This book is aimed at teens, I guess, but while the science seems to be at the appropriate level, its discursive and rhetorical style are probably going to go over their heads. Dawkins' approach is to present mythical explanations for natural phenomena, followed by our current scientific understanding of what's really going on—the reality which is, in his terms, even more "magical" and wonderful than the myth. I'm dismayed that our supposedly advanced civilizations, particularly the US, are still so blindered by religion that such a book seems necessary and appropriate, but even so I think it would be best to put the dismantling of religious stories as secondary to the explanation of scientific realities: any teen who is going to encounter this book with an open mind will already be receptive to Dawkins' ideas, while anyone who actually believes any of the religious or mythic stories is going to be put on the defensive by Dawkins' attack.I guess this is the same problem even non-religious people have with other facets of the "New Atheism": it gets in your face as an idea whose truth requires the falsehood of competing explanations—and, however great your disagreement, getting in someone's face like that is just poor manners. The Magic of Reality is only very slightly boorish in that way, but I think it would have been a better and more wonder-full book if it hadn't addressed myths and religions at all, and just presented the "magic" of our scientific understanding of the world.
1
