Letter: Laboratory work that has literary merit

Sir: Tom Wilkie ('Is it true art and science don't mix?', 28 February) bemoans the loss of a past when the writings of scientists such as Sir Peter Medawar and Julian Huxley revealed natural wonders to their readers. He perpetuates a cliched and outdated stereotype of scientists as boffins, whose horizons end at the laboratory door and for whom writing or explaining is a 'boring irrelevancy'. He fuels this with obeisance to Stephen Hawking, as if he alone has greater horizons.

Far from 'retreating into their laboratories', many scientists put much effort into popularising their excitement, sometimes with great literary merit. Richard Dawkins' concept of The Selfish Gene is now a part of the language. Roger Penrose has made contributions to our understanding of space and time that merit comparison with Stephen Hawking's, while Steve Jay Gould and Freeman Dyson (now based in America) produce literary works that happen to be about science. These are just a few of the professionals who deny Dr Wilkie's thesis.

In the visual media, Ian Fells and Heinz Wolff have brought engineering alive on television for many years. Colin Blakemore has brought the frontiers of bio-medical research to television; Lewis Wolpert has both written and reported on the disturbing ethical implications of modern science and technology. The postbag following my own televised Royal Institution Christmas Lectures has been so extensive that I have yet to reply to many letters.

There are hundreds of others like us, less well known, perhaps, but no less driven to communicate the excitement that made them choose science instead of some more financially rewarding career. Many will, like me, be travelling throughout the country during SET7 (the National Week of Science, Engineering and Technology, from 18 March) giving talks and demonstrations to the public.

Yours faithfully,

FRANK CLOSE

Abingdon, Oxfordshire

The writer is vice-president of the British Association.