Thorium, Polonium, Radium, Oh My! Marie Curie and Maggie Gyllenhaal Kick Off the 2011 World Science Festival

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Even in the world of science, it is not every day when romance is summed up using words such as diamagnetism and paramagnetism as analogies. Yet Alan Alda manages to intricately tie these concepts into matters of the heart in his new play, Radiance: The Passion of Marie Curie, which had its debut reading during the World Science Festival Opening Night Gala Celebration last night at Alice Tully Hall in New York City.

True to the gala spirit, with a science twist, the night was glamorous with guests ranging from media giants Barbara Walters, Diane Sawyer, and Regis Philbin as well as science giants such as Eric Lander and Antonio Damasio. And of course, there were also the actors, who included Maggie Gyllenhaal, Allison Janney, David Morse, and of course writer and narrator, Alda.

The play sums up over a decade of Marie Curie’s scientific endeavors and feverish love life, revealing a passionate and obsessive scientist who dealt with quite a bit of conflict. To begin with, Curie, read by Gyllenhaal, labored in what sounded like a make-shift lab, handling radioactive material, at a time when women were not accepted in the sciences. In true testament to the struggles of women in science, her part in the studies of radioactivity and its relevance to transmutation was practically dismissed by the Nobel committee when it awarded the 1903 Nobel Prize in Physics. Her husband, equal part an intellectual and romantic partner, died tragically in an accident.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


And based on the play, there was a little (alright, more like huge) kerfuffle over Curie’s affair with a fellow physicist, Paul Langevin—which almost cost Curie her 1911 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for her discovery of two other radioactive elements, polonium and radium (the diamagnetism/paramagnetism bit was a dramatized love scene between widowed Curie and the married Langevin, concerning mutual repulsion and attraction). Gyllenhaal was, as I expected, expressive even though this was just a reading; in fact, every actor on the stage brought a captivating and lively interpretation of their character to the performance.

Although the reading was a bit too drawn out towards the end—after all, this evening's entertainment consisted of seven actors basically sitting in chairs for about two hours reading the play--—it was a great reminder of how scientists and their scientific endeavors are not free from personal and social pressures. It's a relevant reminder at a time when scientists today face the ups and downs political wielding, funding uncertanties, and of course, media coverage— for both their successes and failures.

And thus commences the fourth reiteration of the World Science Festival, the brain child of physicist Brain Greene and journalist Tracy Day (quite the power couple themselves). Four days of talks that will span every corner of science from aging and longevity to dark matter, and to finish it off, a street festival for families.

Let the science fun begin!

 

Photo of Maggie Gyllenhaal at the WSF Gala courtesy of Kevin Da Silva

About the Author

Neda Afsarmanesh has been press officer for Nature Publishing Group for over two years, settling in to New York City after a couple short stints with the sciences. She obtained her bachelor’s degree in biology from Caltech and a Master’s degree in neurobiology from Boston University. 

The views expressed are those of the author and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe