Crick and Watson Were Not Involved in Stealing Franklin's Data

In early 1953 at Cambridge University, James Watson and Francis Crick were exploring the structure of DNA at the same time that Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin were conducting related investigations at Kings College London. Franklin was preparing to leave both Kings and the field of DNA study altogether, while Wilkins intended to pursue the subject more intensively after her departure.

A long-standing public belief claims that Watson and Crick secretly used Franklins data to achieve their breakthrough. This suspicion largely originates from Watsons dramatic but unreliable memoir, The Double Helix, where he recalls viewing X-ray diffraction images in January 1953 and becoming deeply interested. Although he did not identify the scientist who produced those images, many later assumed that they belonged to Franklin, despite the absence of firm proof.

If an image had truly been capable of revealing the answer so clearly, it is reasonable to assume that Franklin, an expert in the field, would have recognized its significance herself. Moreover, in January 1953 Franklin actually encouraged Crick to speak with a colleague who had prepared an informal summary of the research being done at Kings. This suggests that she did not view her findings as secret or off-limits.

A careful examination of interviews with Crick from the 1960s, along with a detailed review of the original Watson and Crick scientific papers, indicates that their discovery was not based on Franklins experimental results. Instead, they spent several weeks constructing and adjusting physical models made of cardboard to represent DNAs chemical components, applying known principles of chemistry. Their final model was achieved largely through experimentation and intuition, and only afterward did it align with Franklins observations.

Franklin did not hold hostility toward either man. She continued to exchange ideas with them and eventually developed a close friendship with Crick and his wife, Odile. She stayed at their home in Cambridge, attended social gatherings with them, and spent time at the theatre with Odile. During her illness, she even stayed with the Cricks while recovering.

Crick had declared as early as 1947 that his two ambitions were to understand life itself and the workings of the human brain. His contribution to molecular biology helped fulfill the first goal. In 1977 he moved to California and joined the Salk Institute to pursue the second, focusing on the nature of consciousness. Although he never arrived at a single, definitive explanation, his influence shaped the foundations of modern neuroscience.

He championed the careful study of neural anatomy, helping inspire large-scale projects to map the structure of animal and human brains. Later, in the 1980s, he worked closely with cognitive and computer scientists who were developing the ideas behind what became known as Parallel Distributed Processing, an early precursor to modern artificial intelligence. He supported the integration of computer models and biological knowledge, collaborating with pioneering researchers such as Geoffrey Hinton and John Hopfield.

Together with Christof Koch, Crick promoted a biological, materialistic approach to the study of consciousness, an approach that continues to influence current research. Before the end of the 20th century, his ideas were widely recognized, and he published frequently in leading scientific journals. In 1994, he also released a popular science book that shaped both academic and public thinking about the mind.

A lesser-known aspect of Cricks personality was his passion for poetry. He experimented with writing verses himself and developed a strong interest in the work of poet Michael McClure. After discovering one of McClures poems in a San Francisco bookstore in 1959, Crick displayed it in his home. Years later, the two men met and formed a close friendship, exchanging letters, drafts, and critiques of each others ideas.

For over thirty years, their correspondence revealed a deeply emotional and creative side of Crick that might appear to contradict his scientific outlook. In reality, his scientific process was also driven by imagination and sudden insight. His appreciation for poetry offers a richer understanding of both his character and the unconventional way in which he approached science.

Sources:

• Crick and Watson Did Not Steal Franklin’s Data