Biopunk enthusiast? Not so much.

The once pristine apartment, the space of escape that I recognized as my home away from home, covered in masses of post-it notes, neat towers of petri dishes, and a microscope resting on what used to be where we ate dinner every night. How would I feel about this? I would definitely not be a happy camper. My roommate loves science, much like I do. The only gap in this hypothetical story is the fact she absolutely hates chemistry and genetics, so this situation I can assure will never ever happen. Aside from that little fun fact, I would be upset if this did happen to my apartment. I am OCD when it comes to my car and my living space. To have that boundary violated makes me shudder. I am very old fashioned when it comes to the distinction between “the home” and the “workplace.” To have a wet lab brought into my oasis is a no-go. My roommate and I are very reasonable when it comes to compromise, if she wanted to do research on genetic material, she may do so in her own room, not the common living space. I tip my hat to the adventurous science enthusiasts who aim to go above and beyond, but if I were ever to participate in research, it would not be in my own home. 

Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star.

I am legally blind; I cannot drive without prescription lenses and when I do not have lenses on, I only see blurry blobs of color. When I took the time to attempt to clarify galaxies, stars, and other anomalies, I guess I expected my contact lenses to assist in my quest to open myself to a world of amateur astronomy. This was not the case.

In many instances, I squinted, I held my laptop in various angles, I heightened the intensity of the brightness on my screen, I inverted the photo, and then overall, I just felt like what I was working towards was an inevitably wasted effort. Here is the dilemma: I think citizen science is great if you have the background and if you are aware of what to look for; I, on the other hand, feel like another statistic in the pool of inaccurate data in science.  There are many people in society that have no formal education or training in sciences, yet they have just as much capability and knowledge as a gentleman who graduated from Harvard. Not only do I not have an interest in astronomy, I despise the subject. Good riddance to twinkle,twinkle little star and the nursery rhymes that tried to change my mind. I can understand and appreciate the idea of citizen science, but as a whole, it will never be accurate.

To eliminate bias, I also took part in a project I thought I would enjoy, which requested volunteers to classify little sea creatures of the saltwater floors. Who wouldn’t enjoy classifying and learning about Nemo’s neighbors? Well, turned out that pessimistic person was I. This became a repetitive and boring process of looking at the same species of scallops, starfish, and the occasional hermit crabs. I am all for the idea of taking part in research, definitely if it is something I am interested in, but Zooniverse just wasn’t my forte. I believe that citizen science is the fraud branch amongst scientists and the general public, making us feel like we are involved in their occasional discoveries. Then for the general public, we feel stupid whilst attempting to guess the measurements of scallops and the amount of spirals in a galaxy formation, yet we are praised for our good intentions to have attempted to help. Don't get me wrong; there are the several whom actually input valid, hard-thought data, but the majority are people who guess as they go. Sounds like a red tape scenario: may the wasted efforts begin.

Genre Misinterpretation

In the classic Shakespearian play, Hamlet, the main character makes a soliloquy in which he states the famous quote, “To be, or not to be: that is the question…” Some genres of literature have strong characteristics, and others seem to mix interchangeably. What are the significant differences amongst our society’s popular genres?

Two categories of literature that seem to seep into the grey area are science fiction and fantasy. Science Fiction is commonly something unknown that is hypothesized to be understood in the future, so it would be thereby changed as a common perspective of a specific idea. A misinterpretation is the confusion of science fiction and fantasy, which is a genre that clings the curiosities of the imagination and it is admired for its strangeness. Science fiction is “fiction” because it is not based off certifiable evidence of the story’s existence, but basic scientific law and theory rule the direction of the story. Science fiction is explicit throughout the entirety of the story line, but fantasy is extremely vague and has no concrete explanation for its mysterious phenomena.

So back to the question: To be, or not to be? Why is science fiction seemed to be out ruled to the popularity of fantasy and the supernatural? In today’s world, it seems we are always looking for explanations. Why is the sky blue? Why is the grass green? How did Earth come about? We are an advanced civilization of technology and science; everyday common questions are being answered. Fantasy, on the contrary, does not demand any answers or scientific explanations. Fantasy has no grounding in reality and allows people to escape the reality. Fantasy usually involved supernatural forms and some type of magical theme within its plot, which lacks any rationality. I think both are interrelated, but they are both distinctively different. In the popular media, fantasy is in the public eye. Then again, science fiction is still thriving in cinema like Tron, Stars Wars, and even the more recent, Hunger Games. The popularity and opinion solely seems to depend on whom you ask.