Last week marked the announcement of this year’s Nobel prizes in medicine, physics, chemistry, literature and peace.
For those who are not one of the Nobel hopefuls, the reaction to the annual announcements is usually one of apathy. Many have even criticized the prize committees for their policy of not awarding posthumous awards and for their seemingly arcane policy of limiting the award to three individuals in the era of large, collaboration-based lab science.
But beyond this apathy and criticism of a prize that is inherently flawed by human bias are many interesting life stories, promising innovations in science and technology and inspiring examples of political leadership and courage. Here is a rundown of this year's prizes and what you should know about them:
On Monday, the Nobel Prize in medicine was given to Robert Edwards, a British biologist, for his work on pioneering in-vitro fertilization. The first of eventually 4 million test tube babies conceived by IVF were born back in 1978 and are still alive today. The historical significance is most interesting: outcry by the Pope, scientists, and the general public kept the British government from funding this research, similar to the present regulatory chaos concerning embryonic stem cells in the United States.
On Tuesday, the British and Russian national teams celebrated when Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov won the Nobel Prize in physics for their work on graphene, a paper-thin material made out of carbon atoms whose magical electrical properties will undoubtedly lead to amazing gadgetry in the future. A little-known fact: graphene was never patented because Geim thought it would be a waste of taxpayers’ money.
On Wednesday, the Prize in chemistry was given to American Richard Heck and Japanese chemists Ei-ichi Negishi and Akira Suzuki for "palladium-catalyzed cross couplings in organic synthesis." Need I say more?
Thursday's Nobel Prize in literature was given to Peruvian Mario Vargas Llosa, who has produced a flood of novels, articles and essays in a variety of literary genres over his lifetime. He used his pen to sharply criticize and characterize the political atmosphere of Peru, encapsulated in his 1990 bid to become president of Peru. Llosa reminds us that writers and journalists can still affect change in the modern world. As an aside, the announcement of Llosa was the only one to bring an enthusiastic, cheering response by a crowd in Sweden.
Friday's Peace Prize to Chinese writer, human rights activist and dissident Liu Xiaobo stole the show with its controversy. Before the prize was announced, the Chinese foreign ministry warned the Norwegian Nobel Institute not to give the prize to Xiaobo, who is currently serving an 11-year sentence in a Chinese jail for subversion, in spite of over 100 Chinese scholars urging the committee to do so.
With the widespread Chinese censorship of the announcement, Xiaobo was able to communicate through his wife that he was dedicating the award to those who died in 1989 at Tiananmen Square. This year's Peace Prize, unlike the ridiculous award last year to President Obama or a few years ago to Al Gore, helps restore the legitimacy of the award in recognizing truly meaningful work and sacrifice. President Obama, put in between a rock and a hard place as he won last year's prize, and other world leaders also realize this and have called for an immediate release of Xiaobo.
Send nominees for next year to djgarry@asu.edu
