BOTANY FOR LIVING 499 



of Americans is eager to feel at home amid new plant neighbors. They can 

 enjoy their newfound freedom more if they have at least a nodding acquaint- 

 ance with the native flora and the rich variety of introduced species. 



These three trends offer a great opportunity for botanists, but with the 

 opportunity is an obligation. Ours is the responsibility for presenting botani- 

 cal knowledge with such a selection of content as can be of value to individuals 

 affected by these changes in living habits. For those who write as well as teach, 

 there is the added privilege of interpreting their own experiences and of trans- 

 lating the treasures which lie hidden in technical journals and abstruse texts 

 into prose understandable to the layman. In matching botanical education 

 to the new trend in living, we as leaders should introduce such material, where 

 it is relevant, into the traditional content of botany. It is also worthwhile re- 

 membering that as botanists we are more fortunate than our fellow scientists in 

 chemistry and physics, whose subject matter does not lend itself to such 

 avocational and recreational application as does ours. This presents a great 

 challenge. However, academic indifference to the future interest of the 

 general student and layman, or an ivory-tower philosophy as to who shall 

 be the chosen few to drink at the fountain of botanical wisdom, could well 

 keep us from meeting the challenge adequately. 



Elsewhere in this volume Donald Culross Peattie has contributed a thought- 

 provoking article on the importance of popularization of botany and the 

 trials of a popularizer. Everyone who has tried to depart from the orthodox 

 presentation of botanical information will agree with Peattie. There is no 

 need of reiterating the point that more widespread willingness of botanists 

 to share their enthusiasm and knowledge with the layman would be a fine 

 beginning toward meeting these trends. In this connection, an additional 

 fact is worth noting. Why do so few professional botanists contribute articles 

 of a popular nature? Much that appears in magazines and books is written 

 by self-taught naturalists who may be journalists or businessmen, with botany 

 as a hobby. This is no criticism of their excellent contributions, but to have 

 to rely on those who are technically untutored in our field to take up our case 

 is certainly a reflection on professional botanists. How much easier it should 

 be for the botanist trained in his subject to translate firsthand information 

 into accurate but readable articles acceptable to publishers. 



In a recent conversation with the editor of Natural History, the magazine 

 published by the American Museum of Natural History, we discussed the 

 relatively small percentage of articles by botanists as compared with that of 

 zoologists. We agreed that botanists seem to find it harder to write so that 

 an editor, and hence the general reader, will be interested. Botanists seem 

 more handicapped by use of traditional nomenclature and an excessive burden 

 of technical vocabulary. If this is so, we have much to learn from our zoologi- 

 cal colleagues to make the world of plant life available to the public. 



In looking ahead, what goals should we have in view to assist our students 



