What will Henry Gee make of this one?
Not-so-cultish sci-fi show Dr Who will feature an unlikely co-star later this year—Richard Dawkins.
According to the Independent, the evolutionary biologist and godhead of atheism will play himself in an upcoming episode.
Dawkins already has intimate ties to the timelord—his wife Lalla Ward starred opposite former Doc Tom Baker in the 1970s as Romana. Dawkins was also a close friend of Douglas Adams, who occasionally wrote for the show.
I don’t know what Hanry Gee will think. As for me – well, it’ll be like “George Galloway”: http://www.georgegalloway.com/appearing on Big Brother. The Dickie D will lose whatever remaining shreds of credibility he still has, and disappear from the public consciousness faster than a buttered ferret up a Teflon trouserleg. To paraphrase what one of Galloway’s critics said at the time, Dawkins is a C-list scientist with an A-list ego.
D’oh, sorry Hunry.
That’s OK, Mutt.
Up? Wouldn’t that actually not be very fast, but would involve a lot of frantic clawing and flying fur? Hmm, that might still be rather close to the truth.
Well, I guess it could be ‘down’, but that would remove the frisson created by the anticipation of genital mutilation.
Well that’s all very well for a Jew to say.
I don’t read above any actual reason why it is so bad for a scientist (or anyone) to appear as themself in a TV show. It has been done before, surely.
Is it just because it is Richard Dawkins?
I’d like to know some “non-recreationally outraged” reasons why this is considered such a bad thing. I can’t immediately think of any reason why. (There are plenty of people around with egos – they may be irritating but this fact alone doesn’t remove their credibility, does it?)
Look, I really dislike Dawkins, for many perfectly sound reasons which I won’t go into here, and there’s nothing recreational about it. The fact that he is appearing in one of my favorite TV shows saddens me, as it seems that one can’t get away from this man. The effect of his being on Dr Who, apart from spoiling my Saturday evening, will puff up his bloated public profile even more. And as for credibility—Dawkins is meant to be a scientist. But when did he last do any actual science? I can’t find anything later than the mid-1980s. His claim to fame now rests on writing a tract that many people outside the hothouse world of the media chatterati (and therefore people whom the media chatterati affect to ignore) find ill-researched and unscientific, and which, because of Dawkins’ position as licenced communicator of science, does science no credit whatsoever. As for a bris? For me, at least, that’ll be payback for his position on Israel, and his strange remarks about Jews, which from my perspective are only half a step away from ancient conspiracy theories which despite being long discredited still find currency in some circles. Well, perhaps the man deserves it. Without anaesthetic. By a ferret.
I’m no fan of the D man (as he is known in the hood), but I’m with Maxine a bit. After all, Stephen Hawking made an appearance in STTNG - so I’m not particularly anti because it degrades him as a scientist.
However, what I do think is odd is that he should be considered a celebrity. The rest of my family would rightly say Richard Who? (Doctor’s brother.) And I’m also worried, should he be allowed to use the platform to do his militant atheist bit, just as I wouldn’t expect them to give Rowan Williams (Rowan Who? (etc.)) a chance to do a quick sermon. But then, of course, Rowan Williams is a celebrity. Wasn’t he in Blackadder?
I thought it was Robbie Williams who was in Blackadder.
so I’m not particularly anti because it degrades him as a scientist
But that’s my point. Dickie D is no longer a scientist, so he shouldn’t really be portrayed as such – he can be degraded no further. And if he’s presented as a militant atheist? Well, I can only hope that he’ll be run over by a Dalek.
After last week’s episode which features tiny white blobs from Homepride bread adverts, my daughters and I came up for a Dr Who scenario in which the world would be invaded by alins disguised as Teletubbies.
Teletubbies, Teletubbies, Teletubbies, say …
[gun ports open up in Teletubby midsections]
EXTERMINATE !!!
On a completely unrelated Forum, a MND patient placed a link to this YouTube clip of Prof Hawkins on Star Trek.
Prof Hawkins – is that Hawking or Dawkins, or some unholy hybrid of the two?
As a mid-bell curve postdoc, I often wonder why and when one can consider themself a scientist. Degree? Post-doc? Fellow? Prinicipal Investigator? Tenure? Head of Department? Nobel Prize Winner? Whether or not one likes Dawkins (and I do understand those arguments), I think he has certainly earnt the right to be termed a scientist, regardless of whether he now actually does any (and doing it is not his chair). But hey, I’m a lab-rat who kills cells for a living. (What am I?)
Hunry,
Sounds like the work of The Borg…
I think you can call yoruself a scientist if you are doing science and getting paid for it. If you are doing science and not getting paid for it you are an amateur scientist. If you are not doing science, then you aren’t a scientist. People sometimes refer to me as a palaeontologist, and this makes me squirm because I haven’t actually been one for more than 20 years. I edit palaeontology manuscripts, and I write about fossils – but that makes me an editor or a writer, not a palaeontologist. If I had to guess at the occupation of Dickie D, I’d say he was an author. But no he’s morphing into a ‘celebrity’ – someone who is famous for being famous. It’s nice that people from science backgrounds get into that position, but it would be better if they did it for legitimate reasons i.e. the science.
Henry – that Dickie D (probably inspired by the dreaded rapping animation) made me think of the D man singing (to the tune of Sandra D from Grease): ‘Look at me, I’m Dickie D. Lousy with celebrity…’
Brian – you have missed your metier. Vicious satire beckons…
John Maddox, Emeritus Editor of Nature, and held by me (and I hope, Henry) in great esteem, referred to himself and his colleagues as “camp followers of science”.
I have yet to read any statement here that persuades me that Richard Dawkins is wrong to appear in Dr Who and/or demeans science in so doing.
Maybe he’ll even glamourise it.
Either way, there is no harm in it. Lighten up, guys. There is always the off button. And, anything is prefereable to Andrew Lloyd Bank who is on afterwards in “any nightmare will do so long as it makes me lots of galactic sponduliks” (one of my daughters watches him: cue for me to leave the room).
Maxine – perhaps you meant ‘camp-followers of science’? That hyphen is all important. I don’t mind being a camp follower, though. It’s the feathers that give the game away. And the sequins. And I agree about Andrew Llotsa-Moolah, and that Kevin Spacey’s comments on same are entirely justified. Shame on the BBC.
Henry, would ‘camp followers’ have use of a mincing attachment , do you think?
Only if they have to dispose of recently impaled kittens. The dog has to be fed somehow.
Maxine – I would agree about Andrew L-W, only it’s worth watching for the pained expressions he pulls during the singing.
Actually it must be REALLY irritating if you’re a West End professional and people keep getting these top jobs through a poxy amateur show. I have to confess to feeling a teeny bit similar about Science Idol, or whatever it’s called – that competition to give new science presenters more exposure. Wot about the workers, I say.
Yes, Andrew Llotsa-Wonga’s expressions are classic. But as for ‘amateur’ – there’ been some controversy, I believe, that a couple of the contestants are, in fact, professionals…
I was too scared to put in the hyphen because of all this strike-out thingy. But I shall be brave, rather than limp(hyphen)wristed, in future.
I believe they always have at least one “sleeping professional” in these Andrew Lloyd Bank shows, who gets the job if none of the amateurs is deemed to cut it. I wonder if this approach would translate into Science Idol, Brian (sorry, I have no clue what it is, but I vote for Gandalf).