Editorial
Royce meets Peter and Susan
T
his is about chemists' interactions with nonchemists and how these nonexperts influence the public image of chemistry. Royce meets Peter and Susan, his new neighbors. They say, "What do you do?" Whereupon Royce replies, "I'm a chemist." Here are examples of Royce's new neighbors' responses: 1) "Hmm. I avoided chemistry like the plague in college." 2) "Boy, that's a subject I never could pass." 3) "That's interesting. What kind of chemist?" 4) "That's nice. We're financial software engineers." These are just a few of the many versions I have heard. The distressing part about recalling them is that responses 1 and 2 are the ones most trequently heard. I want to make a point about what's said next in this hypothetical across-the-fence conversation. I'm sure that you have heard responses 1 and 2, too, so it should be easy to put yourself in my sandals. One rather natural reaction to 1 and 2 is to drop the subjectt which ii s more polite course than sympathizing with Susan and Peter's admissions of intellectual deficiencies. I admit to this tendency but suggest that a different response would be far better. Peter and Susan may be lost to us as fellow scientists, but their respect for chemists as professionals and the directions of their children's careers may hang in the balance. So if there are youngsters or teens in the background, maybe you should say: "I'm sure your children will find chemistry not too hard to learn, and I hope that you encourage them to try. It's important for them to know about science and chemistry in order
have a full range of career choices. I'd be glad to talk to them about what chemists do." Alternatively, the conversation could subsequently be turned to some recent invention of chemistry with which you are familiar and can draw simple illustrations of its usefulness. (I like the electrochemical one about automatically darkening rearview mirrors, which are just little colored batteries) . Another line of conversation might be the relationship between advances in medicine and in chemistry and how chemists are trying to improve the supply of new drugs with combinatorial chemistry (part of which is readily illustrated with an analogy to a monkey and a typewriter). However the conversation goes keep it simple and brief. Chemists interact daily with nontechnical friends and neighbors, and—with care not to become nerdy about it—we should not avoid mentioning our profession. After all, isn't a personal interaction with a single member of a group (e.g., a profession) a strong determinant of one's opinion of the entire group? Many of you reading this editorial may not like my suggested responses; then use your own inventions! In our personal contacts, we chemists should never forget that, like it or not we are de facto ambassadors for chemistry, and that carries a responsibility that we represent to our nonchemist neighbors the chemist's concern for how we serve society
Analytical Chemistry News & Features, June 1, 1998 3 5 9 A
