Those “100 Best Novels of All Time”

Posted in Literature with tags , , on May 17, 2026 by telescoper

As it does from time to time, The Grauniad has compiled a list of what it claims are the best somethings. This time it was novels. The full list with an explanation of how the list was compiled, clickable links to comments and pictures of the book covers can be found here, but I’ve reproduced a simplified version below:

1. Middlemarch – George Eliot
2. Beloved – Toni Morrison
3. Ulysses – James Joyce
4. To the Lighthouse – Virginia Woolf
5. In Search of Lost Time – Marcel Proust
6. Anna Karenina – Leo Tolstoy
7. War and Peace – Leo Tolstoy
8. Jane Eyre – Charlotte Brontë
9. Pride and Prejudice – Jane Austen
10. Madame Bovary – Gustave Flaubert
11. The Great Gatsby – F. Scott Fitzgerald
12. Bleak House – Charles Dickens
13. Emma – Jane Austen
14. Mrs Dalloway – Virginia Woolf
15. Moby-Dick – Herman Melville
16. Nineteen Eighty-Four – George Orwell
17. One Hundred Years of Solitude – Gabriel García Márquez
18. Persuasion – Jane Austen
19. Tristram Shandy – Laurence Sterne
20. Wuthering Heights – Emily Brontë
21. The Portrait of a Lady – Henry James
22. Things Fall Apart – Chinua Achebe
23. Midnight’s Children – Salman Rushdie
24. The Remains of the Day – Kazuo Ishiguro
25. Lolita – Vladimir Nabokov
26. Don Quixote – Miguel de Cervantes
27. The Trial – Franz Kafka
28. The Brothers Karamazov – Fyodor Dostoyevsky
29. Pale Fire – Vladimir Nabokov
30. Frankenstein – Mary Shelley
31. The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie – Muriel Spark
32. The God of Small Things – Arundhati Roy
33. David Copperfield – Charles Dickens
34. Wolf Hall – Hilary Mantel
35. Great Expectations – Charles Dickens
36. The Handmaid’s Tale – Margaret Atwood
37. Invisible Man – Ralph Ellison
38. The Age of Innocence – Edith Wharton
39. Their Eyes Were Watching God – Zora Neale Hurston
40. Song of Solomon – Toni Morrison
41. Heart of Darkness – Joseph Conrad
42. The Magic Mountain – Thomas Mann
43. Housekeeping – Marilynne Robinson
44. Giovanni’s Room – James Baldwin
45. The Golden Notebook – Doris Lessing
46. The Leopard – Giuseppe Tomasi di Lampedusa
47. Vanity Fair – William Makepeace Thackeray
48. The Metamorphosis – Franz Kafka
49. A Fine Balance – Rohinton Mistry
50. Wide Sargasso Sea – Jean Rhys
51. My Brilliant Friend – Elena Ferrante
52. The Golden Bowl – Henry James
53. The Transit of Venus – Shirley Hazzard
54. Orlando – Virginia Woolf
55. The Waves – Virginia Woolf
56. Mansfield Park – Jane Austen
57. The Sound and the Fury – William Faulkner
58. Disgrace – J. M. Coetzee
59. Never Let Me Go – Kazuo Ishiguro
60. Howards End – E.M. Forster
61. The Rings of Saturn – W.G. Sebald
62. Half of a Yellow Sun – Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie
63. White Teeth – Zadie Smith
64. The Good Soldier – Ford Madox Ford
65. The Color Purple – Alice Walker
66. The Master and Margarita – Mikhail Bulgakov
67. The Man Without Qualities – Rubert Musil
68. Blood Meridian – Cormac McCarthy
69. Crime and Punishment – Fyodor Dostoevsky
70. Jude the Obscure – Thomas Hardy
71. Kindred – Octavia E. Butler
72. Our Mutual Friend – Charles Dickens
73. Austerlitz – W.G. Sebald
74. Nervous Conditions – Tsitsi Dangarembga
75. The Bluest Eye – Toni Morrison
76. Dracula – Bram Stoker
77. The Rainbow – DH Lawrence
78. A House for Mr Biswas – V.S. Naipaul
79. Go Tell It on the Mountain – James Baldwin
80. Rebecca – Daphne du Maurier
81. Buddenbrooks – Thomas Mann
82. The End of the Affair – Graham Greene
83. A Farewell to Arms – Ernest Hemingway
84. The Talented Mr Ripley – Patricia Highsmith
85. The Vegetarian – Han Kang
86. The Turn of the Screw – Henry James
87. The Line of Beauty – Alan Hollinghurst
88. Ragtime – E.L. Doctorow
89. The Left Hand of Darkness – Ursula K. Le Guin
90. Jacob’s Room – Virginia Woolf
91. Life and Fate – Vasily Grossman
92. Sentimental Education – Gustave Flaubert
93. Invisible Cities – Italo Calvino
94. The Known World – Edward P. Jones
95. The Return of the Native – Thomas Hardy
96. Pedro Páramo – Juan Rulfo
97. Catch-22 – Joseph Heller
98. The Road – Cormac McCarthy
99. The Go-Between – L.P. Hartley
100. My Ántonia – Willa Cather

Such lists are a bit silly, except for the fact that they might encourage people (including myself) to read more books, which is a good thing. I wouldn’t compile a ranking myself as I don’t think of books in terms of league tables. “Best” according to what criterion? I don’t see how you can sensibly compare very different types of novel or novels from very different eras. Nevertheless, I couldn’t resist counting how many books on the list I have read. If you want to know the answer, it is 42. I’ll let you guess which ones.

I have read the Number 1 novel, Middlemarch and, although I thought it was very good, it surprises me to find it at the top of the list, above Ulysses The highest-ranked book I haven’t read is No. 2, Beloved. There are several others on the list that I’ve never even heard of let alone read. The only book on the list that I did at school was No. 78. A House for Mr Biswas, which I didn’t think was all that great. I’ve been meaning to read Tristram Shandy (No. 19) but I think I’ll get that out of the library rather than buying it.

To save you counting, here are the authors with multiple entries:

5 – Virginia Woolf
4 – Jane Austen
4 – Charles Dickens
3 – Henry James
3 – Toni Morrison
2 – James Baldwin
2 – Fyodor Dostoyevsky
2 – Gustave Flaubert
2 – Thomas Hardy
2 – Kazuo Ishiguro
2 – Franz Kafka
2 – Thomas Mann
2 – Cormac McCarthy
2 – Vladimir Nabokov
2 – W.G. Sebald
2 – Leo Tolstoy

I haven’t read anything by either Sebald or McCarthy or Flaubert. Among the omissions that surprised me are The Old Man and The Sea by Ernest Hemingway, The Pilgrim’s Progress by John Bunyan, Gulliver’s Travels by Jonathan Swift, The Catcher in the Rye by JD Salinger and To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee. I’m not saying that any or all of these would be on my list, just that I’m surprised they don’t appear on the Guardian‘s.

If anyone would like to comment – perhaps with other notable omissions or novels that are on the list but you feel shouldn’t be – please feel free to do so through the box below.

Saariaho, Beethoven & Sibelius at the National Concert Hall

Posted in Music with tags , , , , , , , on May 16, 2026 by telescoper

And so it came to pass that yesterday evening I took the train into Dublin and back to see what, for me, will be the penultimate concert by National Symphony Orchestra Ireland at the National Concert Hall. The conductor for this occasion was Colombian born Lina Gonzalez-Granados. There was a good crowd at the NCH, although it wasn’t quite full.

By way of a starter we heard Ciel d’hiver by Kaija Saariaho, a Finnish composer who spent her later life living in Paris; she passed away in 2023. This piece is an intriguing evocation of the winter sky, with dense blocks of harmonies suggesting the broad expanse of the heavens punctuated by drifting clusters of fragmented patterns until it reaches the zenith expressed by an intense climax before fading away again. This piece was new to me – it was in fact the Irish premier – and I enjoyed it greatly. I like it when there are unfamiliar items on the menu!

The rest of the first half of the concert consisted of Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 1 (in C) with soloist John O’Conor. This was first published in 1795 (but revised around 1800). It actually Beethoven’s third go at writing a piano concerto but was published first. His first attempt was written when he was a teenager and was never published. What we now know as the Piano Concerto No. 2 was written around 1788 but not published until 1801. I hope this clarifies the situation.

The Piano Concrto No. 1 consists of three movements, an expansive slow movement (marked Largo) sandwiched between two sprightly up-tempo movements, marked Allegro con brio and Rondo-Allegro Scherzando, respectively. It’s very obviously influenced by Mozart, but Beethoven’s own voice is very clear too. I think the first part of the last movement, full of energy and wit, is the best part of this work and O’Conor played it with genuine sparkle. His performance was very well received, and he rounded it off with a very familiar charming encore, also by Beethoven, his Für Elise, which O’Conor played for his two granddaughters who were both in the audience last night.

Ludwig van Beethoven washimself by all accounts an extraordinary pianist and I couldn’t help wondering during the interval what he would have sounded like playing his own piano concertos.

After the wine break we returned to hear the Symphony No. 2 in D Major by Jean Sibelius. This piece was written about a century later than the Beethoven Piano Concerto and its sound world is very different, although it does share an overall mood of hope and defiance that you will find in many works by Beethoven. It’s probably this aspect of the work that led to it being co-opted by the Finnish nationalist movement although I don’t think it was written for that purpose.

I had been looking forward to this for quite a while as I had never heard this work performed in a live concert before. Hearing it last night was a revelation, especially because the momentum of the piece was much better controlled than on some recordings I’ve heard. It’s a large piece, in four movements, lasting about 45 minutes altogether. The first movement starts with hesitant figures repeated a number of times by different sections of the orchstra. The second movement is slow and rather mournful in tone but full of great melodic ideas. It is marked Tempo andante, ma rubato and I think how to handle the rubato (deviating from strict tempo) is what some conductors might struggle with: I think it’s supposed to flow naturally, but not wallow or become too turbulent. The third movement starts in a hurry and moves directly into the thrilling Finale. The last movement is full of blazing statements of triumph, as would accompany a hero reaching the end of a perilous journey.

The balance and contrast between the different sections of the orchestra was very well done. I especially enjoyed the playing of the brass instruments which was vigorous but superbly controlled. Hats off to NSOI and to Lina Gonzalez-Granados for the performance. I found myself humming pieces of the Sibelius to myself as I walked back to Pearse station for the train back to Maynooth.

P.S. I must get a better recording of the Symphony No. 2 by Jean Sibelius for my collection – does anyone out there have any suggestions?

Weekly Update from the Open Journal of Astrophysics – 16/05/2026

Posted in OJAp Papers, Open Access, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on May 16, 2026 by telescoper

It’s Saturday once again, so time for another update of activity at the Open Journal of Astrophysics. Since the last update we have published a further five papers, bringing the number in Volume 9 (2026) to 104 and the total so far published by OJAp up to 552. It took us until late July to pass 100 last year.

I will continue to include the posts made on our Mastodon account (on Fediscience) to encourage you to visit it. Mastodon is a really excellent service, and a more than adequate replacement for X/Twitter (which nobody should be using); these announcements also show the DOI for each paper.

The first paper to report this week, published on Monday 11th May in the folder High-Energy Astrophysical Phenomena is “Triaxial magnetars as sources of fast radio bursts” by Jonathan I Katz (Washington University, USA). This paper suggests that the mysterious properties of Fast Radio Bursts (FRB) could be explained by triaxial magnetars, with their activity levels influenced by precessional time scales.

The overlay for this paper is here

You can find the officially accepted version on arXiv here and the announcement on Fediverse here:

Open Journal of Astrophysics

New Publication at the Open Journal of Astrophysics: "Triaxial magnetars as sources of fast radio bursts" by Jonathan I Katz (Washington University, USA)

doi.org/10.33232/001c.162006

May 11, 2026, 7:32 am 0 boosts 0 favorites

The second paper for this week, published on Tuesday 12th May in the folder Astrophysics of Galaxies, is “The Abundance of Thin Dwarf Galaxies: a Challenge for Cosmological Simulations” by Jose Benavides & Laura V. Sales (UC Riverside, USA), Julio F. Navarro (U. Victoria, Canada), Simon D. M. White (MPA Garching, Germany), and Carlos S. Frenk, Kyle A. Oman & Shaun Cole (U. Durham, UK). Depending on mass up to 40% of galaxies are intrinsically flat, a fraction that numerical models of galaxy formation struggle to reproduce suggesting the models are incomplete.

The overlay for this one is here:

The official version of the paper can be found on arXiv here and the Fediverse announcement here:

Open Journal of Astrophysics

New Publication at the Open Journal of Astrophysics: "The Abundance of Thin Dwarf Galaxies: a Challenge for Cosmological Simulations" by Jose Benavides & Laura V. Sales (UC Riverside, USA), Julio F. Navarro (U. Victoria, Canada), Simon D. M. White (MPA Garching, Germany), and Carlos S. Frenk, Kyle A. Oman & Shaun Cole (U. Durham, UK)

doi.org/10.33232/001c.162091

May 12, 2026, 6:07 am 1 boosts 3 favorites

Next one up, the third paper of the week, also published on Tuesday 12th May but in the folder Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics is “Cosmological peculiar velocities in general relativity” by Chris Clarkson (Queen Mary, University of London, UK) and Roy Maartens (U. Western Cape, South Africa). This paper refutes claims that the 1+3 covariant approach to cosmological perturbation theory predicts stronger growth of galaxy peculiar velocities, arguing that standard treatments are correct and fully relativistic.

The overlay for this one is here:

The final, accepted version can be found on arXiv here and the Mastodon announcement is here:

Open Journal of Astrophysics

New Publication at the Open Journal of Astrophysics: "Cosmological peculiar velocities in general relativity" by Chris Clarkson (QMUL, UK) and Roy Maartens (U. Western Cape, South Africa)

doi.org/10.33232/001c.162093

May 12, 2026, 6:37 am 1 boosts 1 favorites

The fourth paper this week, published on Wednesday May 13th “Possible evidence for a pair-instability supernova nature of ultra-early JWST sources” by Andrea Ferrara & Stefano Carniani (Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy), Takahiro Morishita (California Institute of Technology, USA), and Massimo Stiavelli (Space Telescope Science Institute, USA). Published in the section Astrophysics of Galaxies. This paper argues that recent observations challenge early galaxy formation models, suggesting that the bright source, Capotauro, could be a supernova from a massive, metal-free star, not a luminous galaxy as initially thought.

The overlay is here:

The officially accepted version can be found on arXiv here and here is the Mastodon announcement:

Open Journal of Astrophysics

New Publication at the Open Journal of Astrophysics: "Possible evidence for a pair-instability supernova nature of ultra-early JWST sources" by Andrea Ferrara & Stefano Carniani (Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, Italy), Takahiro Morishita (Caltech, USA) and Massimo Stiavelli (STScI, USA)

doi.org/10.33232/001c.162107

May 13, 2026, 7:44 am 1 boosts 1 favorites

The fifth and final article of this week was also published on Wednesday 13th May but in the folder Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics. The title is “Evolving and interacting dark energy: photometric and spectroscopic synergy with DES Y3 and DESI DR2” and it is by Maria Tsedrik and Benjamin Bose (University of Edinburgh, UK). The study investigates the Dark Scattering interacting dark energy scenario, using data from various sources. Results show no evidence of dark-sector interaction and a preference for the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder parametrisation.

The overlay is here:

You can find the authorized version of this paper on arXiv here and the Fediverse announcement is here:

Open Journal of Astrophysics

New Publication at the Open Journal of Astrophysics: "Evolving and interacting dark energy: photometric and spectroscopic synergy with DES Y3 and DESI DR2" by Maria Tsedrik and Benjamin Bose (University of Edinburgh, UK)

doi.org/10.33232/001c.162135

May 13, 2026, 7:48 am 1 boosts 0 favorites

And that concludes this week’s update. I’ll do another next Saturday.

That Scottish Higher Maths Paper 1…

Posted in Education, mathematics with tags , , , on May 15, 2026 by telescoper

Talking of Examinations, I saw an article on the BBC website about a recent Higher Maths paper in Scotland which has generated complaints and a petition because it was allegedly unfair. The introduction to the petition states:

This is not a complaint that the paper was too hard. Students expect to be challenged. The problem is that the 2026 Higher Maths Paper 1 used language and phrasing that was confusing, ambiguous, and inconsistent with every past paper students had revised from. Questions were not simply difficult — they were worded in ways that made it genuinely unclear what was being asked.

Past SQA Higher Maths papers have followed a recognisable style: clear command words, standard notation, and questions that test understanding rather than the ability to decode unusual phrasing. The 2026 Paper 1 departed from this in ways that penalised well-prepared students simply because the wording did not match the conventions they had been taught to expect.

Numerous other news outlets have covered the story too. It is frustrating that most of the pieces focus on what people said about the paper but don’t actually include a link to the paper itself, making it impossible to make your own mind up.

So you can make your own mind up here is a scan of the actual paper (obtained from here):

Bear in mind that the Scottish examination system is not the same as in England & Wales – the “Highers” are not as advanced as A-levels and are more similar to the Irish Leaving Certificate.

My opinion, for what it’s worth having neither taught nor studied in the Scottish system, is that there is nothing out of the ordinary with this paper. There is a lot to do in just 75 minutes – for 12 questions that’s just over 6 minutes a question. I don’t like examinations that are speed tests.

That said, the questions look well structured and the “command words” are without exception on the list here. Some questions are easy and others harder: I think Question 12 is the most difficult, but I think that’s intentional – to stretch the stronger students. The only thing I would quibble with is the wording of 11(a) (ii):

The second sentence is redundant. How can one possibly “explain why” without giving “a reason”? The reason is basically that the quadratic remaining after you have taken out the factor (x+2) does not factorize.

I looked at the 2025 Paper 1 and it seems a similar level, though the questions are phrased in a terser fashion. Here it is for reference:

There may well be context that I’m missing, however, so I’d welcome comments on the diffculty and/or fairness through the box below.

After Lectures but before Examinations

Posted in Education, Maynooth, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , on May 14, 2026 by telescoper

This morning I did my last teaching session of the Academic Year 2025-6, an informal revision lecture/tutorial on Computational Physics. It was optional, for the students, as this is officially a study break, and was at 9am, and only a handful of students showed up, but I hope those that did found it useful. As is often the case with optional sessions, I think the students who came were the keenest and probably therefore those who least needed last-minute tips for the examination, but that’s always the way.

In the past such revision classes have been routine, at least for me, but for some reason the University has taken to locking most of the teaching rooms during the study break. This causes huge problems finding a space to do revision sessions. I really don’t understand this. There are constant complaints from students about the lack of study space, and the response from the University is that right before the examinations they lock dozens of empty rooms.

Anyway, the Examination Period starts tomorrow morning, Friday15th, but most of the students who turned up this morning have their first examination on Tuesday 19th May (which happens to be Computational Physics).

take the opportunity to wish all students the best for their examinations:

You shouldn’t really be relying on luck of course, so here are some tips (especially for physics students, but applicable elsewhere).

  1. Try to get a good night’s sleep before the examination and arrive in plenty of time before the start. Spending all night cramming is unlikely to help you do well.
  2. Prepare well in advance so you’re relaxed when the time comes.
  3. Read the entire paper before starting to answer any questions. In particular, make sure you are aware of any supplementary information, formulae, etc, given in the rubric or at the end. You can always ask for log tables if there’s something you can’t remember.
  4. Start off by tackling the question you are most confident about answering, even if it’s not Question 1. This will help settle any nerves. You’re under no obligation to answer the questions in the order they are asked.
  5. Don’t rush! Students often lose marks by making careless errors. In particular, check all your working out, including numerical results obtained your calculator, at least twice
  6. Please remember the UNITS!
  7. Don’t panic! You’re not expected to answer everything perfectly. A first-class mark is anything over 70%, so don’t worry if there are bits you can’t do. If you get stuck on a part of a question, don’t waste too much time on it (especially if it’s just a few marks). Just leave it and move on. You can always come back to it later.

Jobs Under Threat at Nottingham University

Posted in Biographical, Education with tags , , on May 14, 2026 by telescoper

I saw this picture on a LinkedIn post from a former member of staff in Physics at Nottingham University:

It shows a notieboard in the foyer of the Physics Building, which houses the School of Physics & Astronomy. Earlier this week members of staff received letters informing them that their jobs are “at risk of redundancy”. As an act of solidarity the staff members concerned showed posted their letters publicly. I don’t know the names of the people who have received these letters – and if I did I wouldn’t share them here – but there are 17 letters.

UPDATE: I have since heard that 56 members of academic staff in the School – out of a total of 71 – have received these letters. The University wants to reduce the staff numbers in Physics & Astronomy by about a third.

I also know that the undergraduate course in Mathematical Physics, taught jointly with the School of Mathematics, has been suspended and will not admit any students. I taught on this course for many years when I was at Nottingham University (from 1999 to 2007).

The threat of redundancy is not specific to Physics. It seems almost 2,700 individuals across the University have received such notices and the University is attempting to cut 600 positions. Not all those in receipt of an “at risk” letter will actually be made redundant, but the intention is clearly to scare people into leaving in order to save on redundancy payments.

More details can be found here.

There is a petition against these job cuts here which I encourage you to sign.

The background to this disaster is explained here. In summary, the University’s current financial meltdown is caused by the actions of the former Vice-Chancellor of the University of Nottingham, Prof. Shearer West,, who presided over the hare-brained decision to purchase a large new campus. None of the “at risk” staff is at fault., but they will have to bear the burden of management ineptitude. You would think that the people responsible for this fiasco would be held to account and pay at least some of the price for their incompetence. But no. Prof. Shearer West left her post in 2024 to take up the position of Vice-Chancelor at the University of Leeds on a salary of more than £330K, leaving others to clean up the mess.

I fear more such news is coming. The UK Higher Education sector is shrinking rapidly. Nottingham University won’t be the last, and I doubt the contagion will be restricted to the UK either…

Joy Spring – Clifford Brown & Max Roach

Posted in Jazz with tags , , , , , , on May 13, 2026 by telescoper

This tune popped into my head when I was walking home this evening so after dinner I listened to my CD of the terrific 1954 album Clifford Brown & Max Roach, on which it first appeared. Trumpeter Clifford Brown wrote the tune Joy Spring when he was just 23 for his wife Larue and it became a jazz standard. This first version features a quintet jointly led by Brown and Max Roach on drums, together with hugely underrated tenor saxophonist Harold Land, Richie Powell on piano (younger brother of Bud Powell, whose influence you can hear in his playing) and George Morrow on bass. The whole album is great, but I think the standout tracks are this version of Joy Spring and their version of Duke Jordan’s tune Jordu. Brown’s solo on Joy Spring demonstrates his beautifully crisp articulation and his superb capacity for sustained melodic invention, moving into and out of double-time. He only plays two choruses, but packs so much into them. Enjoy!

Despite it’s happy feel, this track will always be tinged with tragedy. Less than two years after this session both Clifford Brown and Richie Powell were killed in a car crash: Brown was 25 and Powell 24.

Maynooth University Library Cat Update

Posted in Maynooth with tags , on May 13, 2026 by telescoper

I thought young Séamus (aka Maynooth University Library Cat) was fast asleep when I saw him under a tree, but I think he was just pretending as he had his beady eye on something…

Cats – Natalia Goncharova

Posted in Art with tags , , , , , on May 12, 2026 by telescoper

Cats (Rayist percep. in rose, black, and yellow) by Natalia Goncharova (1913, Oil on Canvas, 85.1 x 85.7 cm, Guggenheim Museum, New York).

This is a Rayist (or Rayonist) composition in which the artist tries to capture rays of light reflected off objects in the material world. Dynamic lines are added to suggest crystalline forms and the movement of light and energy. The style was influenced by scientific discoveries on the discovery of X-rays and radioactivity suggesting a reality beyond the direct perception of the naked eye.

Editorial Opportunity at the Journal of Open Source Software

Posted in Open Access with tags , , , , , , , on May 11, 2026 by telescoper

The Journal of Open Source Software – known to its friends as JOSS – is is a developer friendly, diamond open access journal for research software packages which has been running since 2016 and is enormously successful, publishing Open Source software across many fields of science. Its UR, joss.theoj.org, is a giveaway that it is a stablemate of astro.theoj.org, aka the Open Journal of Astrophysics.

The driving force behind JOSS, responsible for getting it off the ground at the very beginning, is Arfon Smith whom I’ve known since Nottingham days and it iis fair to say that without his considerable help, OJAp would never have started. Both journals started off as speculative ventures, and OJAp has taken a considerable time to establish itself, but JOSS took off very quickly indeed and has now published over 3,500 papers. There are numerous differences between the two journals but, like OJAp, all publications in JOSS are free to authors and readers.

Arfon has held the role of Editor-in-Chief at JOSS since 2016 but in a recent blog post he explains that he is stepping down from his role as Editor-in-Chief, although he will remain at JOSS. The call for a replacement is here. It’s an opportunity that will appeal to anyone interested in open-source research software and open-access publishing so if that’s you then please consider applying. It will be a substantial investment of time, probably about a day a week. I quote:

Candidates should have the capacity to commit the time this role requires. For those in institutional positions, we ask for a brief letter or statement from your employer or supervisor confirming support for this commitment. Independent researchers, consultants, or others without a traditional institutional affiliation should include a brief statement describing how they plan to allocate the time.

P.S. Today OJAp published its 100th paper of 2026 so far

P.P.S. I’ll be stepping down as Editor-in-Chief at OJAp in a couple of years, when I retire, and we’ll be doing a similar search nearer the date.