Let’s face it; scientists aren’t generally regarded as being funny. While I have met several very funny researchers during my almost 35 year career, the vast majority of my colleagues have been mostly serious and, at times, difficult to amuse; especially when things weren't going so well in the lab.
I consider myself to be a funny guy. And, hanging out and playing softball with Larry David, co-creator of Seinfeld and star of Curb Your Enthusiasm, for three years while a postdoc at Columbia Medical School convinced me that I have some talent. However, while I have often fantasized about a career in comedy, I never had the courage to turn in my lab coat and give it a try. The same can't be said about Tim Lee; a card-carrying PhD-trained biologist who after realizing laboratory research wasn’t for him decided to embark on a career as stand up comedian.
While Powerpoint presentations (modeled after scientific seminars) serve as the centerpieces of his stand up routines, Tim is also exploring other comedic vehicles to help him continue to make a living as a stand up comic. As he told BioCrowd co-founder Vincent Racaniello and I in a recent podcast that we did with Tim before a mid-week stand up gig in San Francisco, 'you gotta lead with your strengths."
Tim has been working as a comedian for the past seven years and, much to his surprise and pleasure, is "making more than he would have if he had chosen to do a postdoc after completing his PhD degree." Tim's star is rising and was recently featured in a New York Times article entitled “Did You Hear the One about the Former Scientist.”
Vincent and I had a wonderful discussion with Tim about his difficult decision to abandon science and what it feels like to embark on a new career (that you didn’t spend 10 years training for!) He still takes science seriously and frequently peruses journal articles and other scientific sources for material. And, for the record both Vincent and I thought Tim was pretty, pretty good (as Larry David would say) at what he does!.
To listen to the podcast and to see a video of one of Tim’s stand up routines visit BioCrowd!
Until next time...
Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (the comedy clubs can use a few more good scientists)
People frequently ask me why I decided to get a PhD degree to become a scientist. For the past 30 years, I have tried to explain to people why I decided to spend seven long years of “blood, sweat and tears” to attain that elusive degree. While anyone who has earned a PhD degree understands what drove them to do it, it is difficult to explain to others that the decision has little to do with career paths and salary considerations and is largely driven by passion— and perhaps more aptly—obsession. That is why Carole and Richard Rifkin’s film “Naturally Obsessed: The Making of Scientist”—an emotional and gritty film that follows the lives of three Columbia graduate students on their quest to obtaining their PhD degrees—is resonating with scientists, students and the public.
The film, which took five years to make and was launched in March 2009, follows the progress of three X-ray crystallography graduate students, Rob, Killington (Kil) and Gabrielle, who worked in Larry Shapiro’s laboratory at Columbia University Medical Center. Work in Larry’s laboratory focuses on elucidating the X-crystallographic structure of proteins that are thought to be involved in appetite control. While Rob, Kil and Gabrielle share a common goal—getting a PhD degree—they are very different people. Rob is a rebellious, boisterous, self-assured free thinker (who was thrown out of a previous laboratory) whereas Kil is a more staid, soft spoken pragmatist from the Midwest. Gabrielle, who returned to graduate school to pursue a PhD degree after a stint as a laboratory technician at a company, loves science but isn’t certain that she has the mettle to realize her dream. Each of them understands that time is of the essence and they work feverishly and unrelentingly to insure that their competitors don't beat them to the punch and publish first!
Despite their obvious personality differences, each is driven and obsessed with producing perfectly-formed protein crystals that are suitable for X-ray crystallography analysis. The film accurately and painstakingly depicts the inevitable emotional “ups and downs” of laboratory research, the personal struggles and the often difficult life decisions that are made when pursuing a PhD degree. In the end, Rob, Kil and Laura find their own career paths as scientists and perhaps, more importantly. come to terms with the decisions that they made during their journeys.
Carole, a documentary filmmaker, and Richard, Chairman Emeritus of the Sloan-Kettering Institute and founding Chairman of the New York Structural Biology Center, made the film to portray the “reality of doing science” and raise awareness about scientific research. The film emphasizes that science, like art, requires creativity, persistence and unyielding commitment and dedication. The Rifkinds interviewed many NYC-based academic laboratories before choosing Larry Shapiro’s laboratory as the subject of their documentary film. Larry’s laboratory was chosen because X-crystallography is visual (and lends itself to film making) and Carol had a hunch that “there was a story to be told there.”
During a recent interview with the Rifkinds, I mentioned that if I had seen the film as a high school or undergraduate student, I probably would have skipped graduate school. Carole responded and said, “Yes, the hard work and emotional challenges portrayed in the film might turn some students off but we wanted to portray scientific research the way it is and remain true to its realities.” She added, "while the film focuses on science graduate students it is also relevant and accurately reflects the trials and tribulations experienced by PhD students in the humanities and the arts.”
One of the more troubling moments of the film for me is when Larry mentions that scientists, like artists, “represent the fringe of society.” The fact that a prominent, successful scientist views himself as different, and on the fringes of society, doesn’t bode well for the public perception of science or scientists for that matter. Another troubling aspect of the film is that Rob, Kil and Gabrielle are clearly being groomed for academic careers despite the fact that roughly only 10% of life sciences PhDs secure academic positions at the end of their training. I pointed this out to Richard and he said that he agrees that it is a troubling trend and that “alternate career options for PhDs is the subject of Carole's and his next film.”
Since it launch in March, the film has been screened at over 60 high schools, colleges, medical schools, professional science associations, government agencies and biotechnology companies. While the film may not be “right” for everyone, it is a must see for graduate students and postdoctoral fellows and for members of the public who want a rare glimpse into the emotionally-charged and highly competitive world of scientific research. For those of you, who may be interested in arranging a screening, please visit the Naturally Obsessed: The Making of a Scientist website or contact Hayley
.jpg)
Let’s face it; scientists aren’t generally regarded as being funny. While I have met several very funny researchers during my almost 35 year career, the vast majority of my colleagues have been mostly serious and, at times, difficult to amuse; especially when things weren't going so well in the lab.
