Have you ever gone to a cocktail party and had a conversation about science? Of course not – nobody goes to cocktail parties anymore. Perhaps a better question would be, have you either gone to a vinyl listening event or underground pop-up restaurant and gotten in a conversation about science?
We’ve all done it. You’re standing there with your Thai/Spanish fusion pork baklava with crème fraîche while listening to obscure Bob Marley B-sides and this person says, “You know what’s really interesting? Toe fungus. Really, it’s just fascinating, I was reading this article…”
Let me stop right there. For the record, toe fungus is not interesting. No one thinks so, probably not even toe fungus experts. What’s happened is a very talented science writer has spun a very tricky tale in which you are carried all the way to the end of a story about freaking toe fungus and are actually glad you read it.
For the brave science writer who did it, that story probably took weeks of reading the latest toe fungus literature, talking to the editor of the Proceedings of the National Toe Fungal Academy, and staring at pictures of toes or visiting toe fungus labs. Then he/she pondered various toe fungus angles for hours until he/she could spin just the right yarn that ensnared the reader, who hurried to the nearest gathering to share the news.
And if the writer has does his/her job right, the readers don’t even realize that they’ve been caught in the yarn. They think toe fungus is actually interesting. More than that, they probably think themselves terribly clever for coming to that realization on their own. But dammit, there was a lot of work that went into that little epiphany.
And while that reader is happily chatting about the repercussions on foot fungus as a whole and regurgitating the science writer’s brilliant analogy between toe fungus and Alexander the Great, that same writer is fielding complaints from every toe researcher and fungus enthusiast on the planet about the sloppy, imprecise story that made toe fungus momentarily interesting.
So let’s be clear. Viruses are dull, unless it’s Carl Zimmer writing about them. Dead bodies are just creepy unless you are hanging out with Mary Roach. And while baboon poo-throwing is amusing, primate behavioral research is surprisingly dead boring until Robert Sapolsky weighs in. (Damn you Sapolsky and your witty, thoughtful prose that shouldn’t belong to a full-time scientist. Damn. You.)
Look, I’m not asking for a congressional resolution to acknowledge science writers as national heroes (unless that’s in the works or is possible to do – is it?). I’m not even saying science writers should get paid more (God forbid). I’m just saying the next time you are reading a story on ______, and you think, “wow, I had no idea ______ was so cool,” flip to the front of the article and give props to that brave science writer who waded through tomes of ______ books and braved the trip to the ______ research station and has earned the loathing of the _____ community because he/she made it interesting.
And if you see that person on the street, stop for a second to thank them. And put some change into his/her cup because the nights are cold when you sleep in a cardboard box.
Photo Credit: Shutterstock
[Update: For an actual story on toe fungus, read this engaging piece by our own Cassandra Willyard. Imagine my surprise.]
Spectacular!
I will thank a science writer. Excellent article.