Hiding the Data: The Narrative Effects of Deferred Information in Contemporary Science Novels

Abstract

In recent decades, representations of science in a variety of media have become increasingly popular. This includes a growing corpus of so-called science novels, which realistically depict a working life in science. The specific properties of the novel allow authors to take creative liberties when it comes to the arrangement of information. These arrangements, which often include intentional gaps – either temporary or permanent – notably affect how one reads the plot and the depicted characters. In this paper, I analyze two contemporary science novels which center fictional cases of research misconduct: Allegra Goodman’s Intuition (2006) and Pernille Rørth’s Raw Data (2016). I argue that in narratives revolving around research misconduct, missing information not only maintains suspense, but also delays judgement of character. This is due to the fact that readers need to negotiate between different versions of events depending on how much information is available. The selection of information, too, impacts the likeliness of alternative cause and effect explanations, which can shift blame from one character to another. Finally, one must consider how truthful the narrators are to the readers, and last but not least, to themselves.