Where is today’s Cosmos?
Published on Dec 20, 2007 at 9:22 am.
10 Comments.
Filed under astronomy.
I knew for a long time that I really wanted to be a scientist. Eventually, my interest began leaning towards physics. Also, I had always had an interest in astronomy, but what really fueled that interest was a television show that ran on PBS during my first semester in college. That was the series Cosmos. The show was a documentary, but unlike most documentaries of the day which were a series of talking heads, Cosmos was rather heavy into special effects. By today’s standards, the special effects were not all that impressive, but they were quite good for that time. The documentary was hosted by astronomer Carl Sagan. The documentary was orchestrated as a mental trip around time and space.
Cosmos was a documentary aimed at the general public, but with enough meat in it to satisfy students of science. That is a very difficult task, and few have met that goal since then as well as Cosmos. But that wasn’t all. The special effects, Sagan’s enthusiasm, coupled with grand musical scores captured the interest of people who normally were not even interested in the sciences. For many years, Cosmos was the most watched documentary in PBS history. It brought astronomy to the forefront. Cosmos helped an entire generation of people learn about the universe. Even more importantly, though, it got a lot of people interested in science. Many people my age or younger remember Cosmos and credit the show with spurring their interest in astronomy. A whole generation of astronomers say that Sagan and this show were what made them want to be astronomers. But, the influence of this documentary extends far beyond the astronomical community. All sorts of scientists, ranging from Physics to Biology, also say that watching this show got them to thinking of science as fun and cool. Engineers, too, often credit Cosmos with fueling their interest in the sciences.
Cosmos is still a very good show, and there is still a lot to learn from it. In recent years, it has been re-released in DVD form (click on the image above to link to the Amazon page for the DVD boxed set). There are a lot of people who want to buy the series, particularly those who watched it long ago. But, sadly, the program would not have the same impact on today’s teenagers. The special effects are dated. Just looking at how people on the program dress and speak shows how terribly out of date it is. Today’s fashion conscious teenagers would just tune out people who look and sound so geeky. So, where is today’s Cosmos? Why has nothing like this been done since then? Sure, there have been several attempts, but they seem to fall short. Nothing has had the impact of Cosmos. Part of the secret to the program may have been the special effects, which were very good for that day. But, part of the success was almost certainly Carl Sagan and his obvious enthusiasm and eagerness to share his love of astronomy.
Carl Sagan died 11 years ago, today. Others, such as Flying Singer, have posted tributes to Sagan, as I did last year. However, this year, I decided to post a tribute to Cosmos.
Sagan took some grief about Cosmos from many scientists. That was such a major event that often people forgot that he was also an accomplished astronomer, which is why he was such a good person to do the show. For some reason, though, many researchers seem to look down on science popularizers. That is a shame, because we really need to get science more into the minds and hearts of the public. But, it is also understandable. Some science popularizers tend to water down the science to make it palatable to people with weak math and science backgrounds. Such “science” becomes fluff. Other science popularizers are not scientists, or they are scientists who are not careful, and what they popularize is wrong. Such “science” is wrong. So, many of the good science popularizers tend to get lumped in with the bad ones. Sagan was also an advocate of SETI (the Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence). He had a scientific approach towards seeking the answer to the question, “Is anyone out there?” However, SETI also tends to attract the UFO groupies and government conspiracy buffs who claim all sorts of wild things. The wackos tended to drown out the scientists for a long time. SETI, itself, has become a serious study now, partially thanks to Sagan’s work. But, many researchers tended to lump him in with the wackos that followed him around. And, they did follow him around. He gave a public talk here back in the mid 1990s. He took questions from the audience. There were a few good questions, but a great number of the questions were from people wanting to talk about UFOs, government cover ups, and their own personal ideas about faster-than-light travel. But, nothing can detract from his work in promoting science to the masses.
We need another Carl Sagan for today, and we need another Cosmos. But, the new Sagan and new Cosmos need to be ones that fit into today’s society and will appeal to today’s people.
-Astroprof
(Sagan image courtesy Wikimedia)
Bruce on December 20, 2007 at 12:33 pm: 1
This post is actually a rather nice tribute, putting Sagan’s “Cosmos” into context and reminding us that he was indeed a real scientist as well as a fine communicator.
Thanks,
Bruce
Kyle on December 21, 2007 at 12:13 am: 2
I have no answer to what could supplement “Cosmos” or who could fill the void left by Sagan. However, what I can do is testify that Cosmos truly changed my view of the universe. Hopefully for the better. Thanks,
Kyle
John Phillips, FCD on December 21, 2007 at 5:44 am: 3
There are three series from the 70s and 80s that I never tire of watching, again and again, and rate among the greatest works ever made for television. They are Jacob Bronowski’s Ascent Of Man, James Burke’s Connections and last but very definitely not least, Carl Sagan’s Cosmos. Each was groundbreaking in its own way, but sadly, I can’t see anyone prepared to put that much effort into projects of a comparable scale today and we are the worst for it.
Ian Kemmish on December 21, 2007 at 9:17 am: 4
Well, there’s almost anything by Sir David Attenborough. The production values are second to none, as is the discomfort suffered by many of the cameramen.
For a modern take on how good CGI can help tell a scientific story there’s also Dr Iain Stewart’s just-finished series “Earth: Power of the planet.”
Of course, I’m not sure when or on which channels these get shown in the US.
Blake Stacey on December 21, 2007 at 9:52 am: 5
I’m actually sitting right next to a pile of Connections DVDs. I just watched an episode two nights ago. . . nostalgia attack!
Astroprof on December 21, 2007 at 10:09 am: 6
For sure, both Connections and The Day the Universe Changed , both by Burke, are among my favorite documentary series. And, they are also very timeless. Both series were produced at about the same time as Cosmos . Also, they were wonderful, but were more of science history than current scientific understanding. I love them, but I am not sure that Burke had the same impact as Sagan. HBO produced “From Here to the Moon , but that had a narrower appeal than did Cosmos . There have been several extremely good series in the intervening years. However, a great number of people saw Cosmos , and fewer people saw these other series. That is a shame, since many of them were, indeed, wonderful.
John Ciccarelli on December 21, 2007 at 12:58 pm: 7
It’s an interesting “thought experiment” what could replace “Cosmos” in today’s media or even replace Sagan. What’s needed is someone who can approach the varying subjects of Astronomy, Biology, Religion, Public Advocacy, etc., with Carl’s all encompassing human view, that every society, point of view has merit and theere are no privelged frames of view. Today, territoriality and xenophobia are more rampant than the late 1970’s and more reminders like the “Pale Blue Dot” are needed to remind us of a shared humanity.
The article noted that the original special affects and clothing are outdated. True, however, the remastered collection that will reair on the Science Channel in January has blended very nicely old footage with new CGI. Hearing Sagan’s voice over flying over a new breath taking visual of Saturn is just as affecting now as it was when I saw the original. However, any new affects are a window dressing that change by the month. When I first watched the original broadcast at 10 years old there were kids then that thought it was out of step with them. Getting youth to take an interest is anything beyond their current lives is nothing new. Some appreciate it, others won’t no matter what you do. It’s worth revisiting the series with your kids even with the original affects because some will like, others won’t.
Andrea on December 21, 2007 at 2:19 pm: 8
Perhaps Astroprof will be the next Sagan?
Kelly Y on December 22, 2007 at 5:19 am: 9
Andrea, that’s what I was thinking. Astroprof, you have the science background, the enthusiasm, and a knack for communicating with us lay people. All you need now is a pile of money and some CGI experts.
Solomon2 on December 25, 2007 at 3:31 pm: 10
John Phillips: I am shocked to discover there is someone else who has EXACTLY the same tastes I do.
many researchers tended to lump him in with the wackos that followed him around.
Before Cosmos, and while still a student, Sagan co-wrote with Soviet astrophysicist Igor Shklovsky the best-seller Intelligent Life in the Universe. I imagine that would be enough to explain why all the “wackos” followed him around.
With that book Sagan made his mark quite early in his career, and learned that science popularization has its place in a democracy. He was quite a productive fellow, willing to accept risks (he chose the Viking 2 landing site) and it is a pity he passed away so soon.