Science is supposed to be pretty. Not a lot of point in doing it, otherwise (for a range of values of ‘pretty’, at least).
So I was first pleased when I saw that an editorial Nature Cell Biology talked about the visual aspects of our work, and then disappointed when there were no accompanying pictures or movies to illustrate the point. Moreover, the link to ‘further reading’, which I clicked upon with great glee and haste, is empty .
Muppets.
Anyway, I got an email from Laura at the EMBO Journal last night. They are running a cover art competition ;
The editors of The EMBO Journal are pleased to announce a new contest to select the best cover image for 2008.
As in the previous years, one winner will be selected from each of the two categories: Best Scientific Cover and Best Non-Scientific Cover. The prize for both winners will be a free one-year print and online subscription to both The EMBO Journal and EMBO reports.
This is a fantastic opportunity to indulge the artistic side of your scientific temperament. It’s a shame that no one outside science will probably ever see your work, and the prize is hardly something that will appeal to someone with institutional access, but that’s just quibbling. The closing date is 18 January 2008. Get snapping.
(x-post )
My former mentor, Roger, used to reason how difficult it eas to make science appear exciting to the public. If science really were entertaining, and exciting, it would be so much more popular. Roger thought how funny would be to put a lively audio comment to a video recording of someone pipetting and broadcasting it somewhere. Like:
Oh boy. That would be a funny advert.
HAHAHAHA!
Brilliant, Massimo.
I think Richard Feynman had a lot to say about science, and actually, it doesn’t need sexing up because it is inherently exciting.
But yeah. You probably need to be a scientist to feel that way about it.
bah. Wish list: edit comments feature. I wanted to say “and how, actually”.
ggh