The first thing that Marc Kaufman's review of IS GOD A MATHEMATICIAN?? by Mario Livio reminds me of is the "Reading Rainbow" reviews by small children. "have you ever wondered what it is like to be a butterfly?" "Did you ever want to live in the time of dinosaurs?" "Did you know that 365 -- the number of days in a year -- is equal to 10 times 10, plus 11 times 11, plus 12 times 12?" This is a poor way to start a review, especially because the facts are not all that interesting, at least not to me. Maybe that is because I am not a mathematician. Or a book reviewer.
The rest of the review is also a cut and past from a sixth grade book report even using terms like "remarkable" and "magical" and this gem of a pun, "An extended section on knot theory is, well, pretty knotty." The greatest irony of the whole piece is when Mr. Kaufman criticizes Mario Livio for limited vocabulary and poor word choice.
The reason for the sophomoric review may be the fact that the author is the science writer for the Washington Post. It would make sense to have a science writer do this review if they actually delved into the science (or math) presented in the book, but this is not the case. Only a brief skimming of the topics of Mr. Livio are discussed and not delved into. Worst of all, because of the ppor style and compostition of the review I do not know whether I would like the book or not. Although since Mr. Kaufman did, I most likely won't.