 |
 |
Notoriety - that's the bathetic bit. Key ingredient, I reckon. The teller should probably bowdlerize the tale, though - expurgate the scandal and leave his or her impressionable listeners to find those juicy bits out for themselves. Either that or include the fall from grace but - another key ingredient - do it sanctimoniously. The danger is that even a whiff of endorsement from a science proselyte for breaches of moral norms, like the one that says fraud is naughty, would make any sentient youngster suspicious. What I find sad about this thread is the notion that youngsters are not smart readers of texts, smart decoders of stories. They are. So story telling - the selling of science careers, in this case - has to be smart too if it's to stand a chance of being effective. (Not that I'm personally advocating the smart selling of science careers.) Hagiography - a sort of Butler's Lives of the Science Graduates - won't cut much ice. Chris > -----Original Message----- > On Behalf Of Sarah Purcell > > Though possibly he now falls under the "notorious" label? ********************************************************************** 1. To suspend yourself from the list, whilst on leave, for example, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the following message: set psci-com nomail 2. To resume email from the list, send the following message: set psci-com mail 3. To leave psci-com, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the message: leave psci-com 4. Further information about the psci-com discussion list, including list archive, can be found at the list web site: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/psci-com.html 5. The psci-com gateway to internet resources on science communication and science and society can be found at http://psci-com.org.uk **********************************************************************