Jatropha Math? Science Serves The People When Media Create Content, Not Discontent
Frank A. Hilario
December 03, 2007
Nonfiction: Since I can´t find a textbook or manual or guidebook on how to translate the language of scientists into the language of the marketplace, since I don´t know of any course on how to write on R&D for non-R&D people, I have decided to write the book on how to popularize science, starting with generating creative ideas from out of the blue (for a good idea of brainstorming as it occurs, you may want to visit my stream-of-unconsciousness ´CommuniCats´).
In my country the Philippines in the meantime, I want to discourage people from joining rallies of discontent and answering calls for People Power without content; instead, I want to encourage the articulate young ones, as well as the articulate young once, into intellectual exercises selling science in the countryside, to discourage them from selling violence in the city. For media men (embracing women) creating discontent more than content, I blame their professors. Like American intellectual Henry Adams says, our professors are too occupied with ´too little cultivation of true intellectual curiosity´ (cliffsnotes.com). That´s putting it mildly. So look at our media now.
Adams says schools focus on education by cultivating memory, not cultivating the mind itself; I say our professors in their daily lessons and our journalists in their daily reports are guilty of stultifying the mind of those ever so young. I note with sadness that the journalists of today in these Pearls of the Orient Seas have abnegated their duty to bring new or improved knowledge either to the city or the village. In the Philippines, our reporters broadcasting on radio or TV, our journalists writing in newspapers or magazines are too preoccupied with observing and expostulating on the dimensions of dissent in the language of the nationalists and disunited opposition, the language of the New Protestation in the Philippines (where the ladies do protest too much), the tongue of the New Dissent (they do talk too much).
There is also the question of the national language that they (I don´t) call Filipino, which is in fact plain and not-so-simple Tagalog; our men of the mass media cannot be bothered to spend endless and English hours interpreting science (embracing technology) to benefit the vast majority of our people, especially those who have less in life and not much more in law (and cannot afford to buy newspapers). I say you cannot write science in Filipino and be intelligent about it. I challenge the many nationalists in and out of the University of the Philippines to do just that.
To be meaningful to the people, science writing must come with the promise of added income as reward for honest & productive manual, mechanical or intellectual labor. Anyway, that´s the usual promise of science journalists. To empower, to transform the mendicant poor into self-reliant families – yes, I wish to focus on families, not simply individuals, not simply women – science writers must cultivate the virtue of entrepreneurship, for citizens to add value to raw materials for consumers and to add value to their own lives. Entrepreneurship is risk-taking. As of today, scholars in universities, policy makers in government, columnists in newspapers, hosts on TV recognize only one risk, and that is population explosion – and the solutions proposed are represented in one object of their desire: the condom. Not a very creative device, I say, not to say an inconvenient ruse. That is to say, they have reduced the art & science of social progress to the size of your prophylactic.
Science writing must also be aimed at the national government, local government, as well as scientists themselves, not to mention ambitious politicians and pretenders to the seat of power. Governments think science is for scientists, and the scientists agree. Ladies and gentlemen, let us realize that science is far too important a subject to be left to scientists alone! Science writing must be for the people at one end (feedforth) and from the people on the other end (feedback). Science without feedback (that is, supply-pushed) is devoid of common sense; with feedback, science gains relevance (that is, demand-driven).
In the Philippines, to many journalists, it is more exciting and psychically rewarding, if not financially so, to be pursuing the adventures of the Cute Crusaders in the Senate and the Pied Pipers of the House of Representatives who want to topple the administration of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. If you aren´t using your head, you´ll find it easier to be anti than to learn to do the best you can in whatever you ought to be doing. You owe it to yourself first.
With science writing, I can´t blame the journalists – the schools didn´t teach them how to popularize science, that is to say, translate science into the language of the home, office, farm, waters, villages – the languages of the consumers. The schools taught them the who, what, where, when, why and how and not much else; if not that, then the students didn´t learn much more – which points back to the schools: If the students hadn´t learned, the teachers hadn´t taught.
There is also of course the science journalism of the know-it-alls: If you do it this way and no other, you will become rich, or richer. Their science journalism is reduced to a magic formula and all the science consumers have to do is follow the directions on the label. Their science is simply an instruction book. With your Core 2 Duo PC or your Nokia 5310, yes, you simply have to follow the user manual. But science must be an intellectual exercise; it must be a judgment call; there are many ways about it.
There are no courses on popularizing science; the subject they call Science Reporting is in fact technical writing, scientists writing for scientists. And to remind my protesting countrymen led by Senator Antonio Trillanes and Brigadier General Danilo Lim (see my essay ´Manila Rain-Walk. The Day Senator Trillanes Declared A Revolt …,´ americanchronicle.com) that they ought to be using their own head, not that of others, I have decided to give out free advice on how to write science for the people without insulting their intelligence.
That brings me back to jatropha as ´fuel for thought´ (Yolandi Groenewald, September 25, Mail & Guardian, mg.co.za). As to the science (embracing technology), how do you write creatively about jatropha, which Filipinos call tubang bakod (hedge fence), which scientists like to call instead with the Latinized name Jatropha curcas so that only they can understand?
I have in mind right now what I call the 5 Os of creative writing and I shall now illustrate how to use them using jatropha as the inconvenient fruit. Please note that the 5 Os are not stages in the creative process; they are not steps – you have to observe all the 5 Os, in any order, to be able to write well; the 5 are simply guides in writing:
(1) Open-mindedness
On one hand, the Philippine National Oil Company (PNOC) has said that farmers can harvest as much as 5 to 10 tons of jatropha fruits a hectare a year and earn as much as P 50,000 from marginal lands almost as a sure bet. PNOC also has claimed that jatropha has no known pests or diseases and is therefore an ideal crop. On the other hand, Director General William Dar of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) has asserted that there is really no science behind jatropha, meaning that there have not been reported and repeated formal experiments and trial plantings of jatropha whose consistent results could be used as basis for asserting information or sharing insights on this species. I saw and heard Dar say that to about 300 people during the 35th anniversary of the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCARRD) at the Manila Intercontinental Hotel last month (see also my essay, ´The 4 Es Club. The Young Dare Be Entrepreneurs, They Dare Be Filipinos,´ americanchronicle.com). Dar says the highest yield of jatropha they have so far gotten at the ICRISAT campus in India is 1.5 tons; given the better soils and climate of the Philippines, he says, you can double that to give you 3 tons, but not more, not 5, certainly not 10 tons.
What then is a poor science writer to do? Be open-minded and check out the counter-statements by asking other experts on the subject. Also search for available local literature on jatropha. If possible, go visit a farm where jatropha is being raised in commercial quantity, at least the seedlings. Visit the PNOC offices; sorry, you can´t simply visit the ICRISAT offices (they´re in India), but you can email w.dar@cgiar.org. If you´re near enough, you can also visit the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UP Los Baños) as they have been quietly conducting a study or two on this species. Not for nothing is UP Los Baños one of the premier universities of agriculture in Asia.
(2) Outsiders
Outside of local literature, outside of local experts, you need to go to sources of data and information outside the Philippines. You´re in luck; the Internet has been waiting for you for the last 20 years. Yes, the Internet is a wonderful knowledge source in most any subject; I thank God for the Internet. I can put in much content because of the World Wide Web. The only ones I avoid when I surf the Web are the bloggers because I don´t want to be influenced by their opinion of the subject of my search for knowledge. They are entitled to their opinion; I am entitled to mine and I don´t want to arrive at mine by first consulting others. And, my friends, that has made all the difference in my creativity.
(3) Order-Disorder
After your background research, you now have much information in your hand, including conflicting data. Thank God for that! There is no more exciting thing to write about than a controversial topic, if you know what I mean. But now you have a real problem in your hands: how do you organize all that data and all those bits & pieces of news and features so that you can write your own intelligent, interesting story or essay that you can be proud of – given the position you are going to take, whether for or against jatropha as a viable source of biodiesel for cars and trucks in the Philippines.
At this point, to put order to the disorder, I recommend that you learn, if you don´t already use, the outline-organize feature of Microsoft Word 2003 – or Word 97 or Word XP but sorry, Word 2007 is a strange species to me – using working subtitles as organizing handles. Then you can collapse subtitles and texts and rearrange them at will: just cut & paste. That is only as much as I can tell you, as outlining-organizing is better seen than read. Yes, I say using the PC is a must if you want to be the best writer you can be. I must disagree with one of my favorite authors, Ray Bradbury, whom there is no love lost with the computer.
(4) Objects of desire
On one hand, objects of desire to be a good writer, to make sure your language is that of the marketplace, I recommend that you install in your personal computer these: a dictionary (I have the Microsoft Bookshelf 2000, which is in fact the American Heritage Dictionary in electronic form, the best dictionary, I say), a thesaurus (I have the Microsoft Encarta Dictionaries), an encyclopedia (I have the Encyclopedia Britannica). If you can´t afford such software, there is always the Internet. The dictionary helps you understand terms and the long words that scientists are very fond of using, such as utilize instead of use, or experiment instead of try, or implement instead of do. The thesaurus helps you find the better (if not the best) word for what you´re thinking. The encyclopedia fills in the gaps of your knowledge or understanding. You can be so lucky!
On the other hand, objects of desire by readers include as many names, anecdotes, examples as you can put in. Again, if nothing else, the Internet can provide you materials for your article on jatropha, such as these:
In an oil & fats conference in China (September 12, uk.reuters.com), experts warn that jatropha is not the magic biodiesel crop because it´s toxic and so requires careful handling by harvesters in the field and workers at the crushing plant; essentially a wild plant, the yield of this species varies from year to year. In the same conference, MR Chandran says it will take about 5 years of extensive research before jatropha can become a viable source of biodiesel. The yield is less than 2 tons a hectare (note that ICRISAT says in their campus in Andhra Pradesh, the yield is 1.5 tons.)
Angela Hind reports (July 08, news.bbc.co.uk) on a jatropha joint venture between UK energy giant BP and D1 Oils. ´There is no doubt about it,´ says Sanju Khan of D1 Oils, ´those who are working with jatropha are working with the new generation crop, developing a crop from a wild plant.´ Did you notice? ´Developing a crop from a wild plant´ – jatropha is not quite ready as a cultivated plant, much less as a good source crop for biodiesel.
You can find more jatropha data & information from the Internet. I googled simply for "jatropha" and got 648,000 English pages with Safesearch. If you want to write well, you have to search well.
(5) Over & over again
One of my favorite Rudolf Flesch quotes is this: ´There is no good writing – only good rewriting.´ I believe Flesch because he writes like he talks, and he invented the Readability Formula that journalists worth their salt in the world religiously use, especially the American columnists and writers of books. There is no good story or essay except the one that has been reviewed, revised, rewritten at least 3 times in 3 different occasions (or days). You need to get away from what you have written so that when you get back to it, you have fresh eyes and can see better what to reject, what to retain, what´s missing.
Finally, there´s jatropha math.
At anytime during your writing, whether at the beginning, middle or end, to generate more ideas, in his book How To Write, Think And Speak More Effectively (amazon.com), Rudolf Flesch recommends math, that which you already know, My Dear Aunt Sally: multiplication, division, addition, subtraction. Like this:
Multiply what you have. Application: Stretch the argument of someone to the point of absurdity. From one basic proposition, derive one or two corollaries; the reverse is to generalize from particulars. From one observation, generate a few insights.
Divide what you don´t quite understand; for instance, break down a vague subject into something graspable, or reduce a big subject into smaller topics.
Add more of the same, or something different, to make it more attractive to your reader. Add more variety, more elements, more illustrations.
Subtract something you have difficulty handling, delete that which isn´t so convincing or which makes dull reading.
Jatropha math: You don´t have to perform all the operations at the same time; you don´t have to perform all the operations at one time, just one. And you don´t even have to perform addition or subtraction first before division or multiplication. Just do it!
Am I recommending that you take the path of math in your own creative writing? Yes; in fact, that´s what I have been doing all of the past 42 years, from 1965 when my friend Manny Alkuino gifted me his own copy of Flesch´s book after having seen that it has become my object of desire.
Rudolf Flesch´s math helps explain why, while I´m not always right, I´m always original.