Fred Hoyle's life-from-space theory has been communicated by Hoyle and other commentators for nearly 50 years in a wide range of media, including science fiction and museums, as well as in the technical and popular press. This analysis uses Lewenstein's “web” model of science communication to demonstrate the connectedness of these media in a web within which life-from-space theory moves from niche to niche as different audiences become significant. Marginalization of the theory as a scientific idea meant a greater prominence in popular culture, and scientific approval made the public sphere redundant. On the basis of this case study, the paper assesses the value of the web as a research tool, and argues for science communication studies to look beyond traditional categories to embrace the wide variety of media and genres that contribute to the construction of science in the public.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Peter Atkins , “100 on the poppycock scale,”Science and Public Affairs Autumn (1993): 58.
2.
On boundary work, see T. F. Gieryn, “Boundaries of science,” in Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, ed. Sheila Jasanoff, Gerald E. Markle, J.C. Petersen, and Trevor Pinch (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 1995), 393-443.
3.
So “popularization” here is a category determined not necessarily by genre and also by the context of reception. See Stephen Hilgartner, “The dominant view of popularization: conceptual problems, political uses,”Social Studies of Science20 (1990): 519-539.
4.
H. M. Collins and Trevor Pinch, “The construction of the paranormal: nothing unscientific is happening,” in On the Margins of Science: the Social Construction of Rejected Knowledge, ed. Roy Wallis (University of Keele Press, 1979), 237-270.
5.
Collins and Pinch, “The construction of the paranormal,” p. 240.
6.
H. M. Collins , “The place of the “core-set” in modern science: social contingency with methodological propriety in science,”History of Sciencexix (1981): 11-12.
7.
Bruce V. Lewenstein , “From fax to facts: communication in the cold fusion saga,”Social Studies of Science25 (1995): 408-424.
8.
H. M. Collins and Trevor Pinch, “The construction of the paranormal.”
9.
For a history of this interest, see Marc J. Seifer, Wizard: the Life and Times of Nikola Tesla, Biography of a Genius (Secaucus, NJ: Birch Lane, 1996), Chap. 17.
10.
Fred Hoyle , Home is Where the Wind Blows: Chapters from a Cosmologist's Life (Mill Valley, CA: University Science Books, 1994), 159.
11.
The Star was a London evening paper: it closed in 1960.
12.
and D.W.M, “Shorter notices,”Financial Times, 4 July 1955.
13.
Fred Hoyle , The Black Cloud (London, Melbourne, Toronto, Cape Town, Auckland, The Hague: Heinemann, 1957).
14.
Anon ., “Fred Hoyle's frolic,”Daily Telegraph, 16 September 1957.
15.
Anon ., “Hoyle's nimbus,”Daily Telegraph, 1 December 1957.
16.
The serial and its sequel were later published as novels: Fred Hoyle and John Elliot, A for Andromeda and Andromeda Breakthrough (London: Souvenir Press, 1962). Elliot was a BBC screenwriter.
17.
Fred Hoyle , Of Men and Galaxies (London: Heinemann, 1965), 31.
18.
Hoyle was involved in a very public policy dispute at the time: see, for example, “A special grant for Cambridge University? Professor Hoyle asks for new institute,”The Times, 8 March 1965 and coverage over the next four months.
19.
However, Hoyle is often in the press on other matters: for example, Cambridge politics in 1966, quasars, Stonehenge, and foot-and-mouth disease in 1967, cosmology in 1968, the Common Market in 1969 and 1970, economic inflation in 1971, and more Cambridge politics in 1972.
20.
Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press, 1984).
21.
For a history of “stardust” theories see, for example, Keay Davidson, Carl Sagan, a Life (New York: Wiley, 1999).
22.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria, p. 25.
23.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, “Interstellar grains,”Nature223, no.5205 (1969): 459.
24.
F. Hoyle and G. Hoyle, The Inferno (London: Heinemann, 1973),.210.
25.
Fred Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press, 1984), 56.
26.
N. C. Wickramasinghe , “Formaldehyde polymers in interstellar space,”Nature252, no. 5483 (1974): 462.
27.
Fred Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, 1984, From Grains to Bacteria, p.66.
28.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, “Dry polysaccharides and the infrared spectrum of OH 26.5 + 0.6,”Astrophysics and Space Science72 (1980): 247.
29.
F. Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, “Does epidemic disease come from space?”New Scientist [17 November] (1977):
30.
Personal communication with Bernard Dixon, 11 September 2002.
31.
B. Dixon , “Celestial pathology,”New Scientist [17 November] (1977): 396.
32.
J. M. Penman , 1977, “Epidemics from space?”New Scientist 8 December, 000.
33.
J. Fairhall , “Life on comets' comes down to earth,”Guardian,? April. 1978.
34.
McKie , “Disease from outer space research `obstructed' claim,”The Times, 14 April 1978.
35.
A. Berry , “Space flu vaccines a problem,”Daily Telegraph, date? 1978
36.
Fred Hoyle , “The invading viruses from space,” Letter. Daily Telegraph,? Applied 1978.
37.
T. Coleman , untitled. Guardian, 13 September 1978.
38.
A. Macpherson , “The cosmic connection,”Daily Mail, 16 September 1978.
39.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria, p. 116.
40.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, Lifecloud, p. 2.
41.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria, pp. 116-120.
42.
R. Sheldrake , Seven Experiments That Could Change the World (London: Fourth Estate, 1994).
43.
Fred Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, Influenza—A Genetic Virus with the External Trigger (Cardiff: Department of Applied Mathematics and Astronomy, University College Cardiff, 1980).
44.
Fred Hoyle , The Relation of Biology to Astronomy (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press), 13 and 23.
45.
Fred Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, Origin of Life (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press, 1980), 15 and 18.
46.
and J. Gribbin, review in New Scientist, 29 January 1981.
47.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (London: Dent, 1981),.143.
48.
New Scientist, “Extraterrestrial genes,” 15 October 1981.
49.
Fred Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, Space Travellers: the Bringers of Life (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press, 1981),.30.
50.
Fred Hoyle , “Will Darwin bite the dust in Little Rock?”The Times, 7 December 1981.
51.
and the reply: Fred Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, “Origins of life,”The Times, 24 December 1981.
52.
B. Silcock , “Hoyle's law: was man's ancestor a spore from outer space?”Sunday Times, 17 January 1982.
53.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, Proofs that Life is Cosmic. Memoirs of the Institute of Fundamental Studies, Sri Lanka, No. 1 (Sri Lanka: Government Press, 1982).
54.
J. Cherfas , “The word according to Hoyle,”New Scientist May (1983):.
55.
A. Macpherson , “In the beginning there was a creator,”Mail on Sunday, 23 October 1983.
56.
Awake! (New York: Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, 22 January 1996).
57.
Observer, 18 December.
58.
M. Shallis , “In the eye of a storm,”New Scientist [19 January] (1984):.
59.
Editorial, “Where was Hoyle?”Nature305 (1983): 750.
60.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria, pp. 172, 197-199.
61.
P. Campbell , “Life in outer space: infrared data debugged,”Nature306 (1983): 218-219.
62.
T. Shippey , Review of Comet Halley. Guardian, 2 August 1985.
63.
F. Hoyle , Comet Halley (London: Michael Joseph, 1985),.43-44.
64.
Hoyle , Comet Halley, p.185.
65.
A. Tucker , “New evidence of organic material in Halley's comet,”Guardian, 3 April 1986.
66.
P. Wright , “'Stardust' leads to scientific conflict,”The Times, 8 August 1986.
67.
and T. Prentice, “Aids virus blamed on comet,”The Times, 2 December 1986.
68.
Fred Hoyle and C. Wickramsinghe, Archaeopteryx, the Primordial Bird: a Case of Fossil Forgery? (London: Christopher Davies, 1986).
69.
T. Kemp , “Feathered flights of fancy,”Nature324 (1986): 185.
70.
P. Whybrow , 1986, “Archaeopteryx,” Letter. New Scientist, [2 October] (1986): 60.
71.
Natural History Museum , The Feathers Fly! (London: Natural History Museum, 1987),.7.
72.
Hoyle , “Still in a world of his own,”Independent on Sunday, p.4.
73.
B. Woolley , “Orbital dreams,”Guardian, 22 July 1988.
74.
F. Hoyle and C. Wickramasinghe, Our Place in the Cosmos (London: Dent, 1993).
75.
R. Shapiro , “Life, the universe and anything goes,”Nature363 (1993): 124.
76.
P. Atkins , “100 on the poppycock scale.”
77.
Interview with Ben Morgan, assistant editor, Science and Public Affairs, 1993.
78.
and B. Lovell, 1994, “A starring role in the universe,”New Scientist? (1994): 36.
79.
Interview with Fred Hoyle, 11 August 1993.
80.
See also Karlheinz Steinmüller, “Science fiction and science in the twentieth century,” in Science in the Twentieth Century, ed. John Krige and Dominique Pestre (Amsterdam: Harwood, 1997), 339.
81.
Peter Parrinder , Science Fiction: Its Criticism and Teaching (London, New York: Methuen, 1980), xv, 13.
82.
Steinmüller , “Science fiction and science in the twentieth century,” p. 356.
83.
and Kingsley Amis, New Maps of Hell: A Survey of Science Fiction (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1960), 21.
84.
and Brian Aldiss and David Wingrove, Trillion Year Spree: the History of Science Fiction (New York: Atheneum, 1986), 104.
85.
A. Toffler , Future Shock (London: Pan, 1971), 384.
86.
S. Moskowitz , Explorers of the Infinite: Shapers of Science Fiction (Westport, CT, 1974), 11.
87.
Parrinder , Science Fiction: Its Criticism and Teaching, pp. 58-59.
88.
Felicity Mellor , “Colliding Worlds: Asteroid Science and Science Fiction.”Cornell University. [Paper given], March? 2001, p.11.
89.
Steinmüller , “Science fiction and science in the twentieth century,” p. 355.
90.
and Steinmüller, “Science Fiction and Science in the Twentieth Century,” p. 355.
91.
Fred Hoyle , The Black Cloud, pp. 170-171.
92.
N. C. Wickramasinghe , “Formaldehyde polymers in interstellar space,”Nature264, no. 5581 (1974): 45-46.
93.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, “Primitive grain clumps and organic compounds in carbonaceous chondrites,”Nature264, no. 5581 (1976): 45-46.
94.
Fred Hoyle , The Relation of Biology to Astronomy (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press, 1980), 22-23.
95.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, “Dry polysaccharides and the infrared spectrum of OH 26.5 + 0.6,”Astrophysics and Space Science72 (1980): 247.
96.
Terry Coleman, Untitled , Guardian, 13 September 1978.
97.
Fred Hoyle , The Relation of Biology to Astronomy, p. 23.
98.
Nicholas Timmins , “Survivors of disaster in an earlier world: evolution according to Hoyle,”The Times, 13 January 1982.
99.
Fred Hoyle and Geoffrey Hoyle, The Inferno (London: Heinemann, 1973), 210.
100.
F. Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (London: Dent, 1981), 143.
101.
Interview with Fred Hoyle, 11 August 1993.
102.
interview with Francis Graham-Smith, 21 February 1996.
103.
See, for example, Richard Dawkins, “Rereadings: look, up in the sky...,”Financial Times, 11-12 May, XIII.
104.
J. Miles , Advances in Applied Mechanics24 (1984), 189.
105.
Interview with Herman Bondi, August 1990.;
106.
For example, when asked if readers saw The Black Cloud as a particular effort to popularize steady-state theory, mathematician and one-time steady-state supporter Felix Pirani said “Not at all.” When reminded that the cloud lives in a steady-state cosmos, he said, “I don't remember that and I don't think it was important.” Interview with Felix Pirani, 23 September 1997.
107.
University of Washington Press , “Fred Hoyle's New Book Views Man as a Citizen of the Galaxy,” 26 October 1964. Book News?
108.
Spectator, quoted on the dust jacket of the first reprint (1957) of The Black Cloud.
109.
Fred Hoyle and Raymond A. Lyttleton, “The effect of interstellar matter on climatic variation,”Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society35 (1939): 405-418.
110.
Anon ., “Science fiction serial starts well,”The Times, 4 October 1961.
111.
Hugh McLeave , “Can Fred keep ahead of the test tubes...? Hoyle's TV baby isn't so out of this world as it seems,”Daily Mail, November 1961.
112.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, Lifecloud (London: Dent, 1978), 165.
113.
Interview with Fred Hoyle, 11 August 1993.
114.
Part of the strategy for legitimization of the biochemical community in marginalized mid-twentieth-century Spain was to publish in journals read by as broad a community as possible, rather than to start a journal of its own. See M. J. Santesmases and E. Muñoz, “Scientific organizations in Spain (1950-1970): social isolation and international legitimation of biochemists and molecular biologists on the periphery,”Social Studies of Science27, no. 2 (1997).
115.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria, pp. 116-120.
116.
Discussion at the meeting “Fred Hoyle's Universe,”24-26 June 2002, University of Cardiff.
117.
Other changes say more about the scientific community (e.g., increasing internationalization; declining role of learned societies) than they do about Hoyle.
118.
Fred Hoyle , A. H. Olavesen, and C. Wickramasinghe, “Identification of interstellar polysaccharides and related hydrocarbons,”Nature271, no. 5642 (1977): 229.
119.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, Lifecloud, p. 2.
120.
This development shows the process of accommodation described by Jeanne Fahnestock, in which popularizations reduce forensic content and increase epideictic content compared to scientific publications. See Jeanne Fahnestock, “Accommodating science: the rhetorical life of scientific facts,” in The Literature of Science—Perspectives on Popular Science Writing, ed. Murdo William McRae (Athens, GA and London: University of Georgia Press,?), 17-36.
121.
Peter Atkins , “100 on the Poppycock Scale.”
122.
Collins and Pinch, “The construction of the paranormal.”
123.
Personal communication from Lady Barbara Hoyle, December 1993.
124.
and Jane Gregory and Steve Miller, “Popular science: friend or roe?” in Science in Public: Communication, Culture and Credibility (New York: Plenum, 1998), Chap. 3.
125.
and Jane Gregory and Steve Miller, “Caught in the crossfire? the public's role in the science wars,” in The One Culture? ed. Jay Labinger and H. M. Collins (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002).
126.
For a more recent example of the policing of exhibitions, see the discussion of reactions to the Smithsonian Institution's 1994 exhibition “Science in American Life” in Gregory and Miller, Science in Public, pp. 214-219.
127.
N. C. Wickramasinghe , “Formaldehyde polymers in interstellar space,”Nature252, no. 5483 (1974): 462.
128.
Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, From Grains to Bacteria, p. 60.
129.
N. C. Wickramasinghe , “Formaldehyde Polymers in Interstellar Space.”
130.
Bryan Silcock , “Hoyle's Law: was man's ancestor a spore from outer space?Sunday Times, 17 January 1982.
131.
Angus Macpherson , “In the beginning there was a Creator,”Mail on Sunday, 23 October 1983.
132.
Fred Hoyle and N. C. Wickramasinghe, The Origin of Life (Cardiff: University College Cardiff Press, 1980), 9.
133.
Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, “Does epidemic disease come from space?”New Scientist [17 November] (1977).
134.
J. Gregory and M. Bauer, PUS Inc.: le futur de la communication scientifique. Nouvelles Territoires, edited by Bernard Schiele.
135.
Hoyle's collaboration with Fowler and others in California produced the theory of stellar nucleogenesis. Hoyle's popularizing may have helped initiate the Caltech connection: a copy of the Harper's serialization of the 1950 radio talks is archived at Caltech alongside the original invitation to Hoyle. Letter from Jesse Greenstein to Fred Hoyle, 30 November 1951, from the California Institute of Technology Archives, Greenstein Collection, folder 16.1; see also California Institute of Technology News Bureau release, Friday 26 December 1952, from the California Institute of Technology Archives H section Z, folder no 219.
136.
Price describes the use of dialogue in popular science as polite and persuasive: it acknowledges the existence of and value in the opposing point of view, but the author's point of view wins out nevertheless. K. Price, “Arthur Eddington's `good form': a literary reading of popular physics.” Paper presented to the London Public Understanding of Science Seminar, February 2002.
137.
Despite often achieving substantial success (sales, fame, money, followers) via popular media, excluded scientists will often persist in efforts to gain recognition via scientific media. See Jane Gregory, Fred Hoyle and the Popularisation of Cosmology. PhD thesis, University of London, 1998, chapters 1 and 6.
138.
On scientists blaming the media for the popularization of unorthodoxy, see Gregory and Miller, “Caught in the Crossfire.”
