My PhD advisor Jim Snyder passed
away recently from a stroke. I was a graduate student with him at Emory
University from 2003-2009. Along with my other advisor, Dennis Liotta, Jim had
a very significant impact on both my scientific as well as personal development.
When I entered Emory wishing to do research at the intersection of chemistry
and medicine, I quickly realized that I was much more suited to computational
work rather than experimental work, both by skill and by temperament. Jim
quickly recognized my interest in building molecular models and without
hesitation invited me to do research in his lab.
Jim was a world-class molecular
modeler and scientist. Although my own experience in the field is short-lived,
I can say that he had the best intuitive knowledge of chemical systems and the
strengths and limitations of modeling that I have ever seen. He had an almost
tactile feel for forces and interactions between molecules, and while he was
technically accomplished his real function was not technical; rather it was in
knowing what method would work and what wouldn't, what experiments one should
do next, and how one would interpret the results unearthed by modeling and
simulation without reading too much into them. For him modeling was not about coding or about favorite techniques, it was one more valuable lens through which you could address chemical and biological problems. Chemical intuition was his gift,
and simply by looking at a picture of two molecules interacting with each other
he knew what the sizes of the atoms were, what part you could safely modify
without introducing a clash, what part was essential and what part was
dispensable. He exemplified semi-quantitative science at its best and knew a good
model when he saw one; he especially knew that the best models are not always
the prettiest ones. I have never met a molecular modeler quite like him. He was
also one of the very few scientists I know who achieved high scientific success
in both industry and academia, and he could transition seamlessly between the two
domains: he held successive positions at the University of Copenhagen, Merck, Yeshiva University, G D Searle and Emory. He also had a very international outlook, spending time as a professor
in Copenhagen, New York and Italy and collaborating with friends around the
world.
The results of his expertise were
communicated in more than 300 papers in top journals. They spanned a remarkable
diversity of fields, from the purest chemistry to the most applied drug design,
from the structure of organometallic copper compounds to the properties of
anticancer drugs in the body. In each one of these papers Jim used computational techniques sparingly and combined them as much as possible with experimental data (as in the papers we wrote together combining NMR data with conformational searching). By any standards Jim’s output was prolific, and I
have seen very few scientists from any field who worked on such a wide variety
of topics. What’s even more remarkable is that several of these papers in top
journals like the Journal of the American Chemical Society are single-author
publications; they attest to Jim’s dedication to scholarship and careful
attention to detail. These single-author papers are a memorable testament in an
age when collaborative work is almost de riguer. I remember my own papers with
him and how he stressed paying attention to every single word and sentence,
even in the cover letter.
In spite of some significant
personal and professional difficulties, Jim lived a life of great scientific
and personal productivity. He was not only a great scientist but also an
accomplished hiker and mountain climber, having made it as far as Mt. Everest
base camp in the Himalayas. He enjoyed good books (Michael Shermer whose books
I often gifted to him was a particular favorite), fine wine and spending time
with his family, and had friends and collaborators in all corners of the world. He had some amusing favorite figures of speech which I suspect fell out of favor in the 60s or so; someone who liked controversy was no shrinking violet, you never wanted to open a can of worms, a kilocalorie or two of energy was small potatoes, and that particular approach...well, that was just a different kettle of fish. He was one of the most laid back and yet focused people I have met. He wore bright clothes to work, drove a yellow scooter or red jeep, and exuded informality and ease. And while I saw him in a tie exactly once in ten years, I have never seen him make do with a sloppy piece of scientific work.
All though graduate school and after
graduation, he and I enjoyed a great working relationship as well as a very warm
friendship. Whenever I visited Atlanta I used to have breakfast or lunch with
him ("Always happy to 'jawbone' with you, Ash"), trading stories and looking to him for wise advice on science and life. The
last time we met for breakfast was in July 2015, and the last time I saw him
was after his stroke, in December 2015. Even when the stroke had affected his
speech, Jim was upbeat and clearly enjoyed talking to me; I was very glad I
could see him and spend an hour chatting.
Jim left me with two singular lessons
which I will never forget.
One was a scientific lesson:
always question the assumptions behind a scientific study or paper, no matter
how elegant the methodology might be, how pretty the molecular models might
look, or how famous the authors in question might be. Even the most impressive
science can crumble if built on a foundation of flawed assumptions.
The second lesson was human:
always take everyone's questions or statements in good faith, and always treat
everyone with respect and kindness, whether Nobel Laureate or undergraduate
student. Jim taught me this lesson by example every single day. I have seen him
accord the same honest respect and careful consideration to beginning
undergraduates as well as famous professors from Ivy League universities. For
him respect did not scale with rank but remained a constant property.
I am sure Jim would have liked us to
celebrate his life, so I will end with a funny and happy memory of him. We were
together on a scientific trip to Imperial College in London in 2007, and were
staying at a hotel in Kensington. When we went to our rooms which were on
separate floors, Jim asked me to meet him in his room (say room no. 36) at a
specific time so that we could head out for dinner. At the specified time I
went to room no. 36 and could not find it. I looked around everywhere. Finally,
in desperation, I yelled out Jim's name and heard a squeaky voice coming from -
at least it seemed like - the floor. I located a very tiny hole in the floor
and walked down the very narrow staircase. That's where I saw room no. 36 all
by itself; to call it a room would be an exaggeration since it was no bigger
than a jail cell.
Jim was sitting on the bed
looking more miserable than I had ever seen him. Ash, he quipped, this is the
worst hotel room I have ever stayed in. I could hardly stifle my laughter and
tried to look as sympathetic as I could.
Jim Snyder touched the lives of many people in multiple ways, and his scientific and human qualities live on in many of us.
Jim Snyder touched the lives of many people in multiple ways, and his scientific and human qualities live on in many of us.
A beautiful tribute, Ash. Thank you for sharing your stories, lessons and fond memories.
ReplyDeleteThank you.
DeleteAsh: I am just hearing of Jim's death through your beautiful remembrance of him in this space. It is quite a shock. Jim hired me for my first industrial science job back at G.D. Searle in May of 1992 and I found him to be a wonderful mentor and scientist, and was saddened when he took early retirement about a year later. Even though we were only working together for a year, I will never forget that year and remain so grateful for the opportunity Jim provided to me, and more importantly for the opportunity to get to know and work with this remarkable individual. Thank you Ash for the wonderful remembrance of Jim.
ReplyDeleteTom Doman
thompsondoman@gmail.com