Who “discovered” the double helix in DNA?  If your answer is Watson and/or Crick, you’re wrong, but that is the answer most people automatically think of.  Having read and reviewed James Watson’s work The Double Helix [1], it is worthwhile to examine the issue of Rosalind Franklin’s often neglected contributions to science here today, especially in light of a thoughtful examination of her place in the scientific world that recently appeared [2].

Let us provide some context.  In the 1950’s, scientific research was very much a boy’s club, even though women scientists had been important since at least the 17th century.  I only know this because it was my unfortunate curse to have to respond to a Document-Based Question on the subject of women scientists in the 17th and 18th centuries for my AP European History Exam when I was a high school student.  Nonetheless, given the lengthy existence of very clever (and often aristocratic) women in the fields of science and mathematics, it is striking that the walls of academia were not quick to break down to either accept women or their contributions to research until very recently.

Enter Rosalind Franklin, a Jewish woman of a fierce personality and a disinclination to politely accept the blinkered and troglodyte views of her times.  As a very competent woman in a very technical field, to say nothing of the lingering effects of anti-Semitism in addition to sexism in the scientific establishment of her time, she was definitely a fish out of water.  When some of her graduate students, without her permission, showed her results to a couple of other scientists (Watson and Crick), they saw the value of her work and quickly “discovered” the Double Helix, earning plaudits all around and then trying to bury her reputation in nasty ink, softening the words later on after her premature death and the public recognition (through the naming of prizes) of her work came to light and made her a more sympathetic figure.

Nonetheless, Rosalind Franklin deserves to be remembered as a reflection that those who seek to write honest histories and live honest lives must be aware that history’s heroes and heroines do not always come with the sorts of pedigrees and identities one would expect.  However, we should expect that just as our Creator gives His gifts widely and generously, that we should find worthwhile contributions from all kinds of people in all kinds of fields.  And, looking honestly at the historical record, we find precisely that.  It is our mental filters and personal biases that betray us into ignoring and neglecting the contributions of others–but that is a problem that can be overcome, as the objective evidence, such as is true for Rosalind Franklin’s important contributions to modern science, is still available for those who wish to examine it.

[1] See below review:

This book is an excellent demonstration of the nature of research, a task in which I have some personal experience. The book is a breathless and exciting account of the false steps, friendly atmosphere, and personal and professional rivalries that are involved in a scientific race that like won by Watson and Crick, which netted them a Nobel Prize for discovering the double helix form in which DNA exists. The work contains a lot of negative words about Rosalind Franklin, which are much softened in the epilogue. The end result is a fascinating account of real scientific research as it is actually done by flesh and blood (and very intelligent) human beings. As such, it is both educational, important, and an excellent read. Especially amusing are the comments about American culture, English food, and pretty girls.

[2] http://io9.com/?utm_source=io9+Newsletter&utm_campaign=86f9b18e38-UA-142218-29&utm_medium=email#!5761388/the-unsung-hero-who-discovered-the-double-helix