At an informal meeting of scientists, one scientist was heard to say that,given the successes in molecular biology and genetics, he might get out ofthe field since everything was now known. Esther replied, "There is a whiteflower with a single central purple petal. Can you explain how that purplepetal got there?" The moral is, scientists are more successful when theycouple observation with thought.
Click for additional information
Esther traveled across the U.S. by train, arriving in Palo Alto with a plan: Shewould stay at the local YWCA. This was a good plan, but after Esther's luggage wasreported lost, Esther also found out that there was no local YWCA in Palo Alto.Instead, Esther arranged to stay at theBarker Hotel (a single-residencyhotel for those down on their luck). The next day, Esther arranged to see Dr. EdwardTatum. Dr. Tatum asked her what she was interested in studying. Esther replied:"Genetics!" Dr. Tatum replied that genetics wasn't offered until the Winter Quarter,and repeated his question: what would she like to study?" Esther replied, "Genetics!"Dr. Tatum asked where Esther was staying, and she replied, "At the Barkeley Hotel."After he recovered from his shock, Dr. Tatum immediately arranged for Esther to stayat an available place in a dormitory at Stanford (Manzanita Hall, then vacant, as theStanford quarter started later than Esther expected), and told Esther to see him thenext day.
Esther arrived the next day, only to find a milk-bottle withDrosophila, allof which had eyes the same color, except for one fly. Esther concluded that she was todetermine why the oneDrosophila had different-coloured eyes. Esther worked out,by herself, all the material typically taught in a genetics course. She was so successful,Dr. Tatum asked her to be theTeaching Assistant (TA) for the genetics course thenext quarter.
Esther said that she was so poor, that as TA in another course, she and another TA atethe frog's legs after student dissections were over. When the quarter started, Estherarranged to live in a private home at 634 Alvarado Row, in exchange for washing theclothes of the woman who owned the home. Esther was not a student with wealthy parents toprovide financial support.
At a young age (19 or 20), Esther was interested in working in genetics. Esther spoke withBernard Ogilvie Dodge (Plant Pathologist at the New York Botanical Garden). Dr. Dodge askedEsther about her knowledge ofNeurospora crassa, posing a few questions to her. Ineach case, Esther admitted that she didn't know the answer, but explained how she would go about "seeking a solution to these problems". Dr. Dodge immediately asked Esther to engage inresearch with him. Esther worked under three scholarships with Dr. Dodge between 1941 and 1942,conducting research in heterokaryosis inNeurospora tetrasperma. Esther explained howDr. Dodge accidentally discovered how heat shock was required to induce germination of thespores.Neurospora crassa was of industrial importance in that it created problems inbakeries.
I asked Esther about her views concerning the morality of working inbiological warfare. Certain that Esther, being ethical, would opposebiological warfare, I wanted to hear how she would explain her opposition.Esther stated that one could not automatically reject funding from biologicalwarfare organizations because so much useful research could thereby beaccomplished; in fact she admitted that she and Josh had accepted funding from CampDetrick although the work she was doing in itself was not directly relatedto biological warfare. Camp Detrick (which was in Maryland) had stipulated thatthe only requirement was that the participating scientist visit Camp Detrick onceevery year.
When Esther's time came to visit Camp Detrick, the people at Camp Detrickgraciously showed her and other scientists the different facilities and muchof the scientific work that was being done. At one point Esther and the otherscientists were asked to get on a bus to be driven to the restricted area ofCamp Detrick. When Esther realized that they were about to tour the areaof Camp Detrick where the development of biological weapons took place, sheasked the driver to stop the bus and let her off. The other scientists on thebus overheard, and all got off the bus, following Esther's lead.
Click for more information.
On another occasion, Esther mentioned her work in the Plasmid Reference Center,distributing "kits" of plasmids to interested researchers. Esther received arequest for a plasmid kit from a researcher from a Middle Eastern country, and itseemed clear to her that the intended area of research was biological warfare.Esther declined to provide the desired plasmids. Ironically, Esther was precludedfrom providing assistance in any case, as the explicitly-stated policy of thisMiddle Eastern country was to refuse assistance from any research or relatedmaterials in which Jewish researchers participated.
Esther grew up during the Great Depression, her parents being quite poorfinancially. Esther's parents did the best they could. Esther told me that herlunch often was a piece of bread, upon which her mother squeezed juice from atomato. Once, Esther's parents told Esther that they would havesteak fordinner (a very rare treat). Esther didn't quite know what "steak" was, as shehappily announced to all her childhood friends that they would be eatingsnake for dinner that night.
In spite of the entrenched gender discrimination found in the 1940s, Esthersucceeded in accomplishing so much. How did Esther do this? A clue is providedby what Esther told me. Esther told me that her female friends took jobs oncereserved for men, but newly opened up to women due to the shortages of"manpower" during World War II. Esther told me that women friends tookjobs in the Defense Department such as in the Signal Corp. These jobs paid well,but Esther thought that the jobs would have no future: as soon as the war wasover, Esther expected that these women would lose their new jobs (which indeedhappened). Instead of opting for a highly-paid job that would ultimately go nowhere,Esther chose to takeresearch-oriented work open to women (no matterhow limited), such as in Public Health. During the Depression, this was thefinancial difficulty her friends tried to avoid.
Esther's choice to pursue knowledge over financial security led her to takecourses and to work with such people as Alexander Hollaender, Milislav Demerec,George Beadle, Ed. Tatum, and C. B. van Neil. It was not an accident that Estherwas influenced by such researchers; Esther deliberately sought this path.
Esther and I were enjoying the natural beauty at Asilomar, in PacificGrove, California: an area that Esther had said she hoped she would be ableto enjoy in her old age. We were seated at a table in the Asilomar dining room,awaiting breakfast, when another couple joined us.
I had been discussing with Esther the dangers and gnawing doubts that I hadconcerning the development of new, artificially-created forms of life; formsdeveloped in the molecular biologist's laboratory. While I had these fears, Ialso recognized the promise that such new engineered forms of life might alsohold for the future. The other couple started to ask questions. They clearlydid not understand very many of the issues involved. Esther explained in detailsome of the methodologies used to prevent the escape of such engineered lifeforms; methods including negative pressure gradients. I noted that theequipment used to create such negative pressure environments could still fail,and wondered if the engineered forms of life then escape. What backup systemsexisted? Would there not always be the possibility of failures? Esther'sviewpoint was that of course failures could always occur, but that greatefforts had been made to find ways to prevent such failures. For example:engineering a new life form that would require a unique amino acid toexist a unique amino acid not normally found in nature. Should the engineered lifeform escape, not being able to find this amino acid, the life form would die.
The other couple at the table were impressed by Esther's knowledge and askedhow she knew about these things. Esther explained that she had served as acommittee member dealing with precisely these issues.
Along these lines: Esther mentioned that at one time she was doing scientificwork in the South of the United States, and one of the scientists who headedup the laboratory made a remark that betrayed his prejudice that Black peoplewere not capable of scientific work. Esther explicitly pointed out that thiswas simply not true.
An example would be single amino acid auxotrophs, or mutants affected by vitamins, a nucleic acid precursor, single or multiple drug-resistant or virus-resistant, temperature-sensitive, etc.
1975: Molecular biologists from around the world meet at Asilomar, Ca., to write an historic set of rules to guide research in recombinant DNA experiments. The NIH Recombinant DNA Committee issues guidelines aimed at eliminating or minimizing the potential risks in recombinant DNA research.
"Recombinant Molecules: Impact on Science and Society: Tenth Miles International Symposium", Beers, Roland F. Jr.; Bassett, Edward, G., Raven Press, New York, N.Y., 1977, p. 90 [discussion of the 1973 Asilomar Meeting on the Potential Hazards of Recombinant DNA Molecules].
"Recombinant DNA: The Untold Story", Lear, John; Crown Publishers, Inc., New York, 1978
"Genetic Engineering--Too Dangerous to Continue or Too Important to Discontinue", by E. Garfield, Current Contents, 35, September 1, 1975, pp. 5-11
I read an article in the newspaper dealing with the inheritance ofbehavior. I told Esther I had a lot of questions about claims concerningthe scientific basis for such genetic foundations of behavior. My concernwas that genetics could then be used as a form of scientific racism, turnedagainst races, "mental defectives", various religions, feminism, or othersociopolitical biases. I was curious to know her opinion, given my fears.Esther responded with crystal clarity, "Let the scientists say what theywill. They must then provide experimental evidence. To my knowledge, suchexperimental evidence has not yet been provided. These are simply claims."
Click for more information.
In an October 15, 1985 interview with T. D. Singh and Pahwan Saharan, it wasnoted that in Francis Crick's view that it would soon be a verysimple matter to create life artificially, now that they had an understandingof DNA structure. Esther's interviewers asked her opinion on such views, andalso asked if she thought such views should be censored. Esther's response waseffectively the same as that above: "Let Crick or others say what they wish;as scientists they must then be able to provide experimental evidence for whatthey say. Censorship is not necessary, and even counter-productive", she added,her reasoning being that censorship prevents thoughts from being expressed.
One should bear in mind that while Esther disagreed with Crick'soverconfident views (she pointed out that scientists were still unable to createeven a living virus), she always viewed Crick with respect, as a close colleagueand friend. Disagreements in principle need not imply a loss of respect orfriendship.
Click to read the article.
Esther told me that in her opinion the Nobel Prize can often be destructive; thatfor example, the Nobel Prize had been very destructive, in her opinion, to herex-husband's character. "How silly Josh was (to view himself in such inflatedself-importance and grandeur)," she said with regret. "Soon both of us will beforgotten."
Click for more information.
Click here to see how quickly scientific researchers are forgotten.
To get another idea of what Esther had in mind, click here to see the accomplishments of Esther M. Zimmer Lederberg..
Another interesting observation of Esther's about the Nobel Prize, may be found in an October 15, 1985 interview with T. D. Singh and Pahwan Saharan, as follows:""
Esther and I went on a trip to Yosemite National Park. It was not so late in the year,so we could travel Route 120 to Dana Meadows, an area we both thought very beautiful.When we got to Dana Meadows, we got out of the car and were walking in the meadows. Esthergot down on the ground and pointed out a small flower, smaller than the nail on your pinky.We both looked at it with great absorption. Esther said "So many of nature's most beautifulcreations are very small, and often overlooked."
Examples of natural beauty can be found everywhere, such as the curious but beautiful shapesof tafoni found along the California Pacific coast.
Click here to see tafoni
Esther told me that many of the scientific conferences took place at sites favored becausethey also afforded attendees the opportunity to ski. Esther could not ski, so instead shedid the unusual thing of hiking with snowshoes.
Esther and I were discussing the film "Andromeda Strain," by MichaelCrichton. Esther had told me that a number of people felt she had been themodel for the female scientist in this film. When the issue came up oftrying to determine how to find factors to control the 'alien life form',Esther commented that "Crichton never got it right." I asked her what shemeant. She replied that if an extraterrestrial life form were caughtin an outer space probe and brought back to Earth, whatever wouldcounteract it would with high probability be caught along with it in thesame probe, because living things are always surrounded in theirenvironment by those things that counteract it. "They should simply havelooked in the same net," she said. "They would have found what theyneeded to control the alien life form." I asked her if the types oflaboratories depicted in the film actually existed, or if they werescience fiction. Esther replied that there were five such P4 facilitiesin the United States.
Click for more information.
Esther told me of a famous geneticist (Élie Leo Wollman) whose parents(Elizabeth Wollman and Eugène Wollman) had been researchers at the InstitutPasteur, in Paris. During World War II, the German Gestapo arrested these Jewishscientists, who were subsequently sent to Auschwitz and never seen again. The dayof the arrest, as their son (Élie Leo Wollman) was walking towards theInstitut Pasteur to meet his father, family friends quickly grabbed the young boy,to save him from the waiting Gestapo. Later, these friends hid the young boy inthe catacombs of the Institut Pasteur, caring for him until the end of the war.Thus, Élie Leo Wollman survived the Holocaust.
"[André] Lwoff had known EugèneWollman in the thirties as a scrupulous and dogged experimentalist. Eugèneand Elizabeth Wollman, Jews, had been seized by the Gestapo at the end of 1943 -he late in the afternoon of December 10 in the hospital of the Institut Pasteur;she a week earlier. They were sent to Auschwitz and never again heard from. Theirson, Élie Leo Wollman, had fought with the maquis in the south of France,and had joined Lwoff's unit at the Pasteur in 1945 a few weeks before Monod."
"The Eighth Day of Creation: The Makers of the Revolution in Biology",
byJudson, H. F., Simon and Schuster, New York, 1979, p. 373
Esther tried to explain the importance of attending the GordonConferences. Esther pointed out that at such conferences she had beeninvited along with the other women to go shopping, as it was not expectedthat a woman attending the conference could actually be a scientist, andnot a wife or a significant other of a MALE scientist. (Or perhaps theorganizers had the anti-feminist viewpoint that all women were interestedin shopping.) Esther added that it was important to attend the eveningsocials after the formal talks had taken place. As an example, she notedthat during the socials the scientists would point out errors not mentionedduring the technical sessions, such as the fact that a molecule referred tohad in fact been a dimer.
Esther once told me of a meeting that took place where Esther wasthe only female scientist. All the men at this meeting were smoking cigars.The chairperson looked up and asked if Esther minded if they smoked cigars.Esther responded that she did, whereupon all the men put out their cigars.After the meeting was over, a female secretary expressed outrage thatEsther had dared object to the men smoking cigars! Thus, it was not onlymen who enforced gender discrimination; in this secretary's view, femalescientists ranked lower than male scientists.
Esther told me that at the end of World War II many physicistswho had been working to develop the atomic bomb were disgusted andcompletely disillusioned with the cynical ends to which science had beenand was being used by the Government. For this reason, some (such asLeo Szilard, Aaron Novick and Seymour Benzer) decided to change theirfields to molecular biology. When an attendee at one of the Cold SpringHarbor Laboratories Symposia remarked, "The problem we have in molecularbiology is that we are not sufficiently trained in mathematics," theformer nuclear physicists in the audience smiled to themselves.
At another Cold Spring Harbor Symposium, while walking back to herdormitory room Esther noted a number of signs in the grassy areasbetween paths, stating that the plants were of an endangered speciesand asking guests not to walk on them. This puzzled Esther, whohad studied botany and thought the plants looked perfectly ordinary.Esther later encountered James Watson, whom she had been told was responsiblefor these signs, and asked him about the plants. Watson admitted that hewasn't an expert on botany; that in fact he knew about as much about botanyas he did about astronomy. Esther asked him how much he knew aboutastronomy and Watson replied, "Absolutely nothing." He just hadn't wantedpeople to wander off the paths and destroy the landscaping.
In addition to her love of, and proficiency in, languages, literature,music, microbiology and genetics, Esther loved botany. Esther felt thatStanford University would do well to foster indigenous plantssuch as,,,,etc. around the Stanford campus. As the Stanford (Palo Alto) area is anatural desert with frequent droughts, it would be beneficial to includeindigenous plants that were suited to the area and would not requireextra watering.
One day, Esther and I were discussing Botany. Esther felt that children in thepublic schools should be taught a little Botany. As an example, Esther pointed outthat the stem of plants in the pea family have a square (angular) shape that iseasily recognized. Esther said that rather than having students memorize taxonomiccategories, it would be more useful if these students were taught that plants inthe pea family grow in nitrogen-deficient soil.
Esther told me two interesting stories about her childhood. Her zayde (grandfather,derived from "tata" or "father"), lived in upstate New York. Esther's grandfatherattempted to teach Hebrew to Esther's several male cousins, but theseyoung boys would have nothing to do with it! On the other hand, Esther washappy to learn Hebrew. Although her grandfather was disappointed that the youngboys couldn't read Hebrew during Passover, Esther made her grandfather happyby doing all the reading.
Another story Esther told me was that she always wondered how her zayde knewwhat mischief she and her cousins got into. One day, she visited her zayde inhis room (he lived in room in the attic of a farm house), she saw that hergrandfather had agrand stand view from his window! Zayde knew everythingbecause he couldsee everything.
As a young child, Esther had been warned about "vicious" dogs, so initially Estherfeared dogs. Later, while living in upstate New York, Esther came to appreciate alocal dog, "Skip". From then on, Esther enjoyed animals.
Esther told me an anecdote about a cat she loved, who had lived with her at her Stanfordhouse. The cat was named "Maximum Velocity" – "Maxi", for short.
While Esther and Maxi were sitting together on the living room couch couch onemorning, there was a sudden jolt. This jolt was a small earthquake. Maxi turned toEsther and gently patted Esther with his paw, as if to say "Don't jolt the couch!".Maxi thought that Esther (not the earthquake) was responsible.
On a few occasions Esther told me how she and Josh were exasperatedat Max Delbrück (known as "The Pope"). For example,when Delbrück was informed of scientific experiments that did not conformto his prejudices, he wanted to either ignore those experiments or re-interpretthe results. I asked, "Didn't he then find a problem trying to impose his prejudicesin place of the Scientific Method?" "Thatwas the problem," Esther responded.
Esther told me that at a very scientifically prolific time, she andJosh and others would tell their French colleagues about their latest (as yetunpublished) experiments in genetics. Hoping to gain priority, the Frenchinvestigators quickly wrote up the experimental discoveries they had beentold of, and published in lesser journals that didn't have strict requirements.Esther said that she and Josh soon learned to follow the French, and not to beso generous in sharing their scientific discoveries (not automatically assumethat scientists would also be principled). Esther noted that in onecase the French jumped to an incorrect conclusion and published resultsthat she and Josh had discovered; upon realizing their mistake, the Frenchwere forced to repudiate and withdraw their own paper.
Esther explained that while it is an honour to be asked to be a reviewerof technical papers, it also involves a great deal of work: a reviewer hasa lot of responsibility. Esther told me that when she was asked to reviewa peper, she would read the paper andimagine at every step, whathad to be done. If Esther saw that some step had been omitted, or that someconclusion was not justified, she would request additional information. Thisrequest sometimes had the unintended consequence of either delaying publication,or even disqualifying the paper from publication. Though her reviews weredetailed and honest, journals sometimes preferrednot to use Esther inthis peer review process. It was easier to get less honest, less critical,less knowledgeable reviewers, even if papers subsequently had to be withdrawn.
For example, go to ; click .Four reviews are provided. The first three are one page apiece;Esther M. Lederberg's review is six pages long.
In speaking of her years working in Josh's laboratory, Esther oncetold me that she observed that whenever she discovered somethingimportant, Josh immediately took her off the project and assignedthe work to someone else. She concluded that if she wanted todo scientific work it would be better for her to quietly completethe work herself, without telling Josh.
The work Esther did with her discovery ofLambda phage was also delayed by Josh, but in that case, it was
Esther told me that in many cases, simply washing your hands carefullywith soap and water is sufficient to preventing the spread of bacterialillnesses. A simple solution, yet one rarely employed systematically.Once, at a party with Josh, Esther warned Josh not to eat the deviledeggs, set upon a table in the sun. Pasteur would have most assuredlyadvised the same, especially as children with their unwashed hands werecontinually touching these eggs. Unfortunately, Josh did not listen toEsther's advice, and ate some of these eggs. Fortunately, he got over theillness in a short while!
I was discussing Barbara McClintock's work with corn with Esther.Esther told me that at one Cold Spring Harbor Symposium BarbaraMcClintock reported that corn seemed to violate Mendelian geneticdistributions. In this discussion, Sewall Wright took the view thatBarbara McClintock simply didn't understand the mathematics (a weaknessin mathematics he felt was common of most women). Dr. McClintock,dismissive of Wright's prejudice, said "I have gone over the figuresagain and again and again. They don't work. After this meeting I willprovide you with the experimental information. You can look at theexperimental evidence and correct me if I'm wrong." Of course,McClintock was right, and Sewall Wright was wrong. I asked Esther ifBarbara McClintock had previously expressed doubts concerning Mendeliangenetic distributions. Esther responded, "Previous to her work with corn,Barbara McClintock would have strongly agreed with Wright." (BarbaraMcClintock had not been biased: she was influenced by theexperimentalevidence alone.)
It had just been announced that Jim Watson (and others) had won the NobelPrize. At precisely this time, Jim was at Cold Spring Harbor Labs. A number ofcolleagues secretly decided to honour Jim. Esther, a close associate, wastaken into their confidence. Esther was assigned a specific task. It wasrequired that Esther be immediatelybehind Jim on the cafeteriabreakfast line. When the time came, Esther was assigned the task of ensuringthat aparticular hardboiled egg found its way onto Jim's tray. Esthertook the special egg, placed it on Jim's tray, saying "It's good for you, Jim!"Jim looked a bit puzzled, shrugged his shoulders, and went to sit down. Eyeswere fixed surreptitiously on Jim as he ate his breakfast. When Jim came tothe egg and opened it, a blue coloured helix fell out.
Shortly before Jonas Salk died, he gave a talk. Esther, a long-timeassociate of Dr. Salk's, attended his talk. The main point that JonasSalk held was that the new and up-and-coming scientists needed toemphasize that science was for the benefit of mankind. After the talk,Jonas Salk saw Esther in the front row of the audience and came over totalk with her. He asked Esther what she thought of his talk. Esther toldme that she told Jonas she disagreed with his stated view, because shethought that these new scientists were already very strongly interestedin the good of mankind.
At one point in Stanley Cohen's birthday celebration at theSilverado, in Napa CA, one of the scientists said that he had no one(no child) to whom he could pass important scientific information. Estherimmediately remarked "Your work and your students are your children."
Esther and two other women at Stanford noted that there were nowomen professors at Stanford. All three got together to request that awoman be appointed as a professor. Esther researched the question, thenall three women presented their complaint to a dean. The dean respondedthat none of the women were qualified, as a professor must have publishedenough papers and none of the women in question met this requirement.Esther pointed out that most of the male professors didn't satisfy therequirement either. The dean responded that there was not sufficientfunds to appoint a woman professor. Esther pointed out that funds hadbeen specifically allocated for that purpose. The dean countered that themonies in question had been allocated to promote minorities that at thattime were politically active and creating an embarrassment for StanfordUniversity. Esther pointed out that this was an unauthorized spending offunds that were specifically designated for women: also a minority. Thedean relented, saying that only one highly-qualified woman would receivean appointment as a professor. The three women were all highly qualified,but only Esther requested to be appointed as a "Research Professor", anuntenured position (the other two women requested tenured positions). OnlyEsther was appointed, in part, because the position requested was nottenured.
Click for a discussion of gender discrimination in academia in the mid-20th century
Esther told me of a Russian geneticist. The Russian geneticist (who sufferedfrom Tuberculosis) was opposed by T. D. Lysenko. When the scientist stated thatLysenko's opposition to genetics was unscientific, that Lysenko was notqualified, Lysenko replied "Yes, but Stalin listens to me!" In order to disposeof this scientist, the scientist was assigned to work in Vladivostok, a partof the Siberian littoral located on the Pacific coast. Medical doctors hadassured Stalin that the scientist in question would not likely survive longat Vladivostok, given his tuberculosis. The scientist's correspondence wascensored, of course, but Esther received a post card from this scientistbefore he died. The post card had nothing written on it but his name, butit showed a monkey in a cage.
Scientists are always ethical, aren't they? Esther told me thatexperienced microbiologists doing original research often refused to returnmail. The reason was that competitors would attempt (sometimes successfully)to obtain experimental microorganisms that contaminated the return mailenvelope.
Esther feared that physicians were ignoring the advice of most geneticists andmicrobiologists regarding bacterial resistance. When Esther contracted abladder infection, her physician prescribed an antibiotic. Esther questionedher physician's prescription, asking if there was an alternative. Her physicianconfirmed that there was an alternative to using antibiotics, but that very fewpatients had the fortitude and persistence to follow the regime: drinking verylarge amounts of water to literally flush out the infection.
Esther chose not to use antibiotics. Eventually she returned and asked thephysician when she should stop drinking water. The physican was amazed thatEsther had not filled the prescription, and had cured her own infection. "Areyou still drinking water?" he asked in shock.
So many physicians seem determined to subvert medical practice. Esther wascorrect: the physicians will not follow the advice of researchers, andbacterial resistance is becoming an ever-increasing problem.
Esther told me that once, when at home playing the piano, she played apiece by Hayden. Suddenly, Esther's father stood bolt upright, arms stiflyto his side in a salute! The Hayden piece had a number of modified versions,one of which became the anthem of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Esther'sfather had been born in 1896 and attended school in Sereth, Bukowina, apart of the 19th century Austro-Hungarian empire.
Report Card for David Hausrat [later David Zimmer], Boys Public School, Sereth, Bukowina
Esther and I had examined the Stanford Arboretum, lamenting how it had notbeen taken care of. Soon Esther and I read in theStanford Reportthat the Arboretum was now being take care of, and indeed, a rarehad been added to the Arboretum. The Boojum is typically found in theOcatillo desert of Baja California. The Boojum, like cacti, has a verysmall surface area-to-volume ratio (to decrease water loss). In the case ofthe Boojum (which Esther and I quickly went to view); the branches arediminuitive, protruding at right angles from the trunk. Some might think thisplant isn't the most attractive, but the Boojum can exist where few plants can!
Esther told me an interesting story about C. B. van Niel. Esther took acourse taught by C. B. van Niel at the Hopkins Marine Station in 1945. Thestudents were shown slides that were at great variance from the slides shownin most books. The students remarked upon this. Dr. van Niel pointed out thatdepending upon the environmental conditions and the specific point in thelife cycle of organisms, they might appear quite differently. The studentswere assigned experimental work to do. The students immediately went to thelibrary to do preliminary research and found no papers about the organismsave a few written in Dutch. The students reported back to van Niel that theonly papers they could find were written in Dutch and that they could notread Dutch. Dr. van Niel told his students that if they were interested inbecoming scientists, then if required, they had better be prepared to learnto read whatever languages required to do their research. Dr. van Niel'shonesty was commendable!
Some Hopkins Marine Station friends
Esther and Josh were continually beset by Dr. Shockley (of racist fame).Dr. Shockley sought "genetic" evidence to support his racist views. Esthertold me of a time outside Tresidder when seated at a table, Dr. Shockleyintruded upon their privacy and once again attempted to cajole genetic"evidence" to support his racist views from Esther and Josh. Esther toldme that during this conversation, at every opportunity, she broke intoShockley's conversation in an attempt to divert the unpleasant discussions:Esther was not a racist and opposed Shockley's racist views and thoughtthere was no scientific support for racism. Esther always opposed such racistviews.
At another time, Esther's second husband Matthew, asked about Charles Davenport'sracist ideas concerning Eugenics. Esther noted that the Eugenics Record Office(the ERO, which was later headquartered at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories) hadwritten papers about two families, the Kalikaks and the Jukes, to supporteugenics. Esther recalled that it was later found that these families, whichwere originally studied due to their high population of "congenital" problemswith intelligence, actually suffered from economic hardship, which broughtmalnutrition and a lack of education. Once both those factors were ameliorated,both families became effectively like all other families. Perhaps Charles Davenport,whose family had been in the United States since the advent of the Puritains,was unable to understand the problems of poverty.
Click for more information.
Esther was a bit upset with her friend, Jonas Salk. Esther explainedthat Polio appears in waves and that the drastically reduced incidencecould conceivably be explained as the tail end of an epidemic wave, ratherthan due to the Polio vaccine. Keeping careful records could help elucidatethis, but Salk didnot keep good records.
Esther and Josh took note that a scientist they worked with had theunpleasant habit of trying to plagiarize their work. Both Esther and Joshviewed this as a joke, because this scientist was quite capable in laboratorywork, but less than distinguished in his theoretical capabilities. Esther andJosh casually mentioned a "great discovery" they had made in the presence ofthis scientist (in fact, this "discovery" was entirely without foundation).The scientist immediately published the "great discovery", but was never ableto provide details that would allow this discovery to be repeated. Eventually,the claims to this "great discovery" were quietly withdrawn in a relativelyunknown journal.
Esther told me the story of a very small group of researchers thatgravitated towards each other as they were interested in the same researchproblems. They did the work that most interested them as a sideline to theresearch work that they did at the university. Every so often, anotherresearcher would join their group, bringing specialized knowledge and skills.The collective knowledge and skills of this research group was unique, not tobe matched anywhere else. Eventually, this small group of researchers allworked together in a pharmaceutical company. This small group were makingbreathtaking progress. The pharmaceutical company was bought out. The newowners were interested only in immediate profits, and did all they could toprevent the group from working on the problems that most interested them.Pressured to stop their research and instead, to work on mundane, money makingareas, one after another of the researchers left the pharmaceutical company:the research group was finally dissolved. Suddenly, the new owners of thepharmaceutical company realized that the research interests of this smallgroup was in a very profitable area. This realization came too late, asthese industrial leaders had worked very effectively to destroy the research,and instead the pharmaceutical company went out of business.
One of Esther's relatives had a very interesting job: he was the music criticfor one of New York City's newpapers. Esther knew that this relative was deaf,so Esther was curious and asked him how he could perform as a music critic?He responded "I read what the other (out of town) music criticswrote and effectively wrote the same thing!"
Esther and I traveled to Grass Valley, California where Esther would participatein a concert with the Mid Peninsula Recorder Orchestra (MPRO). At dinner time weate at a nice local restaurant. When dinner was served, there was a vegetablethat neither of us had previously seen. Simultaneously, Esther and I wereinstantly transported by curiousity by this new vegetable (brocolli flower,also called).A few days later (in Palo Alto) while shopping, I saw this vegetable on sale ata local grocery store. I bought this vegetable to surprise Esther (anotherpleasant reminder of our Grass Valley experience). I presented this surprise toEsther, but Esther had also seen this vegetable and bought it to surprise me. Wesimultaneously presented our gifts to each other. We were both happy in sharingthe same interests and in caring for each other.
Esther told me a sad story. A Stanford scientist did research in theolder, more traditional areas of biology, specifically, the area thatincluded lizards such as the "Tiger lizard". As molecular biology wasthe favoured area of research, the scientist could not secure researchfunds, was barely secure in teaching at Stanford. This scientist, havingother family problems as well, eventually committed suicide. Shortlyafter, Stanford once again started to pay attention to the older, moretraditional areas of biology, but too late to help this scientist. As inall fields of study, there are fads, new areas of research dominate, onlyto eventually be replaced by yet another area of favoured research.
Esther's area started out in the more traditional areas of microbiologyand genetics, but also included molecular genetics. Soon, biology becametotally dominated by molecular genetics. When one considers epigenetics,retroviruses, prions, the interplay of DNA and RNA with proteins, etc. itmay soon be found that molecular genetics does not tell the entire story.Perhaps these older, more traditional areas of research that Esther workedin such as microbiology, will be found to be an area of research that canfill out missing scientific information? Esther would be pleased, I think,to see traditional areas of biology once again being studied, not just thebiochemistry of DNA, RNA and proteins.
See , at /
Frank Lloyd Wright's daring and revolutionary architecture was well-knownto be designed to fit in with its environment: a principle he oftenemphasized and took credit for. One might wonder, then, how the Arabianmotifs of the Wright-designed Marin County (California) Civic Center arosefrom its setting near San Francisco Bay? Did Wright really think thatCalifornia was attached to the Arabian Peninsula? When Esther visitedTaleisin, due to her renown, she was given the rare opportunity of visitingFrank Lloyd Wright's workshop area. Esther was interested in a building thatWright had been commissioned to provide for a client in Saudi Arabia. Later,when Wright's contract with the Saudis was cancelled, this same design suddenlyappeared in the California environment. Thus, while environment maintained ahigh priority for Wright, his love of his own designs was apparently of higherpriority than environmental considerations. Esther's photo slides include multiplephotos taken at Taleisin.
.
Why did Esther 'retire' and cease to do laboratory research? AlthoughEsther continued to work maintaining the Plasmid Reference Center (PRC)after she ceased to do laboratory research, the question remains, "Whydid Esther 'retire' and cease to do laboratory research?".
Esther never had tenure, and funding was an ever-present problem. It wasvery difficult to obtain lab assistants with an adequate education and adequatelab experience due to insufficient or precarious funding. When Esther found thather lab assistants were attempting to falsify experimental results, Esther hadto add "controls" to guard the "controls"! Esther felt that after a period oftime, she would not be able to trust any experimental results. Thus, due toinadequate funding, the time had come to end her experimental studies, and to"retire".
Click for more information.
Esther told me an interesting story about how she and her first husbandJoshua moved from Wisconsin to California to continue their research. Theentire lab at the University of Wisconsin, including many of their researchersmoved to California.
The University of California, Berkeley (UC-Berkeley), had offered a positionto do research: to head up the Department of Genetics. When Esther and Joshcame to the San Francisco area, prepared to move their lab to the Berkeleyarea, they were met with an unexpected situation. To save money, UC-Berkeleydecidednot to provide air-conditioning in the laboratory.Perhaps the University officials thought this a "personal" luxury? Of course,all the research materials requiring air-conditioning would be destroyed,lacking proper temperature controls. Once it became clear that UC-Berkeleywould not reverse its position, Esther and Josh immediately entered intodiscussions with Stanford University, pointing out (once again) the necessityto have air-conditioning. Of course, Stanford immediately offered laboratorieswith the necessary environmental controls to continue the research. Thus theresearch that Esther and Josh did that led to a Nobel Prize was associated withthe University of Wisconson and Stanford University rather than UC-Berkeley. .
Esther had an aspect that could be very humorous. Esther was explaining thatwhen she invented replica plating (which led to her discovery of transduction,with other researchers and Joshua helping too), the budget available was verylimited. With a few dollars, a hoop and a piece of sterilized velveteen provedadequate for replica plating. She noted that now, there are all sorts ofpatented machines that do no more than replica plating, some quite expensive(even thousands of dollars), but at their core are no more than her originalvelveteen replicator!
Esther had a wide and deep knowledge of literature. One important author ofinterest was Charles Dickens. At one time, Esther mentioned that "dancingmasters" taught dancing by playing a fiddle while simultaneously demonstratingthe steps. Later, I (also interested in Charles Dickens) realizedthat Esther knew that the dancing master used a ""(a special kind of fiddle).
See
"There can be no disparity in marriage like unsuitability of mind and purpose."
"David Copperfield", Chapter XLV, Charles Dickens
