Study: An Open Letter to C.P. Snow About “The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution”

Text © Robert Barry Francos / FFanzeen, 2023
Images from the Internet

This is a paper I presented for my Master’s in Media Ecology at New York University, for the class Communications Revolution and Culture in America II, led by Neil Postman and assisted by Janet Sternberg. The footnotes will be in brackets where applicable. Information about CP Snow and his treatise can be found HERE, thanks to Wikipedia. 

An Open Letter to C.P. Snow About The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution

“Closing the gap between our cultures is necessary in the most abstract intellectual sense, as well as in the most practical.” – C.P. Snow, The Two Cultures

Mr. Snow:

Having read your 1959 Rede lecture, I would like to share some of my thoughts on your theory of the existence of two distinct cultures among scholars and examine how that theory relates to the present time [1990s].

I acknowledge the fact that your lecture presented a viewpoint regarding the intellectual community of England at the time. I will explore your ideas in relation to the contemporary American intelligentsia.

You state that you believe the “intellectual life of … Western society … is split into two polar groups” [C.P. Snow (1959). The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press; p. 3], with one pole representing scientists (i.e., physical) and those in literary studies at the other [Ibid., p. 4]. You add that not only are these groups polarized, but “the separation between scientists and non-scientists is much less bridgeable among the young than even thirty years ago” [Ibid., p. 17]. Although that may have ben the situation in the United Kingdom up to the late 1950s, it appears to have become less true over the years in the United States.

You posit that the separation between science and literary studies, which arises in part through education, is less severe in the States [Ibid., pp. 16-17], and that the American system in “hoping to take the problems in hand within 10 years” [Ibid., p. 18]. This trend in American education in the late 1950s may explain the reduced polarity of these two intellectual changes within the American scientific and literary cultures, as I will discuss below.

Your belief that the “industrial society of electronics, atomic energy, automation … will change the world much more” [Ibid., p. 18], appears to have been prophetic. Due in part to an occurrence that seems to be a by-product of the atomic age, one outgrowth that I believe has helped fade the self-imposed line of segregation between science and literature is a genre of publication known as science fiction.

As the power, possibilities, and potential harm of the atomic age have become known over the decades following the end of World War II, the imagination of both scientists and non-scientists alike have been captured by the phenomenon of fission. Writers such as Arthur Clarke and Theodore Sturgeon turn to science for their source of inspiration and use technical scientific information and phraseology to help spread this technological information to both poles. Despite the definite “pop culture” of the genre, scientists were intrigued by the information and the forum in which it was presented, and the literary community learned the metaphors and processes of the scientific rationale. The scientist was also exposed to a form of writing that was fictional, yet presented a literary world with which they could make some association.

One of the leaders of the field of science fiction, for example, was Isaac Asimov. As you point out yourself [Ibid., p. 1], Asimov was trained in both the scientific and literary realms, capable of moving freely between the two. He wrote fiction and nonfiction, and analyses of both science (i.e., physical and social) and classic fiction (e.g., Shakespeare) – as well as writing original fiction. With credibility in both cultures, he could be a bridge that was needed to reach both shores.

As this fiction began to be accepted by both cultures, the influence became as a pebble in a pond, rippling outward and affecting society as a whole, thereby connecting the cultures on some levels.

In the early 1960s, the space program captured the imagination of both poles in America. This science fiction-made-real had both non-scientists and scientists alike observing the technological advancement, helping to further disseminate technological language to the lay scientist and literary audience.

Through the late 1960s, collegiate curriculum underwent a drastic change. Previously, educational systems in the United Kingdom had “set ourselves the task of producing a tiny elite … educated in one academic skill” [Ibid, p. 19]. This was also true for the United States. As riots over the Vietnam War and the narrow choice of subjects allowed in core programs exploded on campus after campus in America, the narrow views presented to the students were broken down, and the choice of topics available became more flexible. This situation helped open a door to educational elasticity.

With this opening up within some of the divisions of culture, each of these previously polarized groups began taking ventures into the other’s area of expertise.

Social scientists were among the first to venture out by publishing mostly nonfictional works that were read by both cultures, including Alvin Toffler’s Future Shock (1970) and Neil Postman’s Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business (1985). The physical scientists tended to write more fiction, such as physician Robin Cook’s Coma (1977) and scientist Michael Crichton's The Andromeda Strain (1969). All these excursions were being accepted and read by both sides of the intelligentsia.

It does appear that even at present, literary-based thinkers still use science fiction as an outlet for technological meanderings. A reason for this occurrence may be referenced to the comment in which you suggest that you believe writers must learn and develop their craft, whereas scientific learning is more innate, coming naturally [Ibid., pp. 10-11].

A further step along the path of joining the two intellectual cultures you posit in Western society has been the spread of the global-village mentality. As non-Western cultures influence the West, they bring other philosophies and ways of study with them, sometimes subtly changing the overall method a society uses to view itself and others, thus generating new ideologies. Innovative ideas have merged into the Western mindset, helping to further melt the barriers that were once a solid element in the West.

Therefore, I believe that in the United States, whereas there may be some separation between the cultures of the intellectual communities, the black and white borders you fear becoming further stratified have changed and continue to gray under the very Second Law of Thermodynamics, with which you referred [Ibid., p. 15].

C.P. Snow's full lecture in PDF form can be found HERE

Twelfth MEA Convention, University of Alberta, Edmonton, June 23-26, 2011

Text and photos © Robert Francos
Click on links for many additional photos

One of the highlights of every summer for is getting to go to the Media Ecology Association Convention. While the organization is based in New York, the conferences have brought me to Mexico City, Boston, Saint Louis, Long Island, and Santa Clara (California), for example.

Last year, for the first time, I missed my first one, held in Maine, because I had immigrated to Canada, and had not yet received permission to crisscross the border. This year, however, it was held just a six hour drive away, at the University of Alberta, from June 23 to 26, 2011.

I have been involved with Media Ecology since starting the graduate program at New York University’s School of Education, in 1991, under the direction of Dr. Neil Postman. Quite quickly, I became both the department’s - and now the Association’s - unofficial official photographer (but not the only one; over the last few years, Octavio Islas, of Technologico de Monterrey, has also done an outstanding job).

The Media Ecology Association group of cross-disciplinary academics and like-minded people gather literally from all over the world, and when we all get together, it’s sort of like Thanksgiving. Yes, there are occasionally squabbles here and there, but it really is one big, ever-growing family.

As in St. Louis where we honored Fr. Walter Ong, who had taught there, this year we were in the birthplace of Herbert Marshall McLuhan for the centennial of his birth (a few days past the convention). For that reason, the name and theme of the convention was Space, Place, and the McLuhan Legacy.

Usually there are two choices for accommodations: the local hotel a bit further away, and the Spartan dorm rooms on-campus. I always go for the dorms, because, well, the price difference is a deal-breaker. This time, the hotel was directly across the street from the campus’ TELUS Centre where the convention was being held, and the dorms were a few blocks away. But it’s summer, so who cares. I had arrived with a friend and neighbor, soundscape artist Ellen Moffat (she presented on Saturday) on Wednesday evening, the night before the conference. We checked in and dropped off our stuff in our respective rooms and we headed over to Earls Restaurant, across from the where conference would be held (always good to learn the way there before, so you don’t get lost and miss any sessions). There we ran into a few MEA conventioneers that I knew, including James Morrison and one of the organizers, Catherine Adams. Their table was full, so we had dinner on our own. Scattered around were others I figured may be kindred spirits, but was unsure.

Below are some links to many photos of each day’s conference. Preceding each link are very brief thoughts and descriptions of the event. If there are any photos of which you would like hi-rez versions, please let me know at rbf55@msn.com; likewise, if there is an image of yourself here that you want taken off, also inform me.


Day 1: Thursday, June 23, 2011

The day started off sluggish. As always, I arrived bright and early (seems about a half hour too early; I mis-remembered the time, probably in anticipation). They were still getting the registration table organized, and breakfast (muffins, pastry, coffee and tea) was only just arriving, ready to be set up.

Sometimes one of the joys of arriving early, especially the first day, is to see who are among the first comers. In this case, it was Robert Logan, of the University of Toronto (he worked with McLuhan). When he saw breakfast wasn’t ready, off he went to the Mac’s (the Canadian equivalent of 7-11) across the street and bought a container of OJ. He sat outside on the curb drinking it, while waiting for everything to open. I do admire him for that.

Slowly, people started to wander in as the time approached, including many people I was happy to see again. Thursday tends to be the second less-attended day, but this year even that day had a nice presence.

Some of the sessions I attended were titled “Gaming, Storytelling and Environments,” “Media Literacy,” one panel titled “Illusionary Freedom: False promises of cyberspace,” and another called “Is Google Making Us Stupid?: Reflections on digital technology and cognition.”

A highlight of the day took place in the afternoon where a group of us rode the subway and bus to the Highland area of Edmonton, and had a too-short walking tour (necessarily, though) of the neighborhood, including the homes of the original designers of the vicinity.

Of course, the whole point of this was that we visited the childhood home of Marshall McLuhan (where he lived in his pre-teen years). The woman who now owns the modest home did not know its historical significance when she purchased it, but over the years, she has become a wonderful tour guide, explaining what small parts of the house are still like it was when the McLuhan’s inhabited the space (such as a living room glass light fixture). What was his bedroom is now a bathroom. We later learned that the city is going to buy the house and restore it to as it was when he lived there. I’m sure the neighbors are delighted.

The woman who led the neighborhood tour is a volunteer, and is quite enthused (and knowledgeable). She was perky and a joy to listen to as she told tales, holding up a British-flag umbrella for us to follow.

We all rushed off to find out we had just missed the bus to the university’s downtown campus at Enterprise Square, and had a 20-minute wait. It was hot and we were all soaking from the walk and standing in the sun; of course, the bus was also a bit late. Finally, the bus came and met the rest of the group in a classroom. There we heard a talk by the same Robert Logan on “McLuhan Misunderstood: Setting the record straight.” There was a nice debate going for a while about McLuhan’s importance in the present.

By the end of the session, everyone was hungry, so we headed to the next event, which was a gallery opening for a show called Spaces&Places:VisioningMcLuhan@100. It was a public opening, and the place was packed. The hors d’ouevres were gone to the crowd by the time I got to the table, and I wasn’t interested in the cash bar.

Ellen Moffat was a like-minded soul in search of food, so we decided to find some place to sit down and have an actual meal in relative quiet. We hooked up with two students from Wheaton College named Ruth and Ben, and we searched high and low for an affordable restaurant. We ended up at a Boston Pizza; we chowed down and had some nice conversations. After, we took the train back to the campus, and got there just before a big rainfall, ready for sleep and the next day.

Day 1 Photos: news.webshots.com/album/580709042lbeeAW?vhost=news


Day 2: Friday, June 24, 2011

As the day started, it was pretty obvious I was having problems with my camera. It kept turning itself off and then on again. So I would turn it on (whirrrr) and couple of second it went off (whirrrr), then on (whirrrr), then off (whirrrr). Sometimes it would do this a dozen times or more, or it would wait until I lifted the camera to my eye, and then turn itself off and on. Very annoying to me, and I’m pretty sure many around me as they had to listen to that distracting noise in a relatively quiet classroom. And I can imagine what the speakers thought of it, especially since I was sitting close to get an unobstructed view (also helps to get a full view of the room the end when I turn around during questions).

The booths that were set up in the lobby were full of interesting books (we were all given a copy of an odd and fascinating 2011 biography of McLuhan by Douglas Coupland, a $26.00 value. Also there was a representative of – and samples by – Intellect Publishing House, who will now be printing the MEA Journal Explorations in Media Ecology (aka EME). Another table was for a kindred organization with close ties, the Institute of General Semantics, including Jackie Rudig and Martin Levinson, two machers of the organization whom I like dearly.

The second day was mostly filled with plenary presentations, such as Douglas Barbour, Elena Lambert and Robert Shields discussing “McLuhan and Artistic Vision in the Wireless City,” Josh Meyrowitz (who wrote the seminal book No Sense of Place on “Media Ecology and the Future of Theory,” and my ex-professor from Queens College, Gary Gumpert, on “Repetitio ad infinitum: From print to sprawl.” The two non-plenary sessions I attended was a panel on “Mobilizing the City as a Classroom: Locative and mobile media for community engagement,” and a talk by ex-MEA president Lance Strate, who discussed “On the Binding Biases of Time.”

Once again, we all gathered en masse and took the subway downtown to the Westin Hotel on 100 Street, as it was there an MEA banquet was held. The food was incredible (I had the salmon), and the company at our round table (among many) of about 10 was interesting. During the meal, Janet Sternberg gave her humorous yet touching MEA President’s Address, “Space, Place and the Media Ecology Association.” Janet was the first person I met when I approached NYU to query about going for my graduate degree. She became my advisor, then my professor for one of my more enjoyable classes, and then my friend. For those who don’t know, her voice is on the satellites Voyager 1 and 2 that were sent out into the universe, saying hello in Portuguese: http://voyager.jpl.nasa.gov/spacecraft/languages/portuguese.html.

After the speech, there was the presentation of the MEA Awards for 2011. A full list can be found on the MEA Website, noted at the end of this blog. This year, a new award was named for NYU professor and co-founder of the Media Ecology Department (along with Neil Postman and Terence Moran), Christine L. Nystrom, who passed away earlier this year. She was both a fierce professor who always spoke her mind, and a dear person. This award was for Career Achievement in Service to the Field of Media Ecology. And its first recipient was, well, me, for all the years of being both a photographer for the group, and a friend to MEA. More details and images of the award can be seen on my blog in late June. I am still touched by this, and am proud to be in the company of the other winners as well.

By the time of the banquet, my camera was acting loony more consistently, and I missed a lot of shots, unfortunately. I couldn’t even give the camera to someone else to get a picture of me getting the award. Luckily, Octavio took one. (picasaweb.google.com/104061494185395089168/TheTwelfthAnnualConventionOfTheMediaEcologyAssociation?authkey=Gv1sRgCLHqn_vbh5aTiwE&feat=flashalbum#5639217395145513538).

After the banquet, there was a screening at the Art Gallery of Alberta of the film Being in the World, followed by a Q&A by its director, Mark Wrathall. As it was yet another train ride away, a few of us decided we were done for the evening, so we took the subway to the University instead. It was drizzling during the walk home from the station, and later began to rain.

Day 2 Photos: news.webshots.com/album/580710614WqMQsY?vhost=news


Day 3: Saturday, June 25, 2011

It was still drizzly on the walk to where the conference was being held. Thankfully, I thought ahead to pack a small umbrella. After yet another solid albeit carbo-heavy breakfast and coffee that I was very grateful for, the convention was on its way, once again. While my camera was still acting up in turning itself on and off, perhaps less frequently than the night before, I realized very quickly that the built-in flash was dead. The photos I would take from this point would definitely be iffy and especially filled with motion echoes. But at least the flash wouldn’t be invasive (I’ve often joked that my second name is He Who Blinds).

I attended two sessions, one a panel called “McLuhan in the Digital Age,” and the other “Sound and Space,” in which my friend Ellen Moffat was a presenter. There were two plenary sessions as well: Richard Cavell, who was interesting but seemed a bit high-strung, posited “Marshall McLuhan as Ec(h)o-Critic.” The second, “Theorizing Culture & Media: McLuhan & Foucault,” was by Mark Poster, which was actually given via Skype projected onto a big screen. Later, I heard a few people talking, saying that they were not impressed by Poster’s comments, which were derivative. I wouldn’t know; however, I have to say that going far away to a conference, with all the time and fees, and then having to just watch the person from their living room, feels like a being cheated. If you can’t be there to present, be listed as absent in fairness to the others who did take the time and expense. There, I said it.

A touching moment is when a bunch of us gathered for an free-flowing, sentimental session called “Reflection on the life and work of Christine Nystrom.” A number of people shared their stories of her personally and professionally, including me. One thing I learned was that she was a salt addict, and would put soy sauce on popcorn.

The evening was left open to explore Edmonton, including an open invitation for dinner at La Boehme in the Highlands district. Instead, a relatively large group of us decided to walk down to Whyte Avenue, sort of the Greenwich Village of the city. The Jazz Festival was going on later that evening, but we were just looking for some food. James Morrison, a Prof I’ve happily known for a number of years now (who will sometimes say, as he is departing, “Jim Morrison has left the building!”), said he knew of a great Thai restaurant, but wasn’t sure how far along the street it was (it goes for miles). We walked and walked, and finally found the King and I Restaurant. They certainly were not expecting to be serving well over a dozen people, and yet they were hospitable, and the food was excellent without being ridiculously priced. One of our group commented that it was the best Thai he’s ever eaten. And for that: thekingandi.ca/ .

Along the way, some of our crowd of technology scholars were amazed that there were actual functioning full-size public telephone booths along Whyte Ave. Perhaps Superman was a media ecologist?

Afterwards, a smaller group of us headed over to the bar across the street from the TELUS Centre, Hudsons Canadian Tap House. Many people were heading home early the next day, so for some it meant goodbye until next year’s convention. I had the chance to have a long and enjoyable catch-up talk with Janet Sternberg, between the goings on in the bar, such as a bridal party scavenger hunt. I didn’t take any pictures of the dinner or at the bar, because with the camera acting up, who needed the stress? It was time to relax and enjoy, even without a drink (beyond not being a drinker, I was on a very strict budget).

Day 3 Photos: news.webshots.com/album/580713605eAnvON?vhost=news


Day 4: Sunday, June 26, 2011

This is the final, and least attended day of the conference, but there also tends to be something interesting going on. The session I chose was “Old News, New News,” which dealt with paper and/or newsprint. The session was lively, and nearly everyone who was there was not anxious to run away so fast. However, as I was traveling by car back to Saskatoon with Ellen, we had both agreed to miss the MEA AGM (the annual business meeting and closing remarks). After the session and some lively adieus, we headed back to the dorms, packed the car, returned the keys (just making the check-out time), and an hour later after a small hitch, we were on our way back to our city. It was a drive full of good conversations.

Day 4 Photos: news.webshots.com/album/580710956KWoOcW?vhost=news

If you have any questions about the conference, what is Media Ecology or General Semantics, or anything else, contact me at the email given at the beginning of this blog. For those interested in either joining the MEA, connecting up with the ListServ (free), or seeing Octavio’s photos, here is the Media Ecology Association Website:
media-ecology.org

Next year’s convention will be at Manhattan College in Riversdale, NY (aka Da Bronx), and its theme is The Crossroads of the World. Hope to see you all there.

Media Ecology Association 10th Birthday, 9/4/08

Today is the 10th birthday of the creation of the Media Ecology Association, an organization that is close to my heart.

What is Media Ecology and the MEA? It is an interdisciplinary study of language, technology, culture, and symbols, with heavy emphasis of social critics like Marshall McLuhan, Neil Postman (who arguable coined the phrase Media Ecology), Jacques Ellul, Walter Ong, Elizabeth Eisenstein, Douglas Rushkoff, Harold Innis, Lewis Mumford, Eric Havelock, Susanne Langer, Erving Goffman, Edward T. Hall, George Herbert Mead, Margaret Mead, Claude Lévi-Strauss, Benjamin Lee Whorf, and Gregory Bateson, and language philosophies like General Semantics.

For more information on the MEA, check them out here:

media-ecology.org.

Wikipedia on Media Ecology:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ecology

Institute of General Semantics:

generalsemantics.org

Wikipedia on General Semantics:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_semantics

This video sort of sums it all up in a humerous way:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsHhNCLaT5s

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, MEDIA ECOLOGY ASSOCIATION!!!