What am I?

While I was pondering how to cram a personal description into 1200 characters, I realised how hard it was to define myself.

I used to be in research for a while, but I discovered during my PhD that there are other (more) options outside academia. I have always loved research, but more for the sake of research, rather than to follow the academic career path. So I decided that finishing my PhD was the ideal moment to take a turn in my path and follow the route of science communication.

One of the “off-putting” things about research was the instability. Unfortunately, it turned out that the world outside academia is not a very stable one either, which is probably influenced by the current economic climate, and fixed-term contracts are often even shorter than in academia. I still remain positive, however, that once you are finding your way and starting to become more established, there is still more potential for development opportunities than in academia.

Why science communication?

To be honest, before I started my PhD I had never heard of that term. Maybe it was less “in fashion” than nowadays or less fashionably in some countries than others. Sure, there were museums and activities for school children, but I think that since the last 10 years, science communication is becoming increasingly popular (which will also increase competition).

But luckily, science communication has many faces and niches. Apart from exhibitions, the area that interests me most is science journalism. Some see science journalism slightly set apart from science communication, purely because the purpose of science communication in general is to solely enthusiast the public, while science journalism should also be critical about the type of research, or the way researchers have conducted and interpreted their research.

It might be a bit of a harsh comparison, but to me, science journalists act as “science inspectors”, or as a “science police” (to ensure that facts are reported accurately). Which in turn will bring more pressure upon science journalists; guess I’m lucky that I do have a PhD after all!

In a way, being a science communicator eased my dilemma in deciding what I should become “when I grow up”. Although I have always loved biology and research, I was always torn between my other interests (music, photography and painting) and could never quite decide on what should become my profession. In the end I decided to become a scientist, who does all the arty stuff as a hobby. But as a science communicator/journalist, I also get the chance to use my creativity, while still being connected with science, which I find very appealing.

So, but what am I now? A scientist or researcher? A science journalist or science communicator? Neither? I think in my heart I will always remain a scientist. I don’t think I will ever be able to get rid of my geeky side, but maybe unlike other scientists, I can see the need and have the desire to communicate science in an accessible and accurate way.

So what’s my blog all about?

Similar to my difficulties in defining myself, I also have troubles defining this blog as strictly as a science blog. There are already quite a lot of science blogs out there, so I’m trying to find my niche, in finding science in sometimes less obvious forms and unusual things. So you may find that most of the articles will be related to science (in one way or another), but don’t be surprised to see other things popping up, such as the occasional historical blog post, photography, or any topic that fascinates me. 

After all, I called this blog “world through my eyes” ;)