If you get two or more chemical educators together, they start grousing about how the public does not understand or appreciate chemistry. The common image of chemistry is in fact a rather wretched one, full of hazards, risks, and pollution. The word "chemicals" has become synonymous with "dangerous substances" in the popular culture. "Unfair," we chemists cry, "and so uninformed." But what is being done to improve the public's perception of chemistry?

Recently, I had the pleasure of visiting one of the nation's leading science museums. I will not name it here, but I can tell you that the exhibits were dazzling, the hands-on experiments captivating, the IMAX movies thrilling, the overall layout inviting, and the attendance figures over one million visitors a year. It was immediately apparent that great effort had been made to welcome everyone, even those without any technical background. Yet, search as I might, almost no chemistry could be found! An exhibit on electricity had the usual sparks and lightning flying every which way but gave no hint of the existence of batteries. The exhibit on holography was breathtaking but contained no information about the chemical components needed to construct the artwork. Biology was portrayed in a lively, earthy manner but with no sense of the chemical basis of life. The museum was able to portray the abstract world of mathematics in a magnificent blend of instruction and entertainment, but did not attempt to depict the strange and enchanting world of the molecule. How can we expect the museum goer to leave with any meaningful sense of what is called the central science? While so much of modern physics, chemistry, biology, and astronomy finds expression in the unifying language of the molecule, the molecule is assiduously hidden from the public.

For me, the best place to visit in a science museum is always the gift shop. Much to my chagrin, but no longer to my surprise, the museum store had no chemistry kits available, although it was jam-packed with cuddly stuffed dinosaurs, wonderful optical gizmos, gyrating objects, etc. This store, for unknown reasons, had been chemically neutered, so that the curious mind should never encounter the joys of chemical experimentations - joys that helped inspire many of my generation to choose a career in science or engineering. Is it any wonder that the American public holds at present such a distorted view of the chemical world?

Was this visit of mine an atypical experience? In 1990 the ASTC mailed out 600 questionnaires to 185 North American institutions, inquiring about museum activities in chemistry. The survey found that about 28 percent of the science museums reported no chemistry activities and that less than one third of the science museums offered chemistry exhibits.

Who is to blame? That is the wrong question. The right question is: What are we going to do about this lack of chemistry in science museums?

The pages of J. Chem. Educ. are filled with fascinating chemistry experiments and demonstrations that can be safely carried out with little cleanup and disposal. It behooves us to see these advances translated into science museum exhibits. But we need not stop with exhibits. Imagine the power of a movie about the relation of color and chemistry. It might open with nature's panoply of colors in the form of flowers and peacock feathers, switch to our first imitations of nature's colors in the form of fireworks, progress to the development of dyes, the historical beginning of synthetic chemistry, go on to such topics as paints, cosmetics, skin pigmentation, and suntan lotions, and end perhaps with the chemical basis of color photography and even of vision itself. Who, after viewing such a film, would continue to equate chemistry only with toxic waste dumps, polluted streams, dying forests, and so on?

We as chemical educators must find a way to work more closely with museum staff to make our case to the public. To do otherwise is to lose the battle for support of our field, because in the long run, chemistry as a discipline cannot prosper without the public's interest.

Ideas for Science Museums? Reports of Successful Exhibits?

Readers who have worked successfully with a science museum - large or small - are invited to share their experiences. These could cover a wide range: displays, demonstration shows, other methods of bringing chemistry to the public, suggestions of what works in a museum setting, where there can be intensive hands-on activities, dealing with clean-up and the need for something to last for a considerable period of time, and inexpensive displays that are succinct and dramatic illustrations of a chemical principle. Dick Zare's main aim is to have you share these with each other. You are invited to do so in these pages. Send your ideas to the Journal by mail, email, or fax; we will circulate these on JCE: Online if there is sufficient interest.

If you are interested in sending a proposal to the National Science Foundation, contact either Margaret B. Cozzens or Hyman Field, Elementary, Secondary, and Informal Science Education, NSF, Room 885, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230; 703/306-1620; mcozzens@nsf.gov or hfield@nsf.gov. Note that preliminary proposals are required.