Seven men from the University of Washington--four professors and threealumni--have won theNobel Prize. Bombardedby the media, showered with invitations and suddenly given thousands of dollarsin prize money, the time of the announcement is a heady experience. But wewondered what happened next. Do you live happily ever after, both personallyand professionally? Or should you be careful what you wish for, lest yourdreams come true?
Columns tracked down the half-dozen UW laureates still living to findout. Our four faculty members continue to live in Seattle: Physics ProfessorHans G. Dehmelt, who shared the 1989 prize in physics; Medicine andOncology Professor Emeritus E. Donnall Thomas, who shared the 1990 prize inmedicine for his work at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center; andPharmacology and Biochemistry Professor Emeritus Edwin G. Krebs andBiochemistry Professor Emeritus Edmond H. Fischer, who together shared the 1992in medicine.
Surprisingly, the two living alumni laureates live only a few miles apart inNorth Carolina: George H. Hitchings, `27, who shared the 1988 prize inmedicine; and Martin Rodbell, `54, who shared the 1994 prize in medicine. Ourfirst laureate, George J. Stigler, `31, who won the 1982 Nobel Prize ineconomics, died in 1991. [Editor's note: George H. Hitchings died onFebruary 27, 1998, just a few days after this issue was printed.]
Each laureate had a distinct story to tell about the heady moment in earlyOctober (usually in the wee hours) when they first heard they'd won. Some weresure the phone call was a practical joke.
Once convinced it wasn't a prank, they endured numerous media interviews andpress conferences leading up to the award ceremonies. Two months later, on Dec.10, the anniversary of Alfred Nobel's death, Sweden's king presented them withtheir award in Stockholm.
Common themes wove throughout their stories. All felt that the blessings of theprize outweighed the burdens of celebrity, such as requests for autographs.
Contrary to certain stereotypes, they didn't shift their research toward"riskier" directions after receiving the prize. "I used to think that if youwon the Nobel Prize, you should turn to the hardest problem of all: how peoplethink. But I've decided that's a bit arrogant," says Krebs. "Instead, ourresearch has continued to guide itself. As it reveals new things, and generatesmore questions than any one lab can work on, we choose which to follow."
Unlike some previous science laureates such as Linus Pauling and George Wald,UW prize-winners seemed wary of becoming public advocates for causes outsidetheir own research.
"There's a stupid misconception that you should know everything abouteverything, just because you won the Nobel Prize in a given discipline," saysFischer. "The missionary spirit is just not my style."
Still, several held (and occasionally expressed) strong opinions on socialconcerns, including population control, disarmament, and access to educationand health care. Some are members of organizations, includingPhysicians for Social Responsibility and theUnion of Concerned Scientists.
They were particularly bemused by continual demands to predict the future:"When they give you the Nobel Prize, they don't hand out a crystal ball to gowith it," says Thomas.
Common Experiences After the Award
George Hitchings, 1988 Prize in Medicine
Hans Dehmelt, 1989 Prize in Physics
E. Donnall Thomas, 1990 Prize in Medicine
Edwin Krebs, 1992 Prize in Medicine
Edmond Fischer, 1992 Prize in Medicine
Martin Rodbell, 1994 Prize in Medicine
Send a letter to the editor atcolumns@u.washington.edu.
