{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03777335984095427, 'fraction_numerical': 0.033797216699801194, 'mean_word_length': 5.140243902439025, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The importance of picking Porter: the Royal Institution, George Porter and the two cultures, 1959–64

This paper examines the cultural reasons why in 1964 the Royal Institution (RI) selected George Porter, who became the only person so far to have been Director of the Royal Institution (1966–85), President of the Royal Society (1985–90) and President of the British Association (1985–86) at the same time, to succeed William Lawrence Bragg as the institution's scientific director and resident professor. Porter was established as first choice by an inner group of RI Managers before the formal selection process began. In this article I argue that Porter won their favour by presenting himself, during his tenure as the RI's Professor of Chemistry (1963–66), as a candidate who fitted well with the Managers' ideas about the future role of the RI—ideas that were deeply influenced by the prevailing technocratic visions of ‘science and society’, particularly C. P. Snow's writings on the ‘two cultures’.