My Dad shook the hand of Turing when Turing was working at Manchester University, after the war. Dad was a good-looking rugby player who was interested in logic - I don't think he understood (at least at the time) why Turing was interested in him! Later on his own security clearance as a V-bomber captain might have been compromised, so he only talked about it to the family.
So I have shaken the hand that shook the hand of Alan Turing. Which always makes me smile, and is my single claim to fame.
Is there more detail to the story, or could it have been simply a common interest in logic and the like? As a gay man I can assure you that we aren't attracted to every allegedly good-looking male.
(I really don't mean this to be snarky, but I know forum posts have a way of making it seem that way.)
According to the biography on which the movie "The Imitation Game" was (very loosely) based ("Alan Turing: The Enigma"), Turing was rather direct when expressing interest in the men he knew. Much more so than I would expect for that time. There were several times where he straight up propositioned acquaintances. So it wouldn't entirely surprise me if there was an actual expression of interest in the original story.
Of course it's quite possible that's what Turing was doing in this case. I'm not saying it wasn't.
My gentle objection from long experience is that gay men's motivations are so very often over-sexualized by people who are not gay men. Without good situational evidence, it's not a good idea to make that assumption.
I can't agree more - it seems very disrespectful to imply that Turing was only/primarily interested in OP's father due to his sexual preferences. I think the over-sexualisation is quite evident if you simply consider changing the gender here - "Mother was a good-looking football player who was interested in logic - I don't think she understood (at least at the time) why Djikstra was interested in her!"
Of course, neither I nor my (late, so I can't ask him) Dad knows what Turing's motivations were.
These are just my possibly incorrect assumptions, following later conversations.
V-force security checks were however a real thing when it came to homosexuality, and to certain extent heterosexuality - V-force liked nice, safe married couples with kids - but they certainly didn't always get them.
I am two handshakes removed both from John von Neumann and Alan Turing (via different people) and wish even 0.001% of their genius was thereby transmissible.
There are plenty of people still alive with handshake distances of 1 or 0, however, if we’re making a metric out of that.
Good writeup. Seems like it should also mention that he was banned from entering the US in 1952 after being convicted of having sex with a man. After reading his dislike for ship travel, I have to imagine that the cheaper air travel in the 1950s would have made a third visit more likely (if not for that criminal charge and his subsequent suicide).
Do you know if the ban was due to a blanket ban on anyone convicted of anything abroad or specific crimes?
I mean the second one is bad for someone just being gay but the first would seem to catch people convicted of political crimes in the likes of Spain during the fascist era or the Soviet Union.
On a slight side note to this, I remember as a kid one of the common things cops said to us about drugs besides health was, if you get convicted you can't go to the US anymore. Just a bit of a chuckle I had there of the threat of not being able to visit the us was bigger than threat of jail.
“Beyond the way they speak, there is only one (no two!) features of American life which I find really tiresome. The impossibility of getting a bath in the ordinary sense and their ideas on room temperature” — Alan Turing (1936)
I'm familiar with the difference in 'room temperature' between here and the UK, but not what the idea of 'getting a bath in the ordinary sense' is. Anyone know?
This is such a fascinating insight. I didn't know this part of his story.
Turing was a complex character as most brilliant people are.
It saddens me what happened to him, but we must recognise that our children's children will be appalled at things we (collectively) stand by and approve of.
Depends how far ahead you want to look. National borders, the use of lethal weapons for self-defense or law-enforcement, the entire education system. It may not always be fair since the problems these things are meant to address may be mostly gone.
A very interesting perspective to me is how many things start out as improvements in society or quality-of-life, but end up viewed as the opposite after history progresses enough to take their benefits for granted and pick out flaws in them.
This has always been so. Every generation has done something another generation later finds to be deplorable or barbaric. I would assume that we would not be exempt from this.
Oil, fast food and sleep however seem more benign, sort of like we look at the past and think, wow we have a much better way of doing this now.
I don't see why chemotherapy is something future generations would be appalled by us approving off. It works and it saves lives and is the best we can manage. Most people don't see the saving of lives given the best means possible as something to be appalled about people doing. They may be appalled at the the fact the was no other option but not at the people who actually did it. It's like condemning a doctor in rural Africa for not using cutting edge medicine but only what they can scrounge up, no sane person would do so but would rather view them more favorably for persevering despite such limitations.
Yeah I don't think we look all that disfavorably on things like amputations to save someone's life if it's the only lifesaving option available on the spot (in the past or present).
Such an amazing book. I’m now listening to the audiobook version for the first time. Extremely well narrated by William Drufris. And my mind is blown all over again at all the things Stephenson brings together in this book. The characters are great. All the interactions are great. Lots of adventure. Good humor. Lots of learning. Surprises me his stories were never picked up for an HBO TV series. Maybe not enough violence.
I can strongly recommend the Baroque Cycle which is a set of prequels for Cryptonomicon set in the 17th and early 18th centuries and Fall; or, Dodge in Hell which, while not a direct sequel, shares at least on character and the Waterhouse family foundation.
NB The audiobook versions of all of these are really good.
Edit: Jack Shaftoe is probably one of my favourite fictional characters...
In reality, this is a matter of considerable debate. The chemical castration period ended fourteen months before his death. The official inquest into his death ruled that he had committed suicide by consuming a cyanide-laced apple.
Jack Copeland, an editor of volumes of Turing's work and Director of the Turing Archive for the History of Computing, has suggested that Turing's death may have been accidental, caused by the cyanide fumes produced by an experiment in his spare room, and that the coroner's investigation was poorly conducted.
You do understand that if Turing killed himself accidentally, that's good for the "crown"? (The British government is not "the crown".)
They would have no reason to cover up an accidental death, so I'm not sure why you've suddenly flipped your viewpoint here. Not everything is a conspiracy.
So I have shaken the hand that shook the hand of Alan Turing. Which always makes me smile, and is my single claim to fame.