Reactions – Fraser Stoddart

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

The opportunity to be a creative designer and an engineer of form and function at one of the smallest and most challenging of material levels – namely, the molecular one, in the beginning with all its fancy regulations involving valency and bonding and the like. Quite early on, my imagination started to run riot far beyond the molecule where the fundamental challenges in chemistry lie hidden today in the much more subtle rules that govern weak noncovalent bonding interactions.

At the outset, I would never have dreamt that I would be chasing complexity and emergent phenomena under the guise of chemistry but that’s what is happening now. My experience has been a highly evolutionary and incremental one. I started with a hunch and a hope. I did not really know where chemistry would lead me, other than into the uncharted and the unexpected. I followed my nose but it was most certainly not smells or, for that matter, bangs that got me hooked on chemistry!

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be – and why?

I would very much like to have been a highly successful writer and novelist. I have always had a fascination with the words and phrases that make up the English language. In fact, writing far too many scientific papers has given me the opportunity to develop my skills – which were dreadfully bad when I was in my twenties – during these past 40 years. If I am spared long enough, then I would love to put pen to paper in ways that might help to bring the excitement of being a scientist, totally and utterly addicted to chemistry, to a wide lay audience in many different places around the globe. We all have a right to dream a little!

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

By being an integral part of it, not only in a materials sense, but as folks who care so deeply about our planet that we would be ready, willing and able to provide it with an alternative way forward into the future that values and honors the sanctity of all living things, including human beings, on the planet. Much of our world revolves around chemistry, probably more than around any other creative medium.

In the 19th century, chemists gave the world dyes and made our lives more colourful, in the 20th century, chemists gave the world drugs (pharmaceuticals), so lengthening our lives and making them more bearable, and, in the 21st century, chemists will give the world devices, making our lives much more fulfilled and immensely more enjoyable. These three d’s are made possible by chemistry which is, in turn, about three m’s – making, measuring, and modeling – and a lot more which could make our world a better place for better living for all of us.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

William Shakespeare. He was so brilliant and so highly prolific in an out-of-the-box kind of way during such a short and precarious period in history which coincided with the expansionary phase of the Elizabethan Age. I would like to learn from him how he organized his time in order to meet deadline after deadline. He must have had an extremely vivid imagination to have invented all those rich phrases he introduced into the English language.

I would like to have him tell me that he did it all by himself (for I suspect he did) so that I could hold him up as a role model to all the young people in my life whom I urge to do 200 times more than they do currently in their own lives. As one who gets endless fascination out of watching and analyzing human behaviour, it would also be such a privilege to listen to one of the all-time experts on this subject. I suspect I might come to know myself a lot better after dinner with the Bard.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

Twenty-nine years ago in the summer of 1978 when I left the University of Sheffield to go to the ICI Corporate Laboratory in Runcorn on a three-year secondment. During the 70s, I ran all the NMR spectra for my medium-sized research group since postdoctoral fellows and (post)graduate students were not allowed to use the NMR spectrometers in the Sheffield Chemistry Department, then. I gained access, free from all competition, at five in the morning when my two young daughters made darn sure that I was on my way to the NMR lab at that unearthly hour. By the time we returned as a family to Sheffield in 1982, my daughters had both learned how to sleep and the NMR spectrometers had also become far too sophisticated for a simple-minded guy like me to be able to use them.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

A well-illustrated (in colour!) and user-friendly English dictionary so that I could extend my rather limited vocabulary, while listening to the Beatles (particularly Paul McCartney singing “When I’m Sixty Four” for that’s what I am!) on that one and only CD. After the tradition of that long-running BBC Radio 4 programme, Desert Island Discs, I am assuming that the complete works of Shakespeare will be already there on the island.

If, in the spirit of the programme, which incidentally was first broadcast in the year I was born, I can also choose one luxury item, then it would be an endless supply of Liquorice Allsorts. Guess what, if I told you I have only three ambitions left in life, what one of them is? Right! To be invited to be a guest on Desert Island Discs.

Sir Fraser Stoddart is in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of California, Los Angeles and works on the use of molecular recognition and self-assembly processes in template-directed protocols for the syntheses of two-state mechanically interlocked compounds (bistable catenanes and rotaxanes) that have been employed successfully as switches in molecular electronic devices (MEDs) and as artificial motor-molecules in nanoelectromechanical systems (NEMS).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Reactions – Bruce Gibb

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I was always drawn to science. There’s something deep and innate behind this, something best left to beers not blogs. As to why chemistry, I think it was the combination of its transformational abilities and the hands on practical experiences. I mean you can transform atoms with nuclear physics, but there wasn’t much in the way of practical experience as an undergraduate; except “watching” the decay of a radioactive species. To me this seemed slightly negative and sad, like being a geriatric nurse not a midwife. On the other hand, you could get into the chemistry laboratory and actually make stuff. Convert A into B, see the change in color, or measure some other change. Wow!

Within chemistry, I was definitely drawn to organic chemistry by the beauty and majesty of reaction mechanisms. There’s an aesthetic appeal both in the geometric way that we draw organic molecules, and in the dynamism of the “flow” of electrons; the myriad, counter-balancing possible routes, the mechanistic dead-ends, the reversibility and irreversibility of the different steps. Truly a wonderful language. Perhaps not surprisingly, I also find the emerging field of systems chemistry (and biology) fascinating.

2. If you weren’t a chemist and could do any other job, what would it be – and why?

That’s an easy one, a meteorologist. I’m drawn to the dynamism and complexities of weather systems, but beyond that there’s also something awe-inspiring and humbling about the scale of weather phenomenon. This is especially so with severe weather. It was estimated that hurricane Katrina (with which everyone in New Orleans had personal experience of) ditched 54 trillion watts of power in the five hours it took to come on shore in August 29th 2005. That sort of power output is influential.

3. How can chemists best contribute to the world at large?

Like all people, chemists can best contribute by being prudent yet proactive. We should all try to weigh the long-term as much as the short-term, tread carefully when the path is unclear, and act decisively when certainty permits; all within a sound ethical framework.

4. Which historical figure would you most like to have dinner with – and why?

I’m a bit of an iconoclast so there’s no one historical person I’d really like to meet. Add to that the fact that history tends to distort personalities by exaltation or demonization, and there’s the distinct possibility that they would be a let down. Now meeting a well-educated person from the future is a different matter. To ask how the human experiment is going – over a good chicken saag – would be intriguing.

5. When was the last time you did an experiment in the lab – and what was it?

The last time I did an experiment in the lab was just before my group threw me out for asking too many annoying questions. Where are the round bottom flasks? Unfortunately, my ignorance of laboratory geography underlies the trend to put too much emphasis on quantity rather than quality. Presumably because the former is so much easier to define, there is all to often too much reliance on bean-counting. We all of course strive for quality, but all too often it’s a matter of number of publications, value of grants etc., that are the measure of a scientist (and the size of the paycheck). So like most people my age (41) I deal with administrative minutia and push paper while I strive to build an empire. Would I be a better teacher, and perhaps have more good ideas, if I could clear the decks a bit and spend time in the lab? Absolutely. I wager it would also be more fun.

6. If exiled on a desert island, what one book and one CD would you take with you?

If I were to be allowed to take a CD and CD player onto an island, I would swap them for a DVD player and a DVD. I’m a movie buff ahead of a lover of music. If I could get away with that slight-of-hand, I’d take Paul Thomas Anderson’s “Magnolia”. A bit sad for those down-days perhaps, but its a mesmerizing work of art, filled with beautiful scenes and a wonderful collection of quality actors.

If I could slip in a second disc (those boxes are often designed for more than one), I’d take David Lean’s Lawrence of Arabia. Outstanding! A gripping tale of a deep, often perplexing character framed to perfection both cinematographically and musically. They seldom make them like they used to.

As for a book, I’d probably plump for a one that gave me plenty to get my teeth into, such as the complete work of Shakespeare. I’ve a feeling that the sort of book I enjoy reading (current affairs with a political, scientific, ecological or economical bent) would be a bit out of context on the island. Speaking of context, maybe I should exchange Shakespeare for a survival handbook?

Bruce Gibb is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of New Orleans and works on designing supramolecular systems with novel and unusual properties.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *