Heroes

It's that time of the year again: as the leaves fall from the sky, so do the Nobel prizes, and with them fame and glory beyond your wildest dreams. Who wouldn't want to step into the footsteps of Einstein and Curie?

And still, I somehow strongly dislike the kind of hero-worshipping associated with the Nobel prizes, or similar awards and fellowships. To be honest, a lot of my resentment might have to do with the fact that I will probably never win such a prestigious award. But besides the scarring of the soul that comes from such a sense of worthlessness, I've been trying to think about why I dislike hero-worshipping so much. My current thought is that the main reason is that these awards lift the awardees up above the rest of the crowd. This can be a good thing, and it is nice to give a much-loved colleague the sense of being special. However, to me, it also gives the sense that these people are an order of magnitude better in what they do, compared to mere mortals such as us. In reality, they are probably only marginally 'better', but only in some aspects. In most cases, these heroes are probably not really better, but only a bit luckier.

In any case, how can you even tell when someone is better than someone else? It's apples and oranges all the way for selection committees. Also, who decides who is on these committees in the first place? In my view, as a young scientist, some things that tend to get you prestigious awards or fellowships in science are:

- Knowing previous awardees very well ( https://www.pnas.org/content/115/50/12608 )

- Getting your work noticed by senior scientists

- Being at the right place at the right time

- Meeting some vague quality threshold

Personally, I certainly cannot complain about some of these aspects. I have been very lucky to be able to work with exciting new data, and I have worked with some amazing people. Although I was a first-generation student, I never felt I was held back by the lack of money, and I was never discriminated against due to my gender, sexuality, or the colour of my skin. On the other hand, selling yourself can be really hard if you already think it's nearly impossible to ask a waiter for a receipt.

Some things that do not necessarily get you prestigious awards and fellowships, or maybe even permanent positions, in science are:

- Working hard

- Being efficient

- Being a good mentor

- Writing good code

- Helping out others by enabling their science

- Being different from the establishment

- Being kind

And yet, I would say these qualities are at least as important in doing science as being seen to do ground-breaking work. Why don't we also lift the people up that have those qualities? Perhaps there are more heroes than you think. You might share the office with one.