There are many songs in the world about love and loss, heartbreak and heart-ache. There are altogether fewer about algebraic geometry in the style of Alexander Grothendieck. Here is my attempt to fill that gap:

Disclaimer: I hope none of this needs saying, but just in case of misinterpretation:

1. No views expressed therein are attributable to any organisation to which I am affiliated.

2. Most of the views expressed therein are not attributable to me either, but are a deliberate exaggeration, for comic effect, of a common initial reaction to one’s first meeting with Grothendieck-style algebraic geometry.

3. It is not intended as a serious critique of any mathematician or school of mathematics!

Lyrics

When I was a young boy doing maths in class

I thought I knew it all.

Every test that I took, I was sure to pass.

I felt pride, and there never came a fall. Up at university, I found what life is for:

A world of mathematics, and all mine to explore.

Learning geometry and logic, I was having a ball.

Until I hit a wall… For I adore Euler and Erdős,

Élie Cartan and Ramanujan

Newton and Noether. But not to sound churlish

There’s one man I cannot understand. No, I can’t get to grips with Grothendieck,

My palms feel sweaty and my knees go weak.

I’m terrified that never will I master the technique

Of Les Éments de Géométrie Algébrique. He’s a thoughtful and a thorough theory-builder, sans pareil.

But can anybody help me find the secret, s’il vous plaît

Of this awe-inspiring generality and abstraction?

I have to say it’s driving me to total distraction. For instance… A Euclidean point is a location in space, and that we can all comprehend.

René Descartes added coordinates for the power and the rigour they lend.

Later came Zariski topology, where a point’s a type of algebraic set

Of dimension nought. Well, that’s not what I thought. But it’s ok. There’s hope for me yet! But now and contra all prior belief

We hear a point’s a prime ideal

In a locally ringed space, overlaid with a sheaf.

Professor G, is truly this for real? No, I can’t make head nor tail of Grothendieck

Or Deligne, or Serre, or any of that clique.

I’ll have to learn not to care whenever people speak

Of Les Fondements de la Géométrie Algébrique. But don’t take me for a geometrical fool.

I can do much more than merely prove the cosine rule.

I’ll calculate exotic spheres in dimension 29

And a variety of varieties, projective and affine. I’m comfortable with categories (though not if they’re derived)

I’ll tile hyperbolic space in dimension 25

I can compute curvature with the Gauss-Bonnet law

And just love the Leech Lattice in dimension 24. But algebro-geometric scheming

Leaves me spluttering and screaming.

And in logic too, you may call me absurd

But I wouldn’t know a topos, if trampled by a herd. I’ve tried Pursuing Stacks but they vanished out of sight,

I’ve fought with étale cohomology with all my might.

And Les Dérivateurs. It’s 2000 pages long.

I reach halfway through line 3, before it all goes badly wrong. No, I’ll never get to grips with Grothendieck

And I’m frightened that I’m failing as a mathematics geek.

All the same, I can’t deny the lure and the mystique

Of Le Séminaire de Géométrie Algébrique. – Richard Elwes, 2015

Comments are closed on the Youtube page (because obviously) and here (because broken) but open on Google plus, Facebook, and Twitter.

and here