I’ve always been interested in science for as long as I can remember. I was fortunate to grow up near Boston, where a quick hop on the T could take you to the New England Aquarium or the Museum of Science, two of my favorite places. I credit the former with my life-long love (some might say obsession) with sea turtles.
Over the years, I developed a knack for observing the natural world. I’ve noticed that I tend to see and hear things in nature that others might miss or discount. Part of that is because a lot of those things are ‘little’. It’s not necessarily something new or earth-shattering, and so it can be of little interest to other people. However, I do find them interesting and the trick is figuring out how to bridge that gap.
One of the consistent problems in the scientific community is that we are really good at doing science, and not so good at telling stories about science. Of course, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing. We expect scientists to focus on science. By definition, that’s their job. Unfortunately, such a singular focus can lead to isolation from the rest of the world.
ivory tower, noun, a state of privileged seclusion or separation from the facts and practicalities of the real world
The accusation of academia existing in an ‘ivory tower’ of isolation or seclusion is not new. While it is often used with regards to subjects in the humanities and social sciences, the ‘hard sciences’ are not immune to this problem. It can be very easy to throw up our hands when the general public does not understand what we do and retreat inward with our technical jargon. “They won’t understand it anyway, so why bother explaining?”
Of course, this problem leads to the inevitable question: with whom do we share our work? In order for science to move forward, we need to share with other scientists, so they can test the findings for themselves. However, science doesn’t happen in a vacuum. If we don’t or can’t share it with everybody, then what is it good for? In my opinion, not very much. So, how does the layperson relate to science? I believe it is through stories.
“People think that stories are shaped by people. In fact, it’s the other way around.”
Terry Pratchett
Stories shape people. This is true no matter what type or genre of story. Our whole lives are made up of stories, ones we tell each other and ourselves. They are what drive people. Unfortunately, when it comes to science, people often think back to school. They think of science as a set of facts that they had to remember. Facts are boring, therefore science is boring to them.
However, science is not a set of facts. It is a process of learning about the world (‘the scientific method’). We best communicate that process to others with our stories. Science needs stories and stories need storytellers.
We have had some very inspiring scientific storytellers. Carl Sagan was one for astronomy and in more recent years Neil deGrasse Tyson has taken his place (even though people my age will probably always think of Pluto as a planet). Bill Nye and the Mythbusters reached millions of people through television and made science interested. While some of that was the explosions (after all, who doesn’t love explosions?), it was also because they were able to tell interesting stories.
What about ecology, the relationship between organisms and their environment? I believe David Attenborough is one excellent candidate for the title ‘Ecological Storyteller’ (if you’ve never seen Life of Birds or any of his other nature documentaries, I highly recommend them). However, you don’t have to trek out to remote jungles in order to experience ecological stories worth telling. Often, the most interesting stories occur right in your own backyard.
“Ecology isn’t rocket science. It’s much more difficult.”
Steve Carpenter, UW-Madison
That quote was a favorite of one of my professors, who would later serve on my thesis committee, Win Everham. I have also taken a liking to it, and it has certainly been proven true with my own work. What does that quote mean? Rocket science is not exactly easy, but it essentially comes down to physics, math, and engineering. By this point, much of the theoretical work has already been done. This isn’t true of ecology, which is still a very young branch of science. We’re still figuring out how things work.
This can make ecology seem complicated, but it’s also very exciting. I’ve decided that I would like to bring some of my excitement for it to a broader audience. The natural world is an interesting place, and I want to share some of my observations of it with the rest of you. My goal to start is to share a nature story with you once a week for the next 25 weeks.
