A Truly Remarkable Man

     On February 6, 2006 Jim Holt wrote a review in the New Yorker on David Leavitt’s biography The Man Who Knew Too Much: Alan Turning and the Invention of the Computer called Code-Breaker. In this article Holt expresses his opinions of Leavitt‘s biography. This article is intended for an audience who has read or is interested in reading Leavitt’s book. The purpose of this article is to critique Leavitt’s writing as well as opinions while keeping the reader‘s attention.
     Holt’s opening paragraph mentions suicide, a conviction of gross indecency, a turning point in World War I and the framework for the modern computer. It sounds more like a movie or novel rather than a biography. It instantly hooked my attention and I wanted to read on. I know the name Alan Turing through my studies a few years ago in Computer Sciences. I only knew of his ideas and breakthroughs but nothing of his personal life. Reading the areas of Turing’s personal life which were explored in the article hooked me and had me eagerly reading further.
     Holt has a wealth of knowledge with regards to Alan Turing’s life. It was delivered in a chronological way which effectively created ethos. Holt’s review was incorporated in Turing’s life timeline which allowed him to not only create ethos but also pick out the parts of Leavitt’s work that he does not agree with such as Leavitt’s “rather overdeveloped ability to detect psychosexual significance.” (Holt 334) Even though I have not read Leavitt’s biography I get the distinct impression that Leavitt focuses much of his writing on Turing’s sexuality. By focusing on Turing’s sexuality it shows him as a victim during a time when homosexual relationships were illegal in Britain. Holt’s objection to Leavitt’s focus on Turing’s sexual orientation removes the thoughts of Turing being a victim and replaces them with thoughts of Turing being a hero. This change in mindset definitely altered the way I received the information of Turing’s life. I am now able to fully understand why many people believe that Turing’s death was not suicide.
     Where Holt further establishes ethos is when he mentions a positive aspect to the biography such as crediting Leavitt for developing Alan Turing “the man.” This shows that Holt is genuinely reading the biography and commenting on the piece rather than personalizing it towards the author. Another example is when Holt noticed specific areas where Leavitt’s logic and understanding of the science were incorrect but did recognize Leavitt’s attempts to research the topic. This instantly placed Holt higher on the credibility scale than Leavitt since Holt seems to have a clearer understanding of the science.
     At the end of the article Holt makes acknowledgement to the differing theory camps surrounding Turing’s death. Holt agrees and notes that there is no evidence to contradict suicide as the cause of Turing’s death but does say “this note of macabre came doesn’t suit a man who eschewed all forms of egoistic fuss as he solved the most important logic problem of his time, saved countless lives by defeating a Nazi code, conceived the computer and rethought how mind arises from matter.” Clearly Holt does not believe that Alan Turing committed suicide and that is the last thought left with the reader. Since Holt established Turing as a hero rather than a victim earlier in the article the audience is able to accept his deductive logic. This is effective because not only did Holt critique Leavitt’s biography and share the life of Alan Turing but Holt also left the audience questioning whether there is a mystery surrounding Turing’s death.
     Alan Turing was an amazing man.  He stood up for what he believed was right knowing full well what the consequences could be.  He is a man to be respected for just that fact alone.  Turing chose to undergo chemical castration (instead of jail time) for being convicted of "gross indecency" trying to bring to justice a man who stole his personal property thinking that Turing would not speak up because he was homosexual.  This conviction stripped Turing of his security clearance and ended his ability to perform crypotlogical work.  My question is:  In our world today how many people do you think would stand up for what they believe is right knowing full well that it could potentially ruin their lives?