1. What made you want to be a chemist?

Hard to be sure, but probably a visceral fascination with order, geometry, complexity and symmetry. Only chemistry allows the curious observer to examine all of these things and then to use what they learn to make new molecules which haven’t ever existed. Chemistry is the science of synthesis, the most creative powerhouse of all the disciplines.

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

Attacking midfielder/captain, Liverpool FC. Being a fellow Huyton boy, Stevie Gerrard’s job’s the one for me. Oh: we’re talking about ‘real’ jobs? In that case, probably an author. I’d guess almost all scientists love writing papers, lectures, and articles: crafting a piece of writing, choosing the best, succinct, weighty but pithy phrase demands a precision which is immensely satisfying (surpassed only by certain watchings of LFC). So, professional writing would be a real treat; and I’d take on fiction and non-fiction with equal relish. Fiction? Plays, short and long stories. Non-fiction: football, politics and history (scientific and other).

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

When we talk about making life better for people, only democracy has contributed more than science, and chemists have made thousands of discoveries which have directly benefitted ‘ordinary’ people. If we continue to innovate with the pace of the last 200-odd years, we will directly benefit society by making and using new molecular structures not only to help people through difficulties (chemotherapy, amongst others) but also by making everyday life far more comfortable and enjoyable (iPods, mobiles, PSPs and the like). If we continue to create and implement useful inventions, whilst also keeping society properly informed about the significance and value of what we do, we’ll make life better, don’t worry about that.

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

George Orwell. If you have to ask why, you need to get out more. OK, if you push me, because: (a) he was the greatest writer of his generation, (b) everything he wrote was (sooner or later) true and, © he was brave enough to physically take part in a distant struggle because of his principles. An erudite and true hero. If George Orwell’s demise was too recent to register him as a historical figure, then Isaac Newton. Because he was Newton. Anyone who stuck a bodkin into his own eye socket just to further his study of optics is alright by me. If Isaac’s busy with an alchemy committee meeting, Shankly, Paisley, Busby, Stein…..

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

Hmmm. About seven years ago. It was an asymmetric aza-Darzens reaction, which we had developed as a method to make enantiomerically-pure aziridines (pretty useful chemicals). As I recall, I was complaining to a guy called Andy McLaren about the yield of his reaction and he challenged me to do better: so I did the reaction, with all my research group watching me like vultures and throwing abuse my way. And I did get a better yield – by 1%. Ha!

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

Science is an intrinsically socialist (lower case) occupation: the collective is more important that the individual, and the system is only as successful as its weakest link. Not for nothing did Newton talk about the “shoulders of giants”. Moreover, for someone from my social background, knowledge and learning was a religion, the means by which you could make sure you did something useful with your life. So, I choose a Manic Street Preachers CD, almost for a single line: “Libraries gave us Power; then Work came and made us Free”. Eleven words which completely encapsulate the true ethos of science and give a perfect Design for Life. Even typing the words raises the hairs on my neck and brings tears to my eyes. I find it impossible to choose a ‘best’ book; notwithstanding the comments re. Orwell as dinner guest, the one which comes into my mind now is “Anna Karenin” (Tolstoy).

Professor Joe Sweeney is in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Reading and works on the design and implementation of new processes in organic chemistry, with a focus on asymmetric and target-oriented synthesis, and chemical biology. His ultimate objective is to actually make a difference.

1. What made you want to be a chemist?

I was interested from a very early age in science, and alternated as a boy between the telescope, microscope, chemistry set, and so on. (My wife would tell you I haven’t changed.) I suppose chemistry fit nicely in between biology (too vague for my tastes at the time) and physics (which was too austere). It had some rigor, but not too much. Of course, I loved reading literature from a very early age, too, but decided that it would be easier to have a library in my house than to have a lab.

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

I think I still would want to be some sort of research scientist. Finding things out that no one else knows, running real experiments where the outcome rides on your own skills and intuition – there’s nothing else like it for me. I could enjoy teaching, writing, or even managing an investment portfolio, but not as much as what I do now.

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

The same way as other scientists do: by working at the top of their abilities, on the most unusual, far-reaching problems they have access to. I don’t want to propose any specific topics; that’s not how it works. Work on what excites you, and allow some time and space for blue-sky experiments. Getting the word out about what chemistry (and science in general) is would help, too, because most people (all these centuries later) still don’t really know.

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

Arrgh, that’s hard. No kings or politicians that I can think of, first off. Newton wasn’t too sociable, was he? More recently I’d have loved to have met Richard Feynman or Peter Medawar – actually, I’d love to have dinner with Freeman Dyson, and he’s still around! If I could tell them what we’re up to now, some of the natural philosophers of the 1700s would be a lot of fun. Outside of science, it might be Nabokov – James Joyce would probably have tried to borrow money off me.

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

Easy. When my company announced the closure of our research site, I went straight back to my lab and started setting up experiments for a fascinating side project I’d been working on. It was then or never, so while everyone else was packing up their offices, I was out there taking aliquots and mixing up buffers. I did the last one in January, and the next day the instrument I needed was mothballed. My next experiment will be (I hope) not long after I start my next job, wherever that is. I never want to lose access to the lab.

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

I’ve never been able to answer these questions! I’m looking at a wall of books over my shoulder right now; how could I narrow down to one? I suppose I’d have to find the thickest anthology I could possibly carry – it would double as a flotation device. Literature, poetry, some math and logic problems – I don’t think they make one of those, actually. CDs are a less wrenching call – something by Bach, maybe, if I had to pick just one thing, although Steely Dan would be a contender.

Derek Lowe is a research chemist in the pharmaceutical industry. Despite nearly twenty years of trying, he has yet to put anything on the market, so if you’re looking for a reason for high drug costs, look no further.