The central thesis of Postcards
from the Brain Museum is an attempt to answer the question: is there such a
thing as a criminal or indeed an elite/genius brain? Burrell tempts the
reader in from the start with the promise of an interesting journey through the
history of brain research, the added bonus of meeting famous scientists and
their brains along the way.

From the outset the reader is aware that this book has been written for
a lay audience. We are immediately introduced to the idea that brain
collections (there is no museum per
se) exist throughout the world and reassured that we won’t need to be brain
anatomists to understand the contents. Within the first few pages we are in
familiar territory — Frankenstein the book and movie are discussed. Everyone
living must know this story and it is an apt one for introducing the topic
here. Mystery, intrigue and not a little gristle and gore are waiting for us in
these pages.

With our noses smelling the formalin and pictures of brains decomposing
while the lids of their containers gather dust we are immediately plunged into
the quest for a marker for genius, for criminality. This is also a cautionary
tale of botched thinking, flawed experimentation, men of science on both sides
of the Atlantic, how idol worship can cloud objectivity even in scientists and
ultimately a path through the history of brain science from the time of the
ancients (some of whom believed the heart mattered more than the brain),
Descartes, to Gall and up to the present day. Religion has always been a part
of this story, primarily the question of where the soul resided, or if indeed
there was such a thing as a soul. Theory of Mind, materialism, the hunt for a
workable paradigm, positivism, phrenology (scalp-bump reading in the early
days), eugenics (breeding a master race and all that entails),
cytoarchitectonics ("the mapping of the cerebral cortex based on minute
differences of cell structure, density, composition, and staining
quality"; pg 247) and ultimately querying whether we can match function to
structure in any meaningful way are all covered here.

Topics such as how brains were acquired, how they were prepared and
stored, if/when they were studied and how are also dealt with. The history of
European and American Neuroscience, the setting up of specialized institutes
and where the brain collections are now are also discussed. A useful index,
notes and whose brains make up the various collections around the world are all
included. The pictures in the middle of the book are appropriate and
fascinating.

Politics and social/historical context are also crucial to understanding
how the scientists worked and how the days they lived in influenced their
thinking. It could be said that this is primarily a story of men in
neuroscience’s history (few women are mentioned and only then as supports to
the men, with the exceptions of Marian Diamond and Sandra Witelson who recently
investigated Einstein’s brain.) To be fair though most scientists in the
history of brain science were men and many of them are given short shrift here.
The author questions previous authors on this topic where/when he can (Stephen
Jay Gould’s The Mismeasure Of Man especially gets a going over in this book.) Burrell talks about the importance of
objectivity, something he isn’t 100% able to do himself one feels. From the
very beginning we are told: "nothing has been proven" (pg 14) and by
the end of this volume this viewpoint isn’t much changed.

Written in a pop-psychology style, this book is a quick read. It also
makes for vagueness at times to the expense of specifics. Burrell does
foreshadow well however and generally links chapters with each other via
concluding paragraphs thus aiding comprehension. The pages are full of
interesting anecdotes (e.g. the possibility that Walt Whitman’s brain might
have been dropped before it could be studied, or that Einstein’s brain spent
many years on the road before it was
actually investigated in any way). Characters too are abundant — swaggering
egos, ladies’ men, loners, The Wild Boy of Aveyron, notorious criminals,
politicians, presidents, scientists and more are all here. Burrell is
especially good at scene-setting (the introduction to the chapter headed
"Lenin" was wonderfully poetic) while less good at letting the story
flow. Many of the chapters are not chronologically (time-wise or subject-wise)
presented. All of the chapters are titled after the principal brain/character
they investigate and many of them don’t introduce this person until well into
the chapter. As a reader I found myself asking when the title character was
going to actually show up…

Burrell is right to say that IQ isn’t well defined/understood and that
even now scientists argue over its definition. He has a point when he says that
scientists can be blinded by the name on
the jar or the name on the paper
rather than being objective about what the data/brain/words tell us. He also
gives us hope when he says that every healthy brain can be improved and that we
are all essentially the same: "any healthy brain has a potential that is
essentially infinite." (pg 307) I take issue however with his and Jerry
Fodor’s contention that psychology isn’t finished and neuroscience isn’t
prepared to wait (see pg 293 for exact quote). That strikes me as a very empty,
ridiculous statement. Burrell seems to forget that cognitive neuroscience is
still a relatively young discipline despite the ground-breaking advances in
technology in recent years. We’re also not just twiddling at knobs using small
research groups to get any data we want (Quote: "Keep the sample size
small enough, say ten to twelve subjects, and the odds are encouragingly high
that, with a little tweaking of the dials, there will be sufficient overlap in
the localized zones to allow you to claim, with 95 percent confidence, that
there is a "God spot" in the brain, a phrenological module of
veneration." pg 294) (Note: he’s using an example but goes on to
generalize to higher-order cognitive functions like thinking, memory etc).
Where does he get this view from is what I want to know? Statements like this
do no service to this area of science — not for our relationship with the
public (whoever might read this book) and not among the scientists and others
involved. Global comments about higher order functions and the fact that he
mentions only one study (on "musical brains") as a means to hedge his
bets isn’t scientific. Then again, it’s questionable how much this author
understands brain scanning techniques. It didn’t instill me with confidence on
this issue when he stated: "Adjust the dials, choose the colors, and one part
of the brain will light up brighter than the rest." (pg 294) He also
states: "It is hardly the case that all of contemporary brain science is a
fraud." (pg 301) A statement that simply left me speechless! This is a
massive field and I felt that Burrell clearly hasn’t covered even 1% of it when
he can make these global statements in the way he does. Despite the fact that
he states: "No one today contests the localization of brain function"
(pg 293) he goes on to contest this very statement. We can link function to
structure to the extent that specific tasks involve specific areas of the brain
in reliable ways. It’s a start surely?

It is sad to think that there are rows of dusty jars full of formalin
and decomposing brains which are not being studied before it is too late. Today
we are more interested in in vivo brain
function — how the brain works while a person is performing some task in a
controlled environment. Gross anatomy has become old news, regrettable when it is clear from this book that there
appears to be a lot left to investigate. The studies so far have been
inconclusive and/or unpublished/unpublishable — either because the data has
been poor, there have been few adequate control groups or because this issue
has always been a political hot potato.
Finding markers of elite brains will
always be unpopular (especially now after the horrors of the Holocaust.)

In conclusion, despite the let-down of the last two chapters (I have to
be honest and say that he lost my trust as a reader right at the end), this
book is an informative one, not least on the history of neuroscience, the move
from gross anatomy (weight and fissures) to cellular maps to investigating the
brain in vivo. The author makes the
case strongly that we are all essentially the same (whatever that means!) yet
also individual (see page 306). History of science students and anyone working
in some area of human neuroscience should be encouraged to read it. Burrell
manages right at the end to stir up the hornet’s nest that has always plagued
this field of science. If nothing else the contents of Postcards from the Brain Museum will make you question, think and
react in either one way or the other. In doing so he carries on the tradition
of controversy that has always been the life-blood of research into the human
brain.

© 2005 Ruth Mark

Ruth E. Nieuwenhuis-Mark is lecturer of neuropsychology at the University of Tilburg in the Netherlands. She specializes in Alzheimer’s disease, stroke, epilepsy and other neurological disorders. Her personal website can be viewed at: www.remark.be

Categories: General, Psychology