Substantia. An International Journal of the History of Chemistry 6(1): 129-131, 2022 Firenze University Press www.fupress.com/substantia ISSN 2532-3997 (online) | DOI: 10.36253/Substantia-1529 Citation: Rasmussen S.C. (2022) Com- ments on Shirakawa’s Response. Sub- stantia 6(1): 129-131. doi: 10.36253/ Substantia-1529 Received: Dec 20, 2021 Revised: Jan 16, 2022 Just Accepted Online: Jan 17, 2022 Published: Mar 07, 2022 Copyright: © 2022 Rasmussen S.C. This is an open access, peer-reviewed arti- cle published by Firenze University Press (http://www.fupress.com/substan- tia) and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Data Availability Statement: All rel- evant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files. Competing Interests: The Author(s) declare(s) no conflict of interest. Historical Article Comments on Shirakawa’s Response Seth C. Rasmussen Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND 58108 USA Email: seth.rasmussen@ndsu.edu As both an active researcher in the synthesis of conjugated materials and a chemist-historian that has spent the last decade attempting to detail and clarify the history of conjugated and conducting polymers,1,2 I am over- joyed that Prof. Shirakawa has elected to provide additional personal details relating to the discovery and development of polyacetylene films. Shirakawa has provided this material in response to my most recent Substantia paper that details newly revealed accounts by Hyung Chick Pyun (1926-2018), who was a visiting Korean scientist that carried out the initial experiment that led to these films.3 This material is critical to advance our understanding of this important historical event. At the same time, however, I was quite dis- appointed to find that Shirakawa viewed my paper as biased, particularly as this puts me in the unpleasant position of having to defend my integrity as a chemist-historian. I approach my historical efforts with great care and the integrity of these efforts is something that I take quite seriously. According to Merriam-Webster, when used as a verb (as the case here), bias means “to give a settled and often prejudiced outlook to”. In a more gen- eral way, bias typical refers to an emphasis in favor of or against an idea or entity, usually in a manner that is closed-minded, prejudicial, or unfair. Of course, the goal and expectation within history is that descriptions of his- torical subjects, general interpretations of the past, and historical expla- nations are fair and not misleading. This does not mean that bias does not occur within history and the historian C. Behan McCullagh describes four common ways in which historical writing can be biased.4 Still, McCullagh goes on to explain that such cases are only biased if they occur because the historian wants a particular outcome, normally to further certain personal interests. Of course, one can describe Pyun’s account as biased, which would be valid. After all, it is a personal account with significant self-interest, as are many such personal accounts, and was written by a man who felt grievously wronged. Still, the use of such sources does not necessarily make the result- ing historical analysis biased. Historians have long been aware that written documents reflect the concepts and interests of their authors.4 This issue is generally dealt with by not taking material at its face value, but to construct explanations of its origins that will account for its features as much as possi- ble, after which efforts are made to find coherence among the various expla- http://www.fupress.com/substantia http://www.fupress.com/substantia http://www.fupress.com/substantia 130 Seth C. Rasmussen nations to decide what really happened. This is precisely the approach taken in the analysis of Pyun’s account and its incorporation into a larger view of the discovery of polyacetylene films, including highlighting aspects that were known to be inaccurate. Shirakawa is also critical of the sources used in the analysis and presentation of the discovery of polyacety- lene films, stating “Most descriptions in the article are based on Pyun’s accounts and third-party records, such as press reports by the Nobel Foundation and Royal Swed- ish Academy of Sciences at the time of the Nobel Prize announcement and award. The article lacks any of my own input, except for my printed Nobel Lecture and sci- entific papers.” This, however, is a misrepresentation of the sources used. While third-party sources were indeed used, this was only in discussion of how the event has been commonly portrayed by others, as well as high- lighting errors in many of those descriptions of the event. In terms of constructing a more accurate narra- tive of the discovery of polyacetylene films, the primary sources beyond Pyun’s account were Shirakawa’s sci- entific publications, his published Nobel Lecture,5 his Nobel autobiography,6 and a reflection by Shirakawa on the polyacetylene film synthesis that was published in the Journal of Polymer Science: Part A. Polymer Chem- istry in 1996.7 All of these sources were written by Shi- rakawa and include his personal descriptions of various aspects of the event. As such, the published narrative included all available sources at the time. Of course, as I pointed out in the Substantia paper:3 “the truth is Shi- rakawa has actually said very little on the subject and what has been said is somewhat vague.” While Shirakawa is now sharing additional material that will further add to our understanding of these events, the previous work cannot be criticized for not including details that had never been communicated. I look forward to a deeper study of this new account from Shirakawa, which will likely change our view of the details of this event. The addition of new sources is a common aspect of historical study, which can often result in refinement, correction, or even drastic re-evaluation of historical events. As with the previous account of Pyun, this will require analysis of Shirakawa’s newly presented account and renewed efforts to find consistency between all of the available sources to decide what really happened. Clearly, this will require more significant time and effort than what I have been able to dedicate for the preparation of this short commentary. However, initial review seems that Shirakawa is now implying that Pyun’s initial experi- ment did not produce polyacetylene films, but only “a black flappy or spongy matter”. This failed experiment then served as motivation for further experiments by Shirakawa and his students, which ultimately resulted in the successful generation of polyacetylene films. As emphasized by Shirakawa, Pyun was not involved with these additional experiments and stated that “Pyun’s contribution was minimal ”. This new narrative, howev- er, does not seem to be consistent with multiple state- ments Shirakawa has made in the past. Such statements include an acknowledgement “to Messrs. H. C. Pyun and T. Ito for the preparation of poly(acetylene) films” in his 1971 paper,8 as well as the following statement from his autobiography that describes Pyun’s initial product as a film:6 “when a visiting scientist tried to make poly- acetylene in the usual way, he only produced some rag- ged pieces of a film.” And then, there is of course the acknowledgement to Pyun made in his Nobel lecture:5 “...and to Dr. Hyung Chick Pyun with whom I encoun- tered the discovery of polyacetylene film by the fortuitous error.” Finally, I must point out that Shirakawa makes various statements concerning the history of organic semiconducting materials that are not supported by our current understanding of the historical record. Rather than enumerate these specific points, I will just encour- age the reader to consult my extensive work on this top- ic for the most current analysis of this history, as well as discussion of the associated historical record.1,2 REFERENCES 1. For the most recent review of this historical work, please see: S. C. Rasmussen, Conjugated and Con- ducting Organic Polymers: The First 150 Years. ChemPlusChem 2020, 85, 1412–1429. 2. For the specific history of acetylene polymers, please see: S. C. Rasmussen. Acetylene and Its Polymers. 150+ Years of History. Springer Briefs in Molecular Science: History of Chemistry; Springer: Heidelberg, 2018. 3. S. C. Rasmussen, New Insight into the “Fortuitous Error” that Led to the 2000 Nobel Prize in Chemis- try. Substantia 2021, 5, 91-97. 4. C. B. McCullagh, Bias in Historical Description, Interpretation, and Explanation. History and Theory, 2000, 39, 39-66. 5. H. Shirakawa, The Discovery of Polyacetylene Film: The Dawning of an Era of Conducting Polymers (Nobel Lecture). Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 2574-2580. 6. H. Shirakawa, Hideki Shirakawa. In Les Prix Nobel, The Nobel Prizes 2000 (Ed: T. Frängsmyr) Nobel Foundation: Stockholm, 2000, pp. 213-216. 131Comments on Shirakawa’s Response 7. H. Shirakawa, Reflections on “Simultaneous Polym- erization and Formation of Polyacetylene Film on the Surface of Concentrated Soluble Ziegler-Type Cata- lyst Solution,” by Takeo Ito, Hideki Shirakawa, and Sakuji Ikeda, J. Polym. Sci.: Polym. Chem. Ed., 12, 11 (1974). J. Polym. Sci. A Polym. Chem. 1996, 34, 2529- 2530. 8. H. Shirakawa, S. Ikeda, Infrared Spectra of Poly(acetylene). Polym. J. 1971, 2, 231-244. Substantia An International Journal of the History of Chemistry Vol. 6, n. 1 - 2022 Firenze University Press To Print or not to Print? Preprints and publication: how the Covid-19 pandemic affected the quality of scientific production Pierandrea Lo Nostro Faraday’s Dogma Stephen T. Hyde Creativity in the Art, Literature, Music, Science, and Inventions Singlet Dioxygen 1O2, its Generation, Physico-chemical Properties and its Possible Hormetic Behavior in Cancer Therapy Marc Henry1, Miro Radman2, Luc Benichou3, Khalid O. Alfarouk4, Laurent Schwartz5,* Is the Second Law of Thermodynamics Able to Classify Drugs? Laurent Schwartz1,*, Luc Benichou2, Jules Schwartz1, Maxime Pontié3, Marc Henry4 History of Research on Phospholipid Metabolism and Applications to the Detection, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Cancer Peter F. Daly1, Jack S. Cohen2,* Capillary Electrophoresis (CE) and its Basic Principles in Historical Retrospect. Part 3. 1840s –1900ca. The First CE of Ions in 1861. Transference Numbers, Migration Velocity, Conductivity, Mobility Ernst Kenndler The Early History of Polyaniline II: Elucidation of Structure and Redox States† Seth C. Rasmussen Path to the Synthesis of Polyacetylene Films with Metallic Luster: In Response to Rasmussen’s Article Hideki Shirakawa Comments on Shirakawa’s Response Seth C. Rasmussen Lipids, Chloroform, and Their Intertwined Histories Carlos A. Ramírez Professor Alexander Kessenikh (1932-2021) Andrey V. Andreev1, Vadim A. Atsarkin2, Konstantin V. Ivanov1, Gennady E. Kurtik1, Pierandrea Lo Nostro3, Vasily V. Ptushenko4,5, Konstantin A. Tomilin1, Natalia V. Vdovichenko1, Vladimir P. Vizgin1