For Sale: One Nobel Prize Medal (Slightly Used, By Francis Crick)

Hugh Pickens writes "UPI reports that for the first time in the history of Nobel Prize, one of the Nobel Prize medals, along with the diploma presented by the Nobel committee, is on auction — with an opening bid of $250,000. Awarded to Francis Crick, who along with James Watson and Maurice Wilkins won the Nobel Prize for medicine in 1962 'for their discoveries concerning the molecular structure of nucleic acids and its significance for information transfer in living material,' the medal will be auctioned off in New York City, by Heritage Auctions. The medal has been kept in a safe deposit box in California since Crick's widow passed away in 2007 and a portion of the proceeds will go to the Francis Crick Institute of disease research scheduled to open in London in 2015. '"By auctioning his Nobel it will finally be made available for public display and be well looked after. Our hope is that, by having it available for display, it can be an inspiration to the next generation of scientists," says Crick's granddaughter, Kindra Crick. "My granddad was honored to have received the Nobel Prize, but he was not the type to display his awards; his office walls contained a large chalkboard, artwork and a portrait of Charles Darwin."'"

Comments

Portion of the proceeds?

[AuralityKev]

When I see things like these, especially with grandkids as the spokespeople, it just makes me think it's a cash grab. It's not due to any "inspirational" mojo behind hanging it up somewhere. If that were the case, they should just donate it outright, and maybe have people pay a couple bucks a gander, and toss that to the Francis Crick Institute. Not "a portion" of the proceeds, which could be $10 on a potential windfall.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[oodaloop]

Portions can be represented as fractions, and 0/0 is a fraction, right?

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[ledow]

To be honest, Crick was a bit of a git anyway (and Watson wasn't exactly what you might call a gentleman). They basically stole someone else's unpublished scientific work to confirm their own data (mainly, it has to be said, because she was only a woman) and without which they'd have ended up with entirely the wrong model. They were loathe to credit her, even after her death, even though others did.

Not saying they *didn't* do a lot of the work, but without her observations, comments, and years of working on data, they'd have been lost for quite a while longer than they were.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[CannonballHead]

Or FILE_NOT_FOUND.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Graydyn Young]

For those wondering who this post is referring to, that would be Rosalind Franklin.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Anonymous Coward]

A fraction involves two integers.

True.

0 is an integer

True.

so 0/0 is a fraction.

False.
The denominator of a fraction must be nonzero. A fraction is a number. N/0 is never a number, regardless of the value of N.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[DerekLyons]

Indeed. It's pretty low to get all worked up about Watson & Crick's asshattery... and then not mention the individual involved.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[PTBarnum]

This claim is, at best, controversial. Some people say that Rosalind's lab partner Maurice Wilkins gave her unpublished work to Watson and Crick without her permission; Watson and Crick say that it was in fact officially released by King's College. I'm not aware that Franklin herself ever stated that she had been robbed. Wilkins was included in the Nobel prize; presumably Franklin would have been also had she still been alive.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[tnk1]

Kissinger, like him or loathe him, actually DID something on the world stage BEFORE he got the award including the actual negotiation of peace accords, even though the accords ultimately failed to succeed.

Obama was a not even inaugurated President-elect whose main achievement was being in the U.S. Senate for a couple of years and having one kickass campaign PR team.

You can make a good argument why Kissinger was overrated, but I was absolutely stunned that Obama got an award not even for trying to bring peace, but simply promising to do so.

The Peace Prize is definitely a different category of award than the others, and it has a tendency to become political due simply to the subject matter, but they used to at least point to actual work or achievements, the quality of those actions admittedly being up for argument.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[interkin3tic]

I'm not aware that Franklin herself ever stated that she had been robbed.

According to wiki and whoever they cite, she probably wasn't aware her data was used and died before she would have found that out.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Charliemopps]

It's hers to sell. She shouldn't have to justify it to you or anyone else. You're an ass for suggesting that she should. Being neither a member of the family or the Nobel comity, it's none of your damned business.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[the gnat]

Perhaps the family of Dr. Crick reexamined the value of a Nobel Prize when a Nobel Prize for Peace was awarded to Barack Obama

What exactly is the problem with you people who can't tell the difference between the Nobel Peace prize and the prizes for Physics, Chemistry, or Medicine? What makes you think the two categories have anything to do with one another, either administratively or politically? They could give the Peace prize to Bashar Assad this fall and it would still have zero relevance to the worth of the chemistry prize.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[wiredlogic]

None of the Nobel committee's failings are Obama's fault. He was stuck accepting a prize any reasonable man would rather not receive. It boils down to a bunch of Europeans infatuated with a new magic negro.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's simple, really. He was awarded the prize as a gigantic, "fuck you, good riddance" to the Bush Administration.

It doesn't say anything good about the award or the institution. In fact, I imagine that Obama would (privately) say the same.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[PoolOfThought]

Maybe the boat your imagining and the car you're picturing just aren't nice enough.

Then again, I'm not sure how that's would even be a possibility considering that college education you have in mind should cost that same $250k.

I think the thing to keep in mind is somewhat more akin to what jooromancer conveying. If grandpa didn't care, then do what you will, but realize that it can't be undone. If grandpa did care, then at least TRY to honor those wishes rather than piss something so valuable away on goodies for yourself. And yes, the boat, the cars, and the education (at your prices) are all pissing it away.

That being said, to be quite honest, I'm certain that Grandma and Grandpa, both having likely lived through very depressed economies would be quite pleased to know that based on their work their children's children SHOULD never have to experience that again. I would guess that if they sell it and do something good with the money that actually HELPS their family tree, then everyone would be pleased. It would actually be a happy story instead of something about which to gossip.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Feyshtey]

Maybe it would help if you actually investigated anything for yourself rather than believing in an out-dated group that has morphed into something largely political. Here's the easy version for you, if you care to educate yourself before spouting off like a moron again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Prize_controversies

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Feyshtey]

It says everything about the award, and the current state of the institution. To give the award to a person who has not earned it simply to say "fuck you" to anyone else for any reason shows a disregard for the spirit of the award, not to mention childish petulence. If your reason for the award is accurate then its even more appauling than simply because they bought into propoganda about Obama's intentions rather than judging the man on his actions. Even if everything Obama said he would bring were found to be completely true in the future, the FUTURE is the time to present the award, after a validation of the promises.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Rhacman]

You are correct if you are referring to rational numbers. A fraction in the most general sense need not be comprised of two integers, for instance SQRT(2) / 2 is a fraction.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[GodfatherofSoul]

Well, it was just some chick after all.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Raenex]

He was stuck accepting a prize any reasonable man would rather not receive.

I would have had tremendous respect if Obama had refused the prize and insisted that they give it to somebody more deserving.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[aardvarkjoe]

Well, family should respect the wishes of their deceased.

This is by no means a universally held belief. I tend to think that the wishes of someone who is dead are irrelevant -- because once they're dead, they're not in any position to care about it anyway.

Sure, I'd probably hang on to grandpa's Nobel Prize too -- but I don't think that their family has some moral obligation to do so. Maybe they feel that the knowledge that their ancestor won the prize is of more importance than the physical artifact.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[FleaPlus]

It's also worth noting that Francis Crick wished to give Rosalind Franklin greater credit, but didn't due to the personality conflicts between Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin:

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2010/11/03/rosalind-franklin-and-dna-how-wronged-was-she/

Moreover, she became great close friends with Watson and with Crick. But sheâ(TM)s unlikelyâ"if in fact she felt they had stolen her discovery. She must have known that they were using her data because there were no other dataâ"her data are acknowledged in Crickâ(TM)s paper. And again, in the second paper he published in Nature a month later. What prevented Crick from giving a much fairer acknowledgment to Rosalind Franklin in the original Nature paper, which he wished to do, was that he to negotiate this with Wilkins.

So in his original draft is, he says, "We thank Rosalind Franklin for her beautiful uh photo of DNA," which makes quite clear that this was what he was relying on. Now, at Wilkinsâ(TM) suggestion he crossed out the phrase "beautiful photo." So it was not an adequate acknowledgment but it was a very different story than stealing her discovery, which is the way it has been portrayed.

Elkin: Nicholas, you are absolutely right. There was an earlier, more accurate acknowledgment. It wasnâ(TM)t to Franklin, it was to Wilkins and Franklin and it did say "very beautiful photographs" which only meant Franklinâ(TM)s. And Wilkins was the one who crossed it out. There are actually six drafts. Very interesting to see that.

And also to see how weak, false, even the first two or three were, before Wilkins got it to decimate it more compared to the draft they wrote about the first model, where they very very clearly acknowledged Franklin.

Re:Portion of the proceeds?

[Daniel Dvorkin]

Moving those goalposts around must be pretty tiring. Why don't you take a rest?

Re:For sale: All Nobel peace prizes.

[ganjadude]

That was the "peace" prize. This is the science prize. Big difference

How much for the chalkboard?

[crazyjj]

I'll give you $50!

Here's an idea for a portion of the proceeds

[Anonymous Coward]

Award them to the relatives of Rosalind Franklin.

Donate to the Rosalind Franklin Society

[jestill]

It would be great to buy this and donate it to the Rosalind Franklin Society ... http://www.rosalindfranklinsociety.org/

Re:Donate to the Rosalind Franklin Society

[ledow]

Start up a kickstarter and I'm in.

"available for public display"?

[wisnoskij]

Are they restricting the bids to museums?
I see no where that private individual cannot buy this to add to their personal collection.

Stephen Colbert should buy it

[dkleinsc]

That way, he'd be able to claim that he's a Nobel-holding doctor, rather than just a doctor!

Auction Link?

[wisnoskij]

Here is a link to the item, it is being auctioned off by Heritage Auctions: http://historical.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=6093&lotIdNo=50001

Re:Auction Link?

[skine]

Just in case there are other Nobel Prize winners looking to sell, there's a link of the page labeled "I Have One of These to Sell."

Re:They can't be worth that much

[wisnoskij]

This is totally not off topic, Obama's Nobel metal for not being Bush degraded the reputation of all Nobel prices.

Re:Scientists, sheesh.

[hazem]

Crick may have been a brilliant microbiologist, but he certainly doesn't know shit about business.

Well, to be fair to Dr. Crick, he's been dead since 2004, so knowing much of anything is probably a pretty big challenge for him.

Re:Vegas Trip

[Sparticus789]

You're right. It's unique and pretty neat. There's a great story to it. But it's not everyday that someone comes in to the shop looking for a Nobel Prize. It's gonna take up space on a shelf for years.

Re:Kindra Check?

[Baloroth]

The typo is in TFA as well, so I'm not sure proofreading would have helped. It is, after all, quite possible her name actually is Kindra Check (it isn't, I checked).

Re:Vegas Trip

[Beardo the Bearded]

I have a buddy who's an expert on Nobel Prize for Medicine medals. Let me give him a call.

Re:I'm going to buy it and melt it down

[Anonymous Coward]

Get it bronzed instead.

Re:For sale: All Nobel peace prizes.

[gandhi_2]

Once upon a time, someone *might* have argued that they both had to be earned, and not handed out lightly or for political purposes.

Re:For sale: All Nobel peace prizes.

[donscarletti]

They're not worth even that, after Obama got his for sustaining war, torture and murdering own citizens.

Well, he got it for being elected, if they want to give him a prize for sustaining war, torture and murdering own citizens then they're going to have to give him another.

Tom Lehrer famously said that political satire became obsolete when Henry Kissinger was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. I think it's been more or less a joke since well before that.

Though it is awarded by the Norwegian Nobel Committee which has different standards and values to Karolinska Institutet or Swedish Academy of Science.

Re:Vegas Trip

[azadrozny]

It would be worth more if it wasn't personalized.

Hey, what about makerbot?

[cellocgw]

Poo on buying the medal: they should release the CAD data so we all can download and print our very own 3D copy.

Michael Mann

[OakDragon]

Perhaps Michael Mann would be interested.

Re:Scientists, sheesh.

[Remus Shepherd]

If he was a really brilliant microbiologist, death wouldn't have stopped him.

Prize Money?

[tompaulco]

If it comes with the Prize Money, I bid half a million.

This medal belongs at the Eagle pub

[hotdiggity]

The Eagle Pub in Cambridge belongs to Corpus Christi College, and it is the place where Crick and Watson announced the helical DNA structure.

Corpus has the money; it could afford it. It's historically relevant, and I could think of nothing better than to hold a raise a pint in their honour.

And then maybe chase it bitterly with a bottle of Jack Daniels, in tribute to young Miss Rosalind Franklin from whom they stole so much.

First Nobel auctioned?

[D H NG]

Did the submitter even read the article? It clearly said that Aage Bohr's medal was sold last year.

why would anyone want this at all?

[0111 1110]

Why would anyone want it? It's not like they can somehow borrow the achievement that earned it by having it on their mantelpiece. Well I guess they could try to change the name to their own and tell anyone who will listen that they received a Nobel prize. What does the prize look like anyway? Maybe the granddaughter can just write in the name of the auction winner with magic marker or something. Maybe for 300,000+ she would be willing to cross out the other names as well so that you don't have to share the prize. I can't picture the kind of person who would want someone else's Nobel prize even for free let alone for 250k. It's sort of like buying someone else's university diploma.

Re:I'm going to buy it and melt it down

[Half-pint HAL]

Naw... Zombies don't need marrow. It's when you're reanimating skeletons that you need to start thinking about that. Not that I'd know, because I don't practice the dark art of necromancy.

(Igor, do you think I got away with that, or do I now need to unleash my undead hordes on the Slashdot readership?)