STEMSet Boulevard ft. Sade Abiodun

Representation of scientists in cinema.

This article follows our #EDIYourSci Workshop Series, in which we explore science communication incorporating equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI). We aim to question and critically discuss the ways science communication is done and how we can move forward to integrate non-traditional methods and EDI in our practices. 

by Vi-An Dang

Graphic by Kimi

Image Description: A bubbling purple Erlenmeyer flask with a call to action in pink letters that read: “Challenge the Scientist Tropes in Fiction.” The workshop title “STEMSet Boulevard: Representation of Scientists on the Big Screen” sits to the left of the flask; to the right, a graphic of the speaker (Sade Abiodun) with short dusty-pink curly hair and hoop earrings grins.

About one month ago, SciComm Collective organised their first #EDIYourSci series workshop, cleverly named STEMSet Boulevard: Representation of Scientists on the Big Screen.  They set out to examine how science and scientists are depicted in television and film, and the repercussion of these representations on public and personal perceptions of science. Sade Abiodun (she/they), the invited speaker, was astonishingly well-placed to speak on this topic, bringing to the table her intersecting identities as a Black neuroscientist and filmmaker. 

Introduction

The event began with a brief overview of why representation even matters. Michelle Shen (she/her), a member of SciComm Collective, called attention to the overrepresentation of male and female white academics in leadership positions at Canadian universities, as well as the underrepresentation of people of  colour in faculty positions, despite students of colour making up nearly half of the undergraduate population. Reflections on power came up here, as they would throughout the workshop: Who holds the power? Who gets to make the decisions? 

The answer to those questions remained the same, even as we shifted our focus to television and cinema. Scientists depicted on screen are overwhelmingly cisgender, white, and male, with examples going as far back as the 1931 Frankenstein film based on the 19th century Mary Shelley novel. And this skewed representation has not changed in recent years; in fact, data from a 2018 study by the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media showed a plateau in women and people of colour portraying STEM characters on screen between 2007 and 2017. Additionally, when looking at intersections of identities, only a minority of depicted women were women of colour, and only 2% of women of colour had a leading role in their story. It should be noted, however, that this study did not look at identities beyond gender and race, nor considered non-binary genders. 

Giving more space to identities that are not as frequently represented may restore balance in these positions of power, whether in fiction or in reality. To do so, representation of diverse identities on screen should go beyond race and binary genders by including people with intersecting and less visible identities, such as people who are non-binary, D/disabled, have diverse sexual orientations or religious identities – or many of those at once.

Representation in Cinema

Sade Abiodun started her segment of the workshop with a quote that she lives by in her day to day: “What you see is what you get.” She shared that the individuals she sees and encounters through science exist as “bodies of proof”: these bodies carry stories and identities similar to hers, validating that she can exist in the fields she wants to pursue. Abodiun observed that there is a “staggering lack of diversity” of bodies of proof at all levels of academia as well as in mainstream media, particularly ones that looked like her. 

It’s due to this scarcity in diverse representation that Abodiun was “absolutely blown away” when she encountered Dr. Simone Garnett, a fictional Black woman and neuroscientist from the TV series The Good Place. Finally seeing herself on screen – seeing a Black female neuroscientist represented in a role with agency and depth – was both inspiring and validating of the place she held in science, shared Abiodun. Indeed, the ways scientists are represented in cinema and television critically shape our idea of who science can be.

Tropes, which are narrative devices used to facilitate the development of a story, can become overused and end up perpetuating stereotypes. Television and cinema have relied on tropes to depict scientists, and while these tropes may have evolved over time, they still remain reductive and restrictive. The most traditional and oldest trope is that of the White Male Scientist, as seen in Dr. Strangelove or Dr. Emmett Brown from Back to the Future. Since then, we have seen the “Pensive, Sheltered, Workaholic”, its slightly modernised “Classic Nerd”; the all-knowing “Polymath”; and attempts at diversity such as the “Hot Nerd”, to superficially include women or the “Foreign Scientist” to superficially include scientists of colour (usually men). 

Despite being fictional and oftentimes comical, tropes ultimately shape our own perceptions of science and scientists. Through these stereotyped depictions, TV and cinema end up sending the message that STEM professions are for white men who are either geniuses, anti-social, nerdy, or foreign. The aforementioned Geena Davis Institute study found that over 80% of women and girls felt that seeing female STEM characters was integral to them and their understanding of the importance of STEM. While limited data are available for other identities, it’s clear that the lack of diverse representation in media directly influences the sense of inclusion (or lack thereof) that marginalised students experience, and ultimately determines who ends up joining and staying in STEM.

One of the ways to tackle and challenge these stereotypes is through anti-tropes, as named by Abiodun. These are counterexamples to film and TV tropes, demonstrated through the advocacy and activism of real-life scientists. Social media provides an easy way to connect with scientists of diverse backgrounds and recognise the shortcomings of fictional depictions so far. Initiatives highlighting traditionally marginalised racial groups, such as Black in Neuro or Natives in STEM (@NativesInSTEM), reinforce that they exist and belong in the field just as much as the White Male scientist. Similar organisations such as LGBTQ+STEM (@LGBTSTEM), DisabledInSTEM (@DisabledSTEM), and Islam & Science (@IslamScienceNet) uplift voices of less visible queer, D/disabled, and religious identities in ways that visual media often struggles to do. Still, fictional depictions are needed to change popular and creative perceptions of science and scientists; film grants such as Alfred P. Sloan’s SFFILM grant creates opportunities for modern, inclusive, and diverse explorations of scientists in cinema. If you’re lucky, you can find some combination of these – uplifting many-layered real-life marginalised identities through TV and film.

In the end, Abiodun says, it comes down to how you fit into this narrative: who are you within science, and how can you shape discourse within as well as beyond the scientific community?

Discussion: Scientists in Film

Following Abiodun’s riveting talk, the workshop continued with discussions in breakout rooms where participants delved deeper into two recent films depicting scientists: The Martian and Annihilation.

Image Description: Screenshot of clip [20:55 to 21:33] from The Martian. Mark Watney is recording himself as part of a video log after having been left alone for dead on Mars. He is seated inside of the Hab (the Mars mission base), and only his upper half is visible (he is wearing a long-sleeve navy coloured shirt). Numbers indicating the day (Sol), the pressure (in PSI), oxygen levels (in %), and the temperature (in °C) are displayed on the left of the video log screen.

The Martian, released in 2015, features an astronaut played by Matt Damon who gets stranded on Mars without any of his crew. He needs to figure out how to survive alone on the desolate planet using the scarce resources available to him. Over the course of the movie, his character Mark Watney is able to accomplish an array of challenging tasks, including growing a potato farm, performing surgery on himself, and eventually finding a way to contact NASA. When discussing this movie, it was noted that this character, in addition to being a white cisgender man, was a clear example of the “Polymath” trope, i.e. the “all-knowing” and “all-doing” genius scientist. Realistically, scientists are definitely not all-knowing and hardly ever work alone; in fact, teamwork and collaboration are important pillars of scientific work. Depictions of such teams of scientists would also give the opportunity for more diverse characters to be represented, simply by virtue of having more available roles. Still, participants acknowledged that Mark Watney’s characterisation allowed the story to progress in a compelling way – are realistic representations a necessary sacrifice for the sake of entertainment?

Image Description: Screenshot of clip [21:44 to 22:54] from Annihilation. Lena meets three other women scientists who are investigating the Southern Reach at the military base. The scene is at night, outdoors, so the lighting is dim. The four scientists are sitting at what might be a picnic table and sharing drinks.

Annihilation had a different approach to representing scientists. The movie introduces four characters in science fields.The main character is a biologist, and the supporting characters are a psychologist, a geomorphologist, and a physicist. It was noted during our discussion that there are also two characters of colour; we seemed to be moving towards more racially diverse representation. Still, the two leading characters are white. This casting choice is especially significant when considering the series on which the movie was based. The trilogy of The Southern Reach describes the main character as being of Asian descent, and the psychologist is of mixed Indigenous and European settler/white background. This relevation led to discussions of white-washing, and the performativity and inefficacy of “diversity” when white characters hold the most power, and non-white characters are reduced to singular labels. To encourage participants to think of the identities they hold, they were asked to share three words that represented some of their identities. The resulting word cloud illustrated the diversity of individuals who participated in the workshop – beyond simply race and field of study.

Representation needs to go beyond tropes, reductive labels, and visible identifiers such as race and gender presentation, members of the SciComm Collective team concluded. Less visible identities such as disability, gender and sexuality, religion, or socioeconomic background are often dismissed or excluded from media and STEM positions. And while there is no perfect way to portray scientists on screen, their depictions are made more realistic when the characters occupy multiple identities inside and outside of a variety of marginalised spaces. If this is to happen, both scientists and filmmakers need to make an effort to highlight and uplift more diverse voices, both in fiction and in real life. As we move forward with these efforts, we are encouraged to reflect on the power we hold through the stories we tell.