individuals may be more than offset by more subtle disadvantages
in eliciting their best contributions and teamwork. Nonetheless, at the
same time I am also impressed by the number of generous, altruistic and
sometimes courageous mathematicians who figure in various episodes of Nash's
story.
In summary, this is an admirably researched
and highly readable biography of someone whose life merits the substantial
effort that the author has made to study it. It is well worth reading, both
to learn about Nash himself and also in view of the general issues that
the attempt to come to terms with him raises.