Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
ages from warfare, but it might be wiser to return to a dynamical picture
of revealing the powers inherent in nature so that we can use them, rather
than torturing Nature ('putting her to the question', like a suspected
witch), or conquering her.
In his published inaugural lecture of 1802, which Mary Shelley
picked up and used in writing
Frankenstein
(Shelley 1999, pp. 17-24)
,
Davy used a sexy rhetoric in which chemistry was a branch of sublime
philosophy, and the chemist:
Not contented with what is found upon the surface of the earth, […] has
penetrated into her bosom, and has even searched the bottom of the
ocean for the purpose of allaying the restlessness of his desires, or of ex-
tending and increasing his power. [Davy 1839-40, vol. 2, pp. 318, 320;
Woof et al. 1997]
Once conquered, Nature could be put on a pedestal and worshipped:
Oh, most magnificent and noble Nature!
Have I not worshipped thee with such a love
As never mortal man before displayed?
Adored thee in thy majesty of visible creation,
And searched into thy hidden and mysterious ways
As Poet, as Philosopher, as Sage? [Knight 1998, p. 9]
In our post-Freudian age, we probably could not, with a straight face,
write quite that way about the scientific urge, though we should note that
Davy's lectures and writings were very popular with women - this was
before the prudish Victorian era. But we might be able to make chemis-
try less down-to-earth and prosy than we often do, maybe giving a new
frisson to hands-on and hands-off.
Chemists were culturally active, Davy analyzing colors used in an-
cient wall-paintings from Pompeii and elsewhere (through his friendship
with the sculptor Antonio Canova [Knight 2000b]); while Wollaston
wrote, also for the Royal Society's
Philosophical Transactions,
on 'fairy
rings' in the grass, and with Sir Thomas Lawrence, President of the
Royal Academy, a paper on why the eyes in portraits follow you around.
In conservation and restoration, the role of chemists remains essential,
and that should be good for the reputation of the science. And we
still, like Goethe, use the idea of personal chemistry in analyzing human
relationships.
