Gigantic A-Hole wrote in message
<5d0bf2be.0208311622.583c2544 at posting.google.com>...
>"Kenneth Collins" <k.p.collins at worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:<xeYb9.43920$Ke2.3090486 at bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>...
>> Marie shared the Physics Nobel in 1903 with Henri Becquerel and
her
>> Husband Pierre. She won the Chemistry Nobel in 1911 [unshared].
Her
>> daughter, Irene Joliot-Curie, shared the Chemistry prize in 1935.
>>>> Marie's relationship with Pierre was as beautiful as any
relationship
>> between a man and a woman that I've ever heard of - full of
'light',
>> 'quiet' mutual-caring, and invigorating scientific-interest.
>>>> ken
>>>Translation from feminese: He did the work and let her take the
>credit for it.
Nope. Pierre's and Marie's working-relationship was 'just' that
extraordinary, and Marie was Truly in-there, as a full participant in
every way.
Pierre was a pretty-special guy. A little 'absent-minded' [he was
reading in a notebook, while crossing a street, when he was hit by a
work-wagon]. Highly-curious, even to a degree of being 'Child-like'
in the way he was captivated with new stuff. He was always
working-intensely, even while carrying a 'normal' Teaching load.
I'd've been fast-Friends with him if I'd lived back then, and, of
course, if our paths crossed ['course I'd've probably been his
custodian :-]. He was fairly without-Prejudice - open-minded,
curious, accepting, encouraging of his students - had many original
good ideas.
Marie Recognized all that, found its embrace, and all that was
right-there, within-her, just 'Blossomed'.
Her work was, as I've described it, surely finding-itself in her
vibrant interaction with Pierre, but genuinely her own work, and
Truly-Heroic.
And she was a good Mother to boot.
The Curies led a rather 'quiet' existence, satisfied with their
mutual interest in Science, and a warm home-life.
What's not to like?
>>I actually don't know this for a fact, but it sounds likely and it
>also sounds like what a woman's only conception of a "beautiful"
>relationship would be.
Well I'm a red-blooded-American-Man, if that makes any difference.
It's just that I Love Science [and since I'm not 'coersible' with
respect to 'how folks're supposed to be', I tend to just use the
'language' that I find in my 'heart'], so I saw the True-Wonder-Stuff
in the Curie's interactive-dynamics because it was so obviously
conducive to doing-Science. [And because I understand the 'costs' of
'being-alone' while confronting merciless unknowns that one comes up
against while doing Science - things just go better in the embrace of
Love. If I celebrate such too-much, it's because I understand its
Worth - from having had to 'live' in its Absence].
k. p. collins
