Many of us probably believe that participatory media is something new. But in the newly published History of Participatory Media: Politics and Publics, 1750–2000 (edited by Anders Ekström, Solveig Jülich, Frans Lundgren, and Per Wisselgren, Routledge, 2010) it is argued that “scholarly discussions on participatory media … are all too often obscured by a rhetoric of newness, assuming that participatory media is something unique in history, radical and  revolutionary”. See more here.

The new thing in canned meat is unicorn:

(from Aman Agah at Street Anatomy)

Maybe the next thing is stem cell relish.

We were so pleased to hear, a couple of days ago, that our own Jesper V. Kragh has just secured a two year external research grant for his project “The History of Drug Abuse in Denmark, 1870-1955” from the Danish Research Council for Culture and Communication.

Jesper distinguishes two different narratives about drug abuse. One is the well known story about psychotropic drugs being introduced in the late 1960s, “when groups of counterculture rebels began experimenting with heroin and other narcotics, but this experimental and recreational use of drugs turned into a social problem which still persists today”. Most drug abusers suffer from a lack of education, and are unemployed and homeless.

But, reminds Jesper us about, there is another, and more interesting narrative, which is unfamiliar to most people today, at least in Denmark (the British, of course, have the story about Sherlock Holmes as a reminder). Drug abuse was a problem already in the 1870s, when the use of morphine and other opiates became a problem for certain groups of Danes. But these people almost exclusively came from the upper or well educated middle classs.

So far, there has been no study of Danish history of drug abuse in the period from the late nineteenth century to the 1950s. In addition to exploring this unknown history of drug addiction, Jesper also wants to focus on aspects of drug abuse that have received only scant attention in the international historiography of addiction, viz., the psychiatric treatment. In doing this Jesper will draw on his extensive experience in using psychiatric hospital records as a major source.

So look out for publications from Jesper’s keyboard in the next couple of years — and maybe some intermittent blog posts as well.

Last winter, I was invited to contribute to a thematic issue (edited by Oren Harman) on scientific biography for the Journal of the History of Biology. 

I decided to revisit and revise a genre analysis I had written a couple of years earlier and the result is an article titled ‘The Seven Sisters: Subgenres of bioi of contemporary life scientists’. A draft manuscript was submitted for peer review in the early spring, and the final version by the end of May. Now, the last corrections have been made and it will hopefully appear in the winter 2011 issue. Here’s the abstract:

Today, scientific biography is primarily thought of as a way of writing contextual history of science. But the genre has other functions as well. This article discusses seven kinds of ideal-typical subgenres of scientific biography. In addition to its mainstream function as an ancilla historiae, it is also frequently used to enrich the understanding of the individual construction of scientific knowledge, to promote the public engagement with science, and as a substitute for belles-lettres. Currently less acknowledged kinds of scientific biography include its use as a medium for public and private, respectively, commemoration. Finally, the use of scientific biography as a research (virtue) ethical genre, providing examples of ‘the good life in science’, is emphasized.

It would actually be fun to make a similar analysis of more recent biographical and autobiographical texts by life scientists published on the web.

On Thursday 2 December, a new Centre for Medical Science and Technology Studies at the University of Copenhagen is inaugurated with talks by Sarah Franklin and Ken Arnold.

Sarah Franklin will speak about “Life After the In Vitro Fertilisation: Biology Has Become a Technology?”. Sarah Franklin is well-known for his studies of in vitro fertilisation, cloning, embryo research and stem cell research. Her latest book is about the cloned sheep, Dolly. Since 2004 she has been a professor at the London School of Economics, where she has led the BIOS Centre together with Nicholas Rose.

Ken Arnold, who will speak about “Art and Communication of Medical Science”, is Head of Public Programmes at the Wellcome Trust, where, among others things, he has been responsible for the Trust’s collaborative projects between scientists and artists. He is primarily known as the initiator of and creative director of the Wellcome Collection, which is one of the world’s most successful arenas for biomedical science communication. In 2010-2013, Ken Arnold is visiting professor at Medical Museion, where he will contribute to the museum’s efforts to build an integrated research and public engagement programme for medical science and technology.

The Centre is a collaboration between Medical Museion and the Section for Health Services Research at the Faculty of Health Sciences’ Department of Public Health. The faculty of the new Centre includes Lene Koch (head of center), Thomas Söderqvist, Signild Vallgårda, Mette Nordahl Svendsen, Klaus Høyer, Jan Kyrre Berg Friis, Henriette Langstrup, Annegrete Juul and Adam Bencard. About ten postdoc’s and PhD students are currently attached to the Centre..

The Centre is co-operating closely with the new PhD-program for Medical Science and Technology Studies at the Faculty of Health Sciences, led by Thomas Söderqvist.

The opening takes place in Medical Museion’s Anatomical Theatre on Thursday 2 December at 3pm. After the talks there will be a wine and sandwich reception.

Torsdag den 2. december, kl. 15:00 er alle interesserede velkommen til åbningen af det nydannede Centre for Medical Science and Technology Studies. Det foregår i auditoret på Medicinsk Museion, Bredgade 62.

Først taler Sarah Franklin om “Life After In Vitro Fertilisation: Has Biology Become a Technology?”. Sarah Franklin er en af verdens førende forskere inden for videnskabs- og teknologistudier. Hun er især kendt for sine banebrydende studier af reagensglasmetoden (IVF), kloning, embryonforskning og stamcelleforskning. Hendes seneste bog handler om det klonede får, Dolly. Hun er en skarp analytiker, som kombinerer STS med antropologi, kønsforskning og kulturstudier. Hun har siden 2004 været professor på London School of Economics, hvor hun sammen med Nikolas Rose har ledet STS – centret BIOS.

Derefter taler Ken Arnold om “Art and Communication of Medical Science”. Ken Arnold er Head of Public Programmes ved Wellcome Trust, hvor han bl.a. har været ansvarlig for fondens store satsning på samarbejdsprojekter mellem forskere og kunstnere. Han er primært kendt som initiativtager til og kreativ leder af Wellcome Collection, som i løbet af få år er blevet én af verdens mest omtalte offentlige arenaer for biomedicinsk forskningskommunikation. I 2010-2013 er han visiting professor ved Medicinsk Museion for at bidrage til arbejdet med at opbygge et forsknings- og praksisprogram for’public engagement with medical science and technology’.

Centret, der markerer en ny satsning indenfor medicinsk STS, består blandt andet af professor Lene Koch (leder), professor Thomas Söderqvist, professor Signild Vallgårda, lektor Mette Nordahl Svendsen, lektor Klaus Høyer, adjunkt Jan Kyrre Berg Friis, adjunkt Henriette Langstrup, adjunkt Annegrete Juul, samt en række postdoc’s og ph.d.-studerende. Centret glæder sig til at tilbyde valgfagskurser til studerende og seminarer til det danske STS-miljø og indgår i et tæt samarbejde med det nyetablerede forskeruddannelsesprogram for Medical Science and Technology Studies ved Det Sundhedsvidenskabelige Fakultet.

Jeg har lige sendt penge til Wikipedia igen her i november. Den her gang fik de 5% af min månedsløn, hvilket gjorde lidt ondt lige da jeg klikkede på ‘betal’, men som jeg alligevel ikke kan lade være med.

Jeg ved flere som heller ikke kan lade være, og jeg synes endnu flere skulle gøre det. Fordi næsten alle jeg kender bruger Wikipedia. Mange, som jeg, bruger den hver dag, simpelthen fordi den er uundværlig hvis man vil vide noget (det gælder ihvertfald den engelske Wikipedia, de tilsvarende danske og svenske ligger desværre langt bagefter, hvilket ikke er så mærkeligt, antallet af bidragsydere taget i betragtning).

Det er ikke alle som ved at Wikipedia lever af private donationer. Så hvis du vil holde Wikipedia levende, vent inte på at Bill Gates måske en gang i fremtiden sender dem et par miljarder. Det er en form for frivillig brugerbetaling. Hvis Wikipedia bliver nødt til at holde op pga mangel på penge så ville det være et tragisk eksempel på Hardin’s begreb “the tragedy of the commons” (som man kan læse mere om på Wikipedia her).

In case you have forgotten where to find Medical Museion on the (social) web:

• Biomedicine on Display: www.corporeality.net/museion

• Museionblog: www.museionblog.dk (in Danish)

• Facebook: www.facebook.com/medicalmuseion

• Twitter: www.twitter.com/medicalmuseion

• Youtube: www.youtube.com/user/medicalmuseion

• Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/53284874@N02/

• and, of course, our traditional home page: www.museion.ku.dk

God iagttagelse af Claus forleden dag — hovedet på sømmet!

Penge og ord – den entreprenante refleks
Jeg har iagttaget en ny rygmarvsreaktion: At forskere, som allerede står på universiteternes lønningsliste, straks, når de får ideer til at samarbejde om nye projekter, pr. automatik tænker dem som større ansøgninger til en forskningsfond eller et forskningsråd, der skal argumenteres og begrundes og kæmpes igennem før samarbejdet kan starte. Forskningssamarbejder fødes på dagens entreprenante universitet som idé-kasteller i stål og glas, fuldbragte med særlige advisory boards og andre udenomsværker, og gerne horder af tekniske eller videnskabelige assistenter, der må søges om ekstra penge til. – Okay, man kan da være nødt til at sikre midler til afholdelse af konferencer eller nyt instrumentel i laboratoriet. Påstanden her er blot, at det er blevet til en refleks helt fra starten at tænke forskningssamarbejder som organisatoriske monstre, der kræver uanede mængder af nye penge og ord. Hvorfor ikke bare begynde med at gøre arbejdet?

Claus har ret, i dag tænker flere og flere på denne entreprenante måde. Jeg må indrømme at jeg føler mig en smule ramt. Jeg tænkte slet ikke på den måde for ti år siden. Det er virkelig blevet en rygmarvsrefleks.

Syntetisk biologi er ikke nogen stor grej idag. Men der er meget hype omkring hvordan den her form for biologisk ingenjørkunst vil kunne forændre vores fremtid som mennesker, med organreservedele og det hele. Så som museum må vi være opmærksom på hvordan vi skal forholde os til indsamling af genstande fra denne tidlige fase af den syntetiske biologi. Den som vil vide mere om udviklingen inden for området kan komme til et seminar med Mark Bedau med titlen “Living technology” på torsdag i næste uge (den 11. november), kl. 14-15. Det sker i regi af vores nye Centre for Medical Science and Technology Studies, og det foregår på CSS (det gamle Kommunehospital), Øster Farimagsgade 5, rum 10.0.11.