Royal Institute Christmas Lectures

Well this is one of the most bizarre conversations I’ve been involved with on GN and that’s saying something.

Thanks for the list MayBeMaw. Not sure what its for but two of the ones you mention were given by Laithwaite who I mentioned up thread and the planets one was Sagan’s. As far as I remember neither of those people felt the need to tear their shirts off in a cloud of smoke. Why do you feel it necessary to tell me that they weren’t dry and academic? That’s exactly what I’ve been saying in this thread. Are you vehemently agreeing with me?

Elegran, none of the Christmas Lectures were ever given in provincial cities, so I do wonder where you were.
I don’t know why you think that I think people need to be famous to give the lectures, that’s come out of your imagination, I’m afraid.

I’m getting told off for saying we shouldn’t patronise children or think they need gimmicks to interest them in science. I’m being told of for being patronising. Alice Through the Looking Glass right enough. Well I don’t think they need patronising; there are many wonders in science that were shown in the lectures before anyone decided the kiddies needed gimmicks to keep them interested. Maybe if we tried to show children what science was about and didn’t try to pretend it was all bangs and flashes then we’d have a better science sector in this country.

I might have copied and pasted rather more topics than speakers-Sagan was in 1977 and Laithwaite in 1974 so you are going back a bit.
But any educator knows that you have to engage your audience, catch their attention and pitch your delivery at the appropriate level.
I do not believe that any of these lectures patronises the audience or “dumbs down” (in the way I can find Lucy Worsley tends to when she is in dressing up mode)
You do not educate young people by reading a lecture, by bombarding them with dry facts, however erudite - in fact even at undergraduate level those days are happily gone.
So I would respectfully suggest since as by your own admission you do not know any young people, presumably have never taught them or been a part of their growing up, you are talking through your hat and by denigrating Sr JVT in the way you have, demonstrating a degree (see what I did there) of intellectual snobbery.

Alegrias1, As an immunologist who worked on antibody generation I think Van Tam is so far ( I have only watched the first one as yet) doing a grand job. He is not trying to explain everything himself but is bringing on experts in their fields to do so.

MayBeMaw - paragraphs 1,2, 3 and 4 - I know. That's what I've been saying throughout this thread. Why are you so vocal about something we agree on?

I have taught. Sciences. At Universities. I haven't been denigrating JVT, just saying I don't think he was the right choice for the gig. But you can insult me all you like, I won't be offended. Bemused, maybe.

garnet25

Alegrias1, As an immunologist who worked on antibody generation I think Van Tam is so far ( I have only watched the first one as yet) doing a grand job. He is not trying to explain everything himself but is bringing on experts in their fields to do so.

What did you think of him tearing his shirt off?

I can't understand why you're continuing to argue about this. The majority of us who have experience with children including some Grans with scientific and teaching backgrounds all think that JVT is an excellent communicator and a good choice for this lecture. We won't agree with you.

Fair enough.

A prophet is never appreciated in their own time.

(joke)

What do you think about the fact that people are arguing with me and insulting me for saying the exact same things that they are saying? Any thoughts on that?

The quote you are looking for is "A prophet is without honour in his own country"

The "provincial city" I attended these lectures in was Edinburgh - I can understand you not regarding Edinburgh as provincial (neither do I, but I daresay it was "in the sticks" as a venue) but it is a fact that the Christmas lectures were held there every year round about 1960. That must have been before the time of a young sprog like you. If you think this is a false memory, ask anyone in their 80s who studied here.

You taught science at University level? Not 11 year-olds?

I've taught 11 years olds and have, as a teaching consultant, watched teachers fail at their job by expecting children of that age to sit and listen to them talk at length and be shown the odd presentation or so. Science and maths were prime lessons where they failed to engage the children. It is well appreciated in teaching now, that children learn in different ways. Practical involvement is essential for many children at any age. Visual impact is part of this engagement too.

I consider the RI as experts in supporting children’s science education and the structure of the Lecture this year is evidence that they are continuing to adapt. As well as the Christmas Lectures, the RI also go into schools, work alongside and involve children and offer CPD for teachers with the sole aim of engaging children. They see the 11 - 17 years old daily and know how to engage them in their learning.

That should read - 11 year olds.

Elegran

The quote you are looking for is "A prophet is without honour in his own country"

The "provincial city" I attended these lectures in was Edinburgh - I can understand you not regarding Edinburgh as provincial (neither do I, but I daresay it was "in the sticks" as a venue) but it is a fact that the Christmas lectures were held there every year round about 1960. That must have been before the time of a young sprog like you. If you think this is a false memory, ask anyone in their 80s who studied here.

You taught science at University level? Not 11 year-olds?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Institution_Christmas_Lectures

The Royal Institution Christmas Lectures are a series of lectures on a single topic each, which have been held at the Royal Institution in London each year since 1825, missing 1939–1942 because of the Second World War.

Royal Society of Edinburgh Christmas lectures Elegran? Also for children.

I have found a slight adjutment to my memory. Sorry if I confused you, Alegrias. The lectures I went to were presented by the Royal Institution, but they were entitled "The Faraday Lectures" and were a roadshow which toured the country for several months. I remembered that Faraday's name was involved, but conflated these lectures with the Christmas ones.

The Usher Hall was the Edinburgh venue, and it was filled with secondary school children and such adults who were lucky enough to get tickets (a boyfriend at Kings Buildings was my source) One lecture began with the curtain being raised on an actual mining machine filling the whole stage on the Usher Hall, and being started up - these days they'd have to provide earplugs for all! Heaven knows how they toured that around the country.

There is a very interesting video (Edinburgh and the Usher Hall appear in it.) at www.theatrecrafts.com/pages/home/shows/faraday-lectures/ about the making of one of these Faraday Lectures, showing the planning and the discussions on content and style of presentation. I imagine much the same preparations are held before the televised Christmas Lectures.

They were lectures presented by the Royal Institution, for the same audiences and in the same style and spirit as the Christmas Lectures.

I wasn't confused Elegran. But thanks.

I'm sure that Carl Sagan and Eric Laithewaite would have been quite happy to tear their shirts off if they thought it would make a point. I will just repeat that, having been taken up tp London by coach for one of the lectures, I have no idea who we listened to or what the subject was. I think it must have been something to do with biology because I had probably dropped chemistry by then, but utterly unmemorable.

I'm sure that Carl Sagan and Eric Laithewaite would have been quite happy to tear their shirts off if they thought it would make a point.

I'm not. ?

Well don't!

Ah is this the problem?
A touch of the little green eye perhaps?
I checked Google Scholar. DH has been cited about twice as often as JVT, on different subjects, obviously. DH is at the top of his game
Not that you are biased………of course?
Well, I have finished watching the first one and really enjoyed it, also finding it informative as well entertaining. Fair enough my degree is an Arts one, but I am not a Science numpty and did not feel either patronised or humoured.
Excellent point in your post of 13.28 Aveline. BTW

“Whoosh bang” presentations have been used many times - Dawkins with his swinging, spiked cannonball, Morrison’s giant pencil and Attenborough with a veritable menagerie including a lion cub! Point to ponder, is Attenborough an eminent scientist at the pinnacle of his profession? A natural historian and national treasure yes, but I wouldn’t define him as a scientist. Wasn’t there also a chap who created artificial snow?

As the lectures are primarily aimed at young people, it might be interesting to ask them which style of presentation they prefer. If you knew any Alegrias, you might better appreciate the difference between them and university students

We don't like being disagreed with, do we?

Dawkins' original cannonball didn't have spikes but they were added in the later recreation for whoosh bang effect. Which kinda proves my point.

PamelaJ1

alegrias my mistake then.
I presumed over the years that as the audience at the Christmas Lectures were all young people it was directed at that age group..

PamelaJ1, you are right. they are particulrly aimed at young people, always were.
this from their website:

The CHRISTMAS LECTURES have been inspiring children and adults alike since 1825. The Lectures were initiated by Michael Faraday at a time when organised education for young people was scarce. He presented 19 series himself, establishing an exciting new way of presenting science to young people.

www.rigb.org/christmas-lectures/about

Alegrias1

We don't like being disagreed with, do we?

Dawkins' original cannonball didn't have spikes but they were added in the later recreation for whoosh bang effect. Which kinda proves my point.

It doesn’t prove anything

No, of course not. ?

I have to say I never expected this thread to develop into such a heated discussion/debate/argument - call it what you will. I take the point that many in the past were more 'high brow' but I believe this year's choice of topic was vital for the education of the youngest generation about viruses and what we can do to survive them. Viruses aren't going away as one of the presenters pointed out. They are programmed to find a host and humans present a convenient one. I also believe this one is not done with us yet. If we are lucky we will stay a step ahead of it but, if a more dangerous one comes along, it really does become the survival of the fittest. Let's face it, each and every one of us alive today is here because our ancestors were the fittest, were the ones who survived and passed on to us the gene mutations to enable us to fight off past diseases. Some experts believe that something like the melting of the ice may throw up diseases from the past long since gone and to which we no longer have immunity. The world is a much smaller place than it was in the past when the population was smaller, moved about less, was capable of closing off villages and towns. Now we hear about incidents in a nanosecond but not fast enough to prevent the first spread because of faster travel and greater mixing.
I still think the lectures did what they set out to do, which was to educate the young and put to rest some of the inaccurate information out there. I liked that they showed how vaccines had got rid of, or contained, other viruses like smallpox and measles. I also liked that JVT had a good spread of both male and female experts and that he gave them all their status. I remember him introducing one of the female professors as the world expert in this field. There was also a good range of diversity. As for their delivery, they are probably more used to interacting with like minded adults and in fields where the 'all singing, all dancing' act is irrelevant. What I saw though was an engaged audience of young people who were hungry to know more about this topic and how they can survive the virus and I think they were sent away much better and more accurately informed.
I would like to thank you all for your contributions, even if it did become very heated. That is, after all, the cut and thrust of discussion and debate.

I was aware that there were two cannonballs alegrias, but thank you for bringing it to the attention of others. In the interest of brevity I did not feel it necessary to list every “whoosh bang” lecture,