Atul Gawande

I usually pay glancing attention to the MacArthur genius awards, noting the names I recognize, which tend to be in literature, politics, and the arts (my favorite MacArthur ever is Bob Moses, founder of the Algebra Project) (did you know that algebra is the single most important predictor of future academic success? make sure your kids take algebra! and, more importantly, support the Algebra Project and help disadvantaged kids gain access to algebra--and their futures!) (end of public service announcement).

This year's MacArthurs didn't really grab me. Now that I look over the list, I realize that I've heard of several, but when I first saw the announcement in the newspaper, I really only nodded my head at David Macaulay.

It wasn't till I read this story on childbirth from The New Yorker that I remembered Atul Gawande had won. Then I slapped myself upside the head and nodded really enthusiastically!

There's a doctor who writes features for my local newspaper who sucks (there's also a psychiatrist who writes op-eds who is really good--I'm not talking about her). I actually don't remember the guy's name, and I'm not going to try and figure it out, because I wouldn't mention it anway, but 1) he's not a very good writer, and 2) he has a hard time with the difference between objective and opinionated. I'm thinking of two pieces he wrote this year, one about some issue related to adoption (I think--or maybe it was religion? infertility? ...obviously memorable) and the other about pain relief in childbirth. In each, he set up the piece as a thoughtful exploration of the issues, when in fact he clearly had an agenda he was trying to sneak in--and in the case of the pain relief article, his agenda was "Pain is unpleasant and can be alleviated so what's wrong with these silly women who insist on natural childbirth?" Need I say more?

I mean, I'm fine with objectivity, and I'm fine with opinion, and I'm fine with subtlety and complexity, but I am totally not OK with sneaky writing, especially sneaky fact-based writing (sneaky suspense novels are a different matter altogether, but we're not talking about suspense novels here).

Anyway, doctor-writer Atul Gawande is the antithesis of that guy. He writes about science and medicine in a thoughtful, complex, careful manner that garners both fascination and respect. He upends conventional wisdom more effectively than almost any writer I know ("The Cancer-Cluster Myth" is one of the best examples of this). And he is a beautiful writer who impeccably models how to structure both the explanatory and the exploratory essay, often at the same time.

The New Yorker piece is a perfect case in point. It balances the story of a single birth with the history of childbirth and obstetrics; it acknowledges the complexities of human capability and natural processes; it shows us practical realities but also considers their metaphysical implications.

Definitely a well-deserved MacArthur.