WRITING POPULAR CHEMISTRY WATSONDAVIS.* Scicnu Service, 21s~AND CONSTITUTION Am., WASHINGTON, D. C.
In writing an article on chemistry, whether popularized or technical, i t is important first to have something to write about. There must he the need for telling your potential readers some new facts or giving a new interpretation that will interest them. The content of your article must he new and intriguing to your readers, though the story may be old to those specialists working in a particular sector of the chemical area. Unlike fiction, science popularization is not necessarily self-sufficient because it is beautifully executed. Science exposition is the frequent medium of pleasing literary effort and emotional thrills. But the good writing must he superimposed upon a useful foundation of fact. The literary superstructure is useful in attracting the reader to peer a t the buttresses of experiment and solid conclusion. If the writer desires to achieve literary effect above all else, let him stick to fiction and not mix it with science. The popularizer of science must he an interpreter. The man in the street, despite his glib superficial acquaintance with the products of a chemical civilization, knows nothing of the difference between a mixture and a compound, an atom and a molecule, or an elemental and complex substance. He thinks H stands for something else than hydrogen, and 0 means an exclamation. His ABC knowledge of chemistry hardly extends beyond the labels of the vitamins. To explain the neutron, for instance, a process of recapitulation must mice the reader out of the depths of alchemy, through the minds of Dalton, Mendel&&, Moseley, Rutherford, to the past few weeks of modem physical and atomic chemistry. Embryonic recapitulation is almost simple compared with this intellectual evolution that must he achieved in a few hundred words read by a hurried glancer a t headlines. W w be to the popularizer or expositor who goes a t his task with the attitude of the teacher! That "Wow, children!" attitude will alienate the ex-school boys and girls who are the men and women of today. It will even scare off the school children of today. The press or periodical is no school room with so many minutes of time turned over to it exclusively. It is in continual and fierce competition with the radio, the talkies, nextdoor gossip, or general apathy. So, while the chemical writer must be conscious of the immensity of his task, the necessity of turning technical jargon into journalese, and the injection of background, he must do i t as though it were good fun for him and for his audience. The atmosphere must he more like that of the vaudeville stage than that of the pulpit. In putting on a chemical show in words, the chemist should not he portrayed in the r81e of a magician who guards the secret of his tricks.
* Managing Editor. Science Service. 1874
701.. 9, NO. 11
WRITING POPULAR CHEMISTRY
1875
rhe scientist is not a wizard (feminine form-witch). The scientist is ust the oppositeof the medicine man or wizard. He does not have to use ncantations, he uses catalysts. The chemist may not yet know just how md why the catalysts perform the functions they do, but he has sound :xperiment upon which to base his process and theory. The scientist does lot confuse the laws of nature; he discovers and clarifiesthem. The mechanism of scientific discovery and the technical application of cience should be clearly outlined in chemical exposition. No mode of luman action is more important than the scientific method of formulating .heories from facts and testing those theories with more facts, always more 'acts. If applied to the science of living, the "scientific method" would ;olve many current problems. The story of every chemical achievement, 11d or new, gives the opportunity of demonstrating the fundamental pality of the scientific method. While demonstrating the method of science, the chemical writer must not ,reach or propagandize. If the layman, once shown them, does not enter of ~imselfthe pearly gates of science, that is sad, but those who do not enter nillingly with their minds make poor citizens of the intellectual realms. rhey would undoubtedly harp too much, strike sour notes and spoil the larmony of straight thinking. No good purpose will be served by making :he public acutely chemistry-conscious. One can breathe efficiently and ~appilywithout thinking with each inhalation: "Ah, I have in my lungs a nixture of oxygen, nitrogen, and some of the rare gases, neon, argon, rrypton, etc." Practitioners and expositors of chemistry needrnot overlook opportuniies for displaying chemistry to the public. They need not he bashful tbout seizing them or even manufacturing them. If chemistry displaces ess fundamental material on the public's reading menu they need not feel {uilty, nor should they feel too righteous. This article is supposed to tell how to write entertaining and informative wticles on chemistry. I wish I could give a formula like: (C~Hm05)~ 7 - applause and enlightenment. But alas, the state of the art or techlology is not such that the process of successful technical writing can be transferred from one human production unit to another. Much more research is necessary and the investigations must lie mostly in the complex ield of human psychology. But I do feel that the ingredients of a successful popularization of chemistry must include a foundation of fact, a flavor of simplicity, a dash of 'Oh, my!" a vivid background, a touch of the creative mind, a little essence >f human interest, all stirred by the personality of the writer before it can be consumed with gusto by a satiated public. The perfection of the process must he left for those interested in tackling this difficult problem of chemico-human engineering.
_
+
