I love RadioLab! Before I get into my reaction to this
particular edition I have to mention that I think this is one the coolest podcasts
out there. While studying cognitive science this past year in Budapest, I often
referred to and cited RadioLab broadcasts and the scientists/authors/awesome people
featured on the show. Jad Abumrad, Robert Krulwich, and the rest of the staff
at WNYC do a great job of balancing education, humor, and sentiment in there
shows. It is something I want to strive to emulate in my own reporting.
This edition of RadioLab was particularly enjoyable. As a
scientist/writer I always enjoy the creative ways in which people put difficult
or complicated scientific theories into fun, relatable stories that resonate
with a general audience. I think it is an important and rare talent to be able
to translate technical scientific data into something anyone and everyone can
understand. This episode about emergence struck me as particularly hopeful. The
stories about the ants and the fireflies were nice and engaging, but the part I
loved the most was near the end of the broadcast when the focused moved from
bugs to brains. Maybe it’s my sentimental side, but I think the way the
reporters talked about emergence in relation to the miracle of human cognition
as well as the greater power of us vs. the power of the individual, was
beautiful. When journalists, or anyone, can make cold, hard science beautiful
and human, it is bound to stick with you, and stories that stick with you (in
my opinion) are the best kinds of stories.
amen paul,
ReplyDeleteEmergence was a beautiful story that filled the listener with hope. It was hopeful, I think, because of the sweeping connections in made across scientific disciplines - the study of bees, brains, fireflies, ants, etc. - in order to establish the idea that there is something bigger (and smarter) than the self. This story relied on the factor of the unknown to keep the listener interested. The broadcasters continuously asked the listener the question: what does organize the disorganized? Without the presentation of one answer in the end, the program leaves the listener with all the facts, allowing the listener to make connections and draw his or her own conclusions. This makes the program almost interactive. It is a casual conversation about new scientific information. It leaves the listener room to dream up ideas on organization and the power of community. This engagement drives the piece and develops this sense of hope and faith in the listener. It's a beautiful thing and very well done.
I'm glad to hear we have another Radiolab fan in the class. I agree with you about humanization of hard science. When reading Writing for Story and working on CYOA, my project partner realized that radio lab episodes fit perfectly into Franklin's outline. They add humanity to science through the same formula for his successful dramatic non-fiction. Without these narrative arcs, Radiolab would just be another Science Friday, am I right?
ReplyDeleteI'm also interested what the sound design does for you. I think Radiolab feels inspiring because they are great sound designers that know what feels inspiring. I feel their transitions benefit the most from their sound design.