OK, so I might be a bit late to this blog party, but I still think the future of the Royal Institution is a current issue.
So to begin, I agree with Martin Robbins.
I have to say, when I first heard that the Ri was being sold I was totally flabbergasted: I didn’t actually know what the Ri was. I had to Google it. And then I saw their website and ‘Ohh, the Royal Institution! They do the Christmas lectures!’ and instantly wanted to help keep the Ri going. My motives were purely associated with the fact that this was (is) another institution that practices science communication and in my books that’s great. There can be no excess of science communication, as there will be no excess of science (as long as people continue to remember someone has to actually do the sciencey bits too).
So I read, and I listened and I remained inert – not wishing to sign petitions because although my knee-jerk reaction is to save something that helps communicate scientific messages something was nagging at me about the whole issue in the discussions I had been reading (i.e. Miodownik’s article and various other Twitter names twittering on about the issue). It wasn’t until I finally got round to looking at the Association of British Science Writer’s Google groups thread on the topic that I actually read Martin Robbins’ inflammatory titled article. And that was when it hit me, I totally agree that the Ri should be sold. That is, the building should.
I honestly believe that we don’t need the building of the Royal Institution to continue the spirit of science and scientific discovery. You don’t need to be there, in that same room, to be able to get excited about Michael Faraday performing the first ever demonstration of electricity, or to feel the importance of science as a whole. What you need is passionate communicators that can do this solely with their words and their own excitement. What will really capture an audience is the passion with which the orator speaks and not the place that they are in – the audience will be transported to another time and place in their minds if their muse is eloquent enough and for this you can be anywhere. We don’t need to forget the history of the Ri, nor do we want to, we just need to realise that to move forward with science letting the building go might be the best option and lets spend that 60 million pounds where it is most needed.
Which is why it is great to see more recently that there is not just discussion and/or outrage about the Ri and the possibility of selling the building. A recent article by Sir Richard Sykes, chair of the Royal Institution outlines their plans for a Future Direction Committee which will determine the new vision for the Ri that includes science communication, advocacy, public engagement and crucially the opinions of the wider scientific community on this vision. Mark Miodownik, a member of the new committee, also put a call out on Twitter asking for views on the future of the Ri to be sent to future [at] ri.ac.uk. So, anyone who was and is up in arms about the whole thing should really make their views heard through this avenue of communication.
I really look forward to how this develops, and I hope that the science community will come up with something innovative and befitting the Ri’s future purpose. And I also hope that whatever the idea, we have the resources to be able to carry it out. As we have seen before with the Ri, great ideas are great until we look at the bank books.
I’d disagree. Historical buildings ARE important, if only because they can’t be replaced.
As I understand it (and I agree that I haven’t been following the case), the RI is in financial trouble because of some choices that the (departing, I hope) management committee made. One would hope that those mistakes can be rectified on a reasonable time scale.
But to sell up “Faraday’s lab” for a handful of sheckels … it would be like selling Down House for building of an immigration detention centre (that’s a calculated insult on Darwin’s loathing of slavery and implicit understanding of the common heritage of all humans ; arguably one of the first people who could base such opinions on a scientific understanding) ; or like paving over “Hutton’s Unconformity” to lay a sewage pipe (errrr, right ; never going to happpen??).
If the financial crisis is really severe, then a bridging loan from some science-based organisation (a pharmaceutical company, or an energy compenay, perhaps) would garner a LOT of good PR. And I’m sure this strategy is being pursued vigorously.
Hi,
Thanks for the comment. I also agree that historic buildings and collections are important and spent my entire masters degree in heritage science understanding the value of cultural heritage. My point here is that the Ri don’t need to be in the building to carry on doing good work, and hopefully better work with a new vision for their future.
I would be against any ideas to demolish the building, but believe that the government providing £60m in this time of austerity towards the Ri who have already shown that the previous £22m put into the building did not prove successful, is not a good idea. I think this money could be better spent in education, healthcare or research. This also gives the Ri the opportunity to re-evaluate their role in the science communication world, and improve what they already do.
It would of course be great if a private company or somewhere that has £60m to spend takes this building over, and lets it still be open to the public so that it can be actively remembered and accessed.
Pingback: The Week in Science (Feb 11-17) | Science Communication Blog Network
I agree… We don’t need another building that houses ideas for great science communication. As you point out, these ideas can be spoken, and received, anywhere. You’d just need someone to communicate those ideas with a 21st century sensibility using social media as a megaphone.
As a possible direction, I like what I see coming out of colleges/universities in the way of free online classes. Take for instance what MIT and Harvard created (https://www.edx.org/) It may be good to see these classes infused with a little TedX to spice up the subject matter.
Thanks for the comment – I like the idea of free online classes too – have you come across Coursera? https://www.coursera.org/
Pingback: Do we really need the Royal Institution? | Science Communication Blog Network