|
Serious Pleasure:
Ponzy Lu's Pursuit of Excellence in Eating, Drinking, and Science
"My food and wine interests are quite serious," says Ponzy Lu, chemistry
professor and chair of Penn's biochemistry program -- although it is
often difficult to tell when he is and is not serious. "I'm never
serious," he declares with utter seriousness. "I like to think that life
is too short to be serious, and that one can learn and accomplish stuff
in a mode where all of it is entertaining." It didn't help that his
colorful attire -- a rugby shirt with broad red-and-blue stripes -- bore
some affinity to a jester's garb.
Lu's office is tucked among the laboratories on the third floor of the
Chemistry Building's 1973 Wing. Passing through the drab, utilitarian
clutter of the labs, one is struck by the sudden contrast this room
presents. A shelf of books encircles the office along the ceiling, and
one wall is loaded with tidy rows of science texts and journals. The
neat and lean glass-topped desk and black office furnishings are offset
by white walls. Together with the bookshelves, they create a backdrop of
clean black-and-white lines.
Upon this framework is hung a chalkboard scrawled with orange and
fuchsia formulae, and colorful boxes connected by a network of lines.
There are also large art posters: Jasper Johns' Three Flags and a
Miró consisting of a stark red slash and a few uneven black
splotches on a cobalt-blue background. A small work by his daughter of
an ice cream cone topped with three primary-colored scoops completes the
effect of an environment integrating the precise structures of careful
thinking with an irreverent and mischievous humor. It is as if there
were a festival of sorts underway within the taut lines and boxes of
Ponzy Lu's scientific thought. And it's not always easy to tell which he
takes more seriously: the biochemical research aimed at breakthroughs in
the field of gene expression, the search for gourmet food and wine
experiences, or his connoisseur's iconoclasm.
Lu takes pleasure in offhand, earthy, and unpolished modes of
expression, corralling the extraneous details of his topics with "stuff"
and dismissing what he deems pretentious or distasteful with "crap." As
it turns out, seriousness and pleasure are not all that far apart for
him. "The word I would use to describe how and why I do things is
'hedonism,'" he confides. "It's important that I get jollies from it."
Lu cites two "defining experience" magazine articles, which he read in
1972, that helped to form his attitudes toward food. "I've always
enjoyed eating. It probably has to do with the fact that Chinese
families consider eating very important: they do everything around the
meal. But these articles really clicked with me at the time."
The author of one of the essays is a "serious" gourmet, Roy Andries De
Groot, who writes appealingly of his experiences at Troisgros, a
three-star establishment in the small French town of Roanne. An
enterprise of the Troisgros family, the restaurant is served by two
brothers who are classically trained but innovative French chefs. (Since
De Groot's article was published, one of the brothers has died.
Troisgros is now run by the surviving brother and his son.) Together,
the entire family, spouses and children, carries out "the discipline of
the search for perfection" in a "daily struggle toward excellence."
The other article, by Calvin Trillin, argues that "the best restaurants
in the world are, of course, in Kansas City," Missouri -- and they are
decorated with bowling trophies, illuminated by neon beer signs, and
serve ribs, burgers, doughnuts, slaw, fries, and malts. Of particular
note to the author and companion Fats Goldberg is Arthur Bryant's
Barbecue, renowned for its barbecue ribs and beef among eaters of
Trillin's culinary sensibility. Lu has dined several times at both
places.
"The Troisgros article has a lot of parallels with what we do as
scientists," notes Lu, "the search for excellence, looking for
innovation within the constraints of nature." De Groot's essay tells of
the extraordinary lengths the Troisgros family goes to secure the best
ingredients and, within the constraints of what they can find, to
prepare a meal of finely balanced tastes. "The whole business of looking
for the best, all this stuff gives pleasure, and within that pleasure,
there's a whole structure where you seek excellence -- to a real goal,
which is food. And science is that too, you know. Science is real
pleasure: finding answers about nature, finding about how something
works is an incredible intellectual pleasure."
Lu invokes what researchers have dubbed the "aha phenomenon," the
experience of the light bulb suddenly switching on as you struggle to
understand something. The experience is an intimate and sustaining part
at every level of the scientific enterprise: from an undergraduate's
mastery of fundamental principles and equations, to a graduate student's
independent replication of an important experimental step, to a seasoned
researcher's breakthrough to uncharted terrain. Says Lu: "You say, 'aha,
that's how it works!' And it's an experience not different from having
your first mouthful of foie gras. This is what it's all about, you know:
'Wow!'"
Lu's analysis of science's pleasure recalls the pronouncements of Calvin
Trillin and Fats Goldberg as they discussed the qualities of the
"top-meat, no-gimmick, class burger" put out by Winstead's, a Kansas
City eatery. The conversation, which took place as they consumed the
subject of their commentary, is reproduced here in full: "Ahhhh,"
stipulated Fats. "Oohhh," Trillin rejoined.
The striking resemblance of this discussion to Lu's rhetoric in
describing the pleasures of science (and the near identical degree of
explication) seems to confirm his theory of a unified structure of
pleasure in both eating and doing science. Lu elaborates: "They are
identical, absolutely identical -- the same endorphins and whatever the
hell neurophysiology goes on."
Like all humor -- including Lu's -- Calvin Trillin's tongue-in-cheek
writing is not without seriousness. "The Trillin article I like because,
you know, I'm a real iconoclast about this culture stuff." Lu earned his
B.S. in chemistry at the California Institute of Technology and his
Ph.D. in biophysics from Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His
colleagues like to kid him about having attended what they caricature as
vocational trade schools all his life. "I've never been at a liberal
arts institution until I came to Penn in 1973. And I notice that there
is a whole class of folks out there who hang out at universities and
think of culture as Beethoven, Brahms, and Bach, and literature as
dead-white-guy stuff, and the canon of art as what you can see only in
European galleries. So I've always said, 'you know, they can't possibly
have a lock on this kind of stuff.'"
"Amusing as he is," Lu continues, "I think Calvin Trillin is a serious
eater. His approach to food is identical to mine." Lu's point is that
the culinary sensibilities devoted to appreciating the cuisine of
three-star restaurants can be applied to savoring dishes prepared by
establishments largely ignored by those who determine the canon of
gastronomy. He takes wicked pleasure in debunking this kind of snobbery:
"You know, temples of gastronomy are not terribly different from a
really good bordello. When I was an undergraduate, there were these
expeditions my colleagues took to Tijuana and to Nevada, where such
institutions are legal. The reports I heard, when I think about it,
aren't terribly different from my own reports on Troisgros. It's a
continuum; it's all sensual, and it's all quite serious."
"You know what I mean by being 'serious' about something?" he suddenly
asks, recalling a question posed earlier. "I mean I spend time and money
on it." By these measures, Lu is profoundly serious about his research
into the mechanisms controlling gene expression, how genes are turned on
and off. His greatest scientific aha pleasure came in 1996 when he and
Dr. Mitchell Lewis from the Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics at
Penn's Medical Center led a team of researchers that finally succeeded
in working out the three-dimensional structure of the lactose repressor
protein. To understand how the protein functions in regulating the
metabolism of lactose (sugar), scientists needed to understand not only
its molecular composition but its structure. The discovery opens the
door to the development of customized molecular switches that turn on or
off selected genes, a technology with powerful applications to gene
therapy and other branches of molecular medicine.
The newly discovered structure reveals that the lac repressor
grips the DNA like two spring-handled tongs tied together at the
opposite ends of the clasps, thereby blocking access to bacterial genes
needed to digest milk sugar. In seminars and public presentations, Lu
uses as props two escargot tongs -- the apotheosis of haute cuisine --
tied together with Penn red-and-blue coiled shoelaces. The operation of
these devices is the same as the lac repressor's. "The resting
state for the escargot gadgets is clamped on the snail shells," he
explains placing two ceramic snail shells into the tongs, "and the
resting state for the repressor is also clamped onto the genetic
material. Both are manipulated by squeezing the middle together; when
you do this the thing it is holding drops out." Lu squeezes the escargot
holders, the pincers open, and the snail shells drop. To free the
lactose-digestion genes, a sugar molecule presses the protein structure
like human fingers and releases the DNA.
"The other amusing thing about this," Lu adds, "is that the biological
name for the snail, the genus, is Helix, because of the spiral shape of
the shell. As it turns out, DNA is also a helix." Lu milks the almost
perfect symmetry: "So I tell people they can go home and forget
everything else I said and just remember that this molecule clamps on
the DNA helix the way escargot gadgets clamp onto a Helix, which is a
snail."
Besides food, Lu also cultivates an appreciation of wines. The November
day the 1997 Beaujolais Nouveau were released to the market, he hosted a
wine tasting -- a lunch of pizza and four bottles of the new wine -- in
the laboratory compound outside his office. Lu makes a point of
introducing his graduate students to the subtleties of wine
appreciation. "If students were taught that wine has complexity, that
beer has complexity, that one should seek more than just the buzz, I
think they would be less excessive in using it." For his last two
birthdays, his students reciprocated and presented him with wine
tastings. Last year's theme was "Cabernets of the world."
The aroma of warm pizza and the laughter of colleagues drew the students
from their labs. A stack of boxed pizzas was piled beside the wine
bottles, which were lined up on a steel cabinet in the hall near the
elevators. Above this tableau, like a big-game trophy, hung a full-color
framed print of the lac repressor molecule. The group stood in an
open space among lockers, a computer terminal, an array of incubators,
and some gas canisters with scratched paint shackled together by a rusty
chain. Layers of postcards, memos, cartoons, post-its, and depictions of
molecular structures were taped to the blue lab doors that hung open in
the hall.
Small quantities of each wine were poured into little plastic cups,
which along with the cork were grouped in front of the bottle that was
its source. The students sniffed corks and then swirled a little wine in
their cups. "Look for bananas, freshness, sparkle on the tongue,"
counseled one before taking a first sip. A second expounded that "the
use of cultured yeast produces a standardized and frivolous taste, and
perfumes the wine with bananas on the nose and candy in the mouth."
"I've had better expression," critiqued a third. "It's not awful," added
another, her eyes directed toward the ceiling. A consensus of
disappointment seemed to be building. "It's great with turkey," said Lu.
"The main reason I do this is to decide on what to have with
Thanksgiving dinner." He confessed to be leaning toward a Pinot Noir
this year.
As the wine tasting continued, some students pointed out that, as a
result of being aerated, the wine was taking on more flavor. To
facilitate that process, the serious oenophiles were now drinking from
much larger cups, labeled "SPECIMEN CUP" in capital letters. (There were
two boxes on the cups' sides to check either "urine" or "other.")
"'Bananas' is the ester in the wine that makes the organic acids
volatile," one of the students explained. "The larger cup provides
increased 'head space' for taking in more of the vapors, the 'bouquet,'
which is an important part of wine tasting." The other meaningful
components are the taste in the mouth and the "finish," the residual
taste after swallowing. A gray-haired professor who had briefly joined
the festivities turned and proclaimed with mock seriousness: "Actually I
have to go work on a lecture; teaching is our number-one priority around
here." He departed past a student who declaimed to another: "To my
palate, the difference between a $20 bottle of wine and a $50 bottle is
about $4."
Among the wines being sampled was a 1996 Beaujolais, which served as a
kind of taste baseline. After sampling some, a newer graduate student
commented that even his untutored palate could easily discern that the
conventional wine, which had been allowed to mature over a period of
time, was far richer and more full bodied than the baby wine. "The
Beaujolais Nouveau are drunk at the end of the harvest season to
celebrate," Lu observed. "They are a kind of pop wine, a wine for
excess. It's like foreplay, you know: if it's gonna lead to something
real good, it takes a long time."
You could tell Ponzy Lu was serious: he chuckled into his cup of wine as
he said this.
|