Blog #12

 

The last portion of “A Feeling for the Organism,” was especially critical as Keller not only revisits the obstacles that Barbara McClintock faced throughout the rest of her career, but also hints at issues currently circulating throughout the scientific domain. First and foremost, these final chapters illustrate significant differences between autobiographies versus biographies, and the significance of each. Prior to this story, this class involved analyzing the autobiographies of Charles Darwin and Benjamin Franklin, and through these perspectives the readers were exposed to a more humanized side to such brilliant minds. In particular, both scientists were rather critical of their own actions, and in turn, spent time self-reflecting and finding areas of improvement in order to achieve their ultimate virtues and lead the “good life.” For example, in Franklin’s autobiography, he notes how he kept a journal and took notes of his errors and actions in accordance to his set list of virtues on a daily basis–on that same note, he was not afraid to critique his actions and look for ways on which to improve. On the other side of the spectrum, Charles Darwin’s autobiography included passages where Darwin expressed a modest perspective over his own abilities by stating that he was rather “mediocre” compared to his colleagues.

Such reflective and personal thoughts regarding failure is something that is barely touched on in McClintock’s biography. However, the beginning of Chapter 9 is the first moment where the reader is exposed to McClintock’s vulnerable side, as she expresses the shock resulting from the failed Cold Spring Harbor Symposium. Since this biography entails Keller’s overarching perspective on McClintock’s life, she primarily focused on her successes and barely touched on her failures. In particular, Keller even inserts her own thoughts, especially when she compares McClintock’s relationship to her colleagues following the incident at the Cold Harbor Spring Symposium (Keller 144).

Personally, I prefer autobiographies as it encompasses a more personalized perspective of someone looking back on their achievements and their failures throughout their overall career; this critical factor is missing in biographies, as this form involves someone analyzing information that is already relatively public and/or superficial. Thus, biographies tend to list achievements under a name, which is valuable information but also leaves something more personal and significant out of the picture.

Beyond this overarching scope, these chapters also hint at issues that McClintock faced throughout her career, which is significant in that these issues are currently embedded not only in science, but also in other related domains. Specifically, Keller highlights the significance of maintaining a balance between the scientist and the scientific community. In relation to McClintock’s lifestyle, Keller notes the difficulty McClintock faced in trying to communicate her data to her colleagues and the rest of the scientific community; further, she notes that her isolation and independence from others is a gift, but also a curse, especially in the final stages of studies and communicating data. This is a significant point that I want to illustrate as I posed a question on a previous blog regarding whether or not science should be more individualistic or communal. Based on examples drawn up from McClintock’s experiences, I agree that there must be a balance between the two, as a scientist must conduct their own studies and protect viable information, but in the appropriate space, must be able to effectively communicate to others regarding one’s findings and contribute to the field as a whole.

Furthermore, the last note that I want to make regarding this section is that it hints at ongoing gender roles within a male-dominated field. McClintock’s noted brilliance and quick-wit was relatively new within the field, and I found it extremely important that many of her colleagues viewed her as a “maverick” simply because of these traits, which were deemed outside of the norm for women (Keller 142). This is a turning point in the book because throughout her entire career, her gender was still stigmatized which proved to be an obstacle at many points throughout her life and career. However, I personally believe that without such obstacles, she would have never been able to achieve her scientific virtues of autonomy and resilience.