Dans l'oeil du compas

The book is widely praised for its engaging and clear writing style, which many found accessible and inspiring, even for readers with little prior knowledge of geometry. Reviewers appreciated its broad historical scope, tracing the evolution of our understanding of space from ancient civilizations to modern theoretical physics. The author effectively interweaves the history of geometric concepts with biographical details of key scientists and mathematicians, presenting complex ideas in a light-hearted, anecdotal, and easy-to-follow narrative. Many found the explanations of non-Euclidean geometries and their relevance to theories like Relativity to be particularly lucid, fostering a deeper appreciation for the role of geometry in science and philosophy. The author's enthusiasm for the subject is often described as contagious, broadening readers' horizons and encouraging further exploration of related scientific fields.

However, several criticisms were raised, particularly regarding the book's accuracy, scope, and authorial voice. Some readers found the lack of diagrams problematic for understanding complex geometrical concepts. A recurring concern was a perceived anti-Christian bias and historical inaccuracies, especially in the treatment of the "Dark Ages" and certain historical figures. The book was also criticized for its Eurocentric perspective, neglecting significant contributions from Islamic, Vedic, and Asian mathematics. Some reviewers felt the author's humor was forced or "cutesy," and his frequent use of personal examples involving his sons became repetitive and annoying. Furthermore, while the initial chapters were generally well-received, the latter sections on modern physics, such as string theory, were often described as becoming too complex and difficult to follow, leading some readers to feel lost or that the book veered off its primary subject of geometry. There were also complaints that the author seemed to diminish Euclidean geometry and sometimes misrepresented the contributions of certain mathematicians.

Overall, the book is recommended for general readers interested in the historical development of mathematics and science, particularly how our understanding of space has evolved. It is best suited for those seeking a broad, inspiring overview rather than a detailed technical education in geometry. Readers who appreciate an engaging, conversational style and don't mind a strong authorial voice will likely enjoy the journey through the lives and ideas of geometric thinkers. However, those looking for rigorous historical accuracy, comprehensive mathematical explanations, or a strictly objective tone, especially concerning religious and cultural history, may find aspects of the book frustrating. It serves as an excellent introduction to pique curiosity and encourage further reading, particularly for the earlier historical sections.