The first Blue Plaques to be unveiled in the 150th anniversary year of the London-based scheme were a “double blue” in Paultons Square, Chelsea. Most attention will probably be on the writer Samuel Beckett, who lodged at the address in 1934, but the physicist and government advisor Patrick Blackett, who lived at the same address between 1953 and 1969, is also commemorated.
Blackett is undoubtedly the less famous but certainly meets the stiff criteria of significance demanded by the Blue Plaque panel (full disclosure: I am currently a member of the panel but was not at the time that these plaques were decided). He was, after all, a Nobel Prize laureate – awarded in 1948 “for his development of the Wilson cloud chamber method, and his discoveries therewith in the fields of nuclear physics and cosmic radiation” – and a President of the Royal Society.
This prize-winning experimental work was largely done at the Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge, where he had trained under Ernest Rutherford, after an education at the Royal Naval Colleges of Osborne and Dartmouth and service in the First World War, including at the 1916 Battle of Jutland. Blackett became a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1933, the year in which he moved to London to head a laboratory at Birkbeck College. After this he helped establish world-class laboratories at the University of Manchester and Imperial College London.
Blackett’s significance also stems from his years of providing advice to government on scientific and university matters. During the Second World War he sat on committees on radar and the military applications of nuclear fission. In the latter, he was the only member who opposed the view that an atomic bomb could be made in wartime Britain. As a socialist, who pushed for a close and productive alliance between science, politics and planning, he was viewed by some with deep suspicion. That he remained influential must be testament to his reputation and skill as an advisor and, presumably, diplomat. He once said that the experimental physicist was “a Jack-of-all-Trades”, and perhaps the advisor needs to be one too.
It was a nice touch for the Blue Plaques scheme that they could start off their anniversary year by honouring figures from both literature and science. They kick-start a series of plaques for a diverse group of men and women from stage, screen and sports. However, noting that Blackett is the only scientist to be honoured with a plaque in 2016, and hearing that he is the first physicist to be marked in Chelsea (while Beckett is one of many literary and theatrical figures), I did some searches of the c.900 existing plaques.
It is fascinating to speculate on the changing fashions, biases and matters of chance that have led to the plaques we currently have. As with statues, women are not well represented, although those behind the scheme are working hard to promote some of the existing plaques to women and to request proposals for more. At 13%, it is not currently much to be proud of, although a better proportion, I hear, than the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography can boast.
But what of different fields? The website has only 62 categorised as “science” (just 4 of which are women), some overlapping with the 50 listed as “medicine” (women feature rather better here). This doesn’t rate too badly against “sport” (21 existing with two more, Bobby Moore and Laurie Cunningham, scheduled for later this year) or theatre and film (69). However, the possible biases of the historic scheme seem clear from the 160 listed under “politics and administration” and no fewer than 205 in “literature”.
If these proportions are to shift – and if the scheme is to be more representative in terms of class, gender, race, nationality, sexuality, geography and more – then the panel needs the public to come forward with a more varied set of nominations. Anyone can propose a plaque, if they take account of the various criteria (including the candidate having been dead for at least 20 years and a building with which they can be associated having survived).
Shortlisting is very selective, so successful candidates must also meet the (clearly contestable and problematic) criteria of lasting significance. This is a tricky judgement when considering those who, unlike Blackett, did not or could not become figures of the establishment, bearing honours and distinctions. Nevertheless, I can assure you that the panel is very open to alternative, varied and diverse suggestions.
Over to you....
