Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
reasoning that since 'all professions are depicted negatively why should
one expect scientists to be treated differently?' Since there is no match
between social reality and the reality presented in movies there is no rea-
son to be concerned about the depiction of science in movies (Crichton
1999, p. 1461).
Crichton is certainly right that the reality content of movies should
not be taken too seriously. In particular, the depiction of scientific activ-
ity does not lend itself well to story telling because abstract thought or
the pursuit of knowledge as such is difficult to represent in images. It is
no accident that filmmakers show scientists in adventure or love, or both
if they use them in plots. One could assume, therefore, that science is a
much too esoteric subject to play any role in a popular medium such as
fiction film. However, even a superficial search of movies about science
or scientists yields over 400 titles. A study of the representation of sci-
ence on television has shown that viewers are confronted to a remarkable
degree with science, technology, and medicine. Contrary to what could
be expected, this does not happen in news magazines or documentaries
like NOVA in the US, but in fictional portrayals in the evening program
(Gerbner 1987, p. 110). A larger share appears in 'dramatized entertain-
ment',
i.e.
fiction films, be it science fiction movies, hospital series, mys-
tery, or espionage stories. Science and its protagonists are evidently suit-
able subjects of the dream factory after all.
Crichton is too simplistic if he believes that the way science is repre-
sented in movies can only be explained through its particular entertain-
ment value. The clichés and stereotypes about science, especially those
regarding the 'mad scientist', were neither invented in Hollywood nor by
the UfA-producers of the Weimar period. They have much deeper his-
torical roots, and their exceptional stability and continuity qualifies them
as products of the popular culture that express a deeply seated ambiva-
lence toward science.
1
Above all, the 'mad scientist' stories are an endur-
ing genre of the anti-rationalist critique of science that has found its way
from literature into movies (Toumey 1992, p. 434).
1
Two years after the publication of the first results of this project I came across Crich-
ton's article and a manuscript by Joachim Schummer raising the same points vis à vis
Crichton. I also owe other information to him that had been unknown to me before
(Schummer 2006).
