The Krantz review is valuable because it is an
approachable document that
can be read and enjoyed by a nonmathematical
reader. It's actually quite amusing I think,
and not just because it has some cheap shots in it
(although I agree, it does). I forwarded it to a
classical scholar of Greek, an English professor,
and a venture capitalist
and they all thanked me for sending it.
Two of them asked me if I "agreed with it" and I said
I had only flipped through the book, so really had
no idea. I suggested they take a look
at it themselves.
Generally speaking there is a tremendous
shortage of popularly-approachable reviews and accounts of
the mathematical literature, and there is a public
out there that will read and enjoy it if it is done well.
There are plenty of sterile technical analyses,
addressed only to the specialist,
of ANKOS available already. It's good that
the Bulletin published the Krantz review in my
opinion.
* * * *
At the ICM
2002-Opening Ceremony in Beijing, SS Chern contributed this introduction (in
part)
It is my great pleasure to welcome you to this gathering....In 2000, we had a
mathematics year, an effort to attract more people to math. We now have a vast
field and a large number of professional mathematicians whose major work is
mathematics. Mathematics used to be individual work. But now we have a public.
In such a situation a prime duty seems to be to make our progress available to
the people. There is clearly considerable room for popular expositions. I also
wonder if it is possible for research articles to be produced by a historical
and popular introduction. The net phenomenon could be described as a
globalization. It is more than geographical. In recent studies different fields
were not only found to have contacts, but were merging. We might even foresee a
unification of mathematics, including both pure and applied, and even the
possibility of the emergence of a new Gauss.