Review for Nat. Foundation for the History of Chemistry.

The Excitement and Fascination of Science: Reflections by Eminent
Scientists. Vol. 3. Compiled by J. Lederberg. Annual Reviews,

Palo Alita, CA. L990,

The Annual Reviews, starting with Biochemistry (1932), have
proved to be sa useful that they have grown to 27 series, the
last addition being Computer Science (1986). Editors of two-
thirds of the series have adopted the practice of including in
each volume an autobiographical "prefatory chapter" by a
distinguished senior scientist. Given a free rein, the authors
focus in varying degree on their personal background, scientific
and administrative accomplishments, and views on the status and
the future of their field tor of science in general).

The present volume is the third in a series of collections
of these essays: it comes from the Annual Reviews of 1977 to 1998
and totals 2400 pages. With the expectation that it will
interest a wide audience, the editors have left out those
chapters that seemed too technical. Of course, all the chapters
inelude technical material, sometimes quite detailed; but the

non-specialist can easily skip these sections and still enjoy the

mn

more personal and general parts of the essays.

Chemists might be interested ta know that the section an
Fhysical Chemistry includes essays by Eyring, Hirschfelder, J. E.
Mayer, Zimm, Herzberg, Stout, and Fitzer. There are alsa essays
from Biochemistry, Materials Science, and Biophysics and

Biophysical Chemistry. Biochemistry is alsa frequently

ancountered in Microbiology, Pharmacology and Toxicology, and
Flant Fhysiology and Plant Molecular Biology. Physics daes not
have an Annual Review, but there are essays from Astronomy and
Astrophysics, Earth and Flanetary Sciences, Fluid Mechanics, and
Nuclear and Particle Science.

Though few scientists have had colorful enough lives, ar
have enough literary talent, to yield interesting full-length
autobiographies, the Annual Review format, of up toa 25 printed
pages, is ideal -~ it can give the reader insight into the
scientist's personality, a rounded survey of his or her
accamplishments, and perspective on the process of discovery.
However, I found myself wondering whether republication in
these collections would contribute much more than a canvenience
for historians, Since the essays in each field would already have
been available, in the widely distributed original review
volumes, to those wha would be most interested in them. On the
contrary: I ended up reading much more of this formidable volume
of material than I had intended, and my wife, who is not a
scientist, enjoyed picking out the personal parts of many of the
staries. tT can well imagine that these volumes might provide
inspiration to many high school and college students.

Indeed, the vision of that audience may be what led to the
choice of a title that seems to me somewhat banal. Excitement
and fascination are perhaps better inferred than announced, and I
prefer the subtitle, Reflections of Eminent Scientists.

While the paths to success in science are seen to have been
extremely diverse, a couple of themes ran through many of the

essays. First, it is clear that these eminent scientists derived

ha
pleasure not only from being recognized, but alsa fram their
victories over nature and from generous interactions with
colleagues and students. The overwhelming competitiveness of
Watson’s "The Double Helix” is not seen (though there was na
doubt often more competitive spirit than is revealed, and it may
now be increasing as the culture of science changes). An evening
with these articles would be a valuable exercise for those people
who believe that science is suffering fram a crisis of integrity,
and that scientists cannot be trusted to run their own
enterprise. Joshua Lederberg, in a campact introductory essay on
the goals of scientific biography, put it very well: "If the
canfidence and support of the larger society are to be sustained,
the public must understand how in the practice of science a
system of reward for personal ambition is melded with, and only
rarely contravenes, the search for truth."

In another frequent theme, many af the authors came from a
poor farm, in a Small rural community where a particular teacher
recognized talent and offered great encouragement. The children
of another "disadvantaged" group, Jewish immigrants from Eastern
Europe have also been prominent in certain fields but are not
heavily represented in this volume -- perhaps most are still too
young. Molecular genetics is represented only by an essay by
Maciyn McCarty on bacterial transformation -~ an indication of
the recency of the explosion in this field.

To compare various articles for their quality or interest
would be an invidiaus job. But To would mote that Birgit
Vennesland has particularly provacative, feisty things to say on

aomumber of general issues of science and society, including
objection ta measuring equal opportunity for women in terms of
numerical representation. Same of the most memorable moments are
the descriptions by Martin kamen and Elvin Fabat of their
encounters with McCarthyite tactics on the part af the
government, which prevented one from working in science and
prevented both from travelling abroad. This history is worth
keeping in mind, aS we face increased governmental involvement in
problems of fraud and of quality in research.

The book closes with two essays from Annual Review af
Saciology. loam struck by the difference between their language
and style and those of all the other essays. This difference
reflects a major underlying tension in the social sciences: while
they have deep roots in philosophy, they are now seeking greater
strength by adapting the approaches of the natural sciences. But
particularily in political "science” and sociclogy only a small
fraction of their questions can be approached ty methods that are
readily recognized as scientific: much of their subject matter is
heavily invested with questions of values, which science cannat
answer. To point this out is mot to belittle these questions: in
fact, in our daily lives they are more important than the natural
scientist's questions about the nature of the external world.

But the vwalue of their study is not increased by exaggerating its

scientific aspects or disparaging its philosophical aspects.

Bernard D. Davis,
Racterial Physiology Unit,

Harverd Medical School, Hastan, MA O21LIS.