SEAC Remembrance Wall

SEAC wishes to provide a space to celebrate our family members who have passed on. Here, we honor the legacy, accomplishment, service, and leadership of some passed electrochemist heroes. SEAC Members may submit their own memory to this wall.

Stephen Feldberg
to June 11, 2024
Senior Scientist (Brookhaven National Laboratory)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories

SEAC losing Bard, Evans, Anson, and Feldberg over a period of months is sobering.  It reminds me of the times when these folks were my seniors, meaning they were 5-10 years older than those of us who had recently graduated.  They showed us the way as mentors just ahead of our generation.  Eventually we all became seniors.  It’s how math works. 🙂

Steve was a fantastic person, collaborator, and global fly fisherman! He helped so many others answer their own electrochemistry mechanism questions.  He singularly put the virtues of “digital simulation” of electrochemical processes on the map and kept making it easier and more user friendly.  In a way, this was the first computer game for electrochemistry that enabled exploring the influence of many parameters without preparing a solution.  First it was boxes of Hollerith cards carried to a campus “mainframe” while today it’s fully accessible as a teaching tool for undergrads.

One activity that may not be widely known about Steve is that he was a very influential in the campaign to bring Academician Ben Levich from the USSR to Israel and then the US.   This was the late 1970s.  Levich was a prominent physical chemist and hydrodynamics expert well known to electrochemistry with respect to rotating disk electrodes.

Fred Anson
February 17, 1933 to May 22, 2024
Elizabeth W. Gilloon Professor of Chemistry, Emeritus (California Institute of Technology)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories
No condolences, comments, or memories have been added yet for Fred Anson. Be the first to add one! Click "Add a comment" button and fill out the form.
Dennis Evans
March 28, 1939 to March 26, 2024
Emeritus Professor (Purdue University)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories

So many special memories of Dennis Evans – I am very fortunate to have known Dennis as a dear friend and colleague for almost 40 years. Dennis was a uniquely gifted and inspiring scientist, colleague, mentor and human being. When we first met at Wisconsin, I was a newly minted assistant professor interested in spectroscopic measurements of electrochemical interfaces. Dennis pulled me aside in the hallway one day and said: “Rob, I am the Chair of the Electrochemistry Gordon Research Conference this year in Santa Barbara. It’s a thankless task, but the one benefit is that I get to invite a couple young scientists to come. You may not think you’re an Electrochemist, but you are, and more importantly, the people who will want to know what you measure and discover about electrochemical interfaces are there. You are coming to Santa Barbara.” I went (learning later that it was fully booked), and Dennis was right. It launched me into a wonderful career that included FTIR and SHG measurements at both single crystal and liquid-liquid electrochemical interfaces. I could never thank him enough. This is just one of many stories. We will all miss Dennis greatly.

Allen Bard
December 18, 1933 to February 10, 2024
Emeritus Professor (University of Texas at Austin)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories

Professor Allen J. Bard’s passing was a sad event for electrochemists around the world. Few people like him have had such a global impact in our study subject, not only helping establish the reputation of the University of Texas at Austin as a capital for electrochemistry, but also helping establish careers and a philosophy of our science across continents and other human boundaries. Thus, just like he taught us to think about spatially resolved electrochemistry and the subtleties of timescales in electrochemical processes, I found it fitting to explore Prof. Bard’s impact in “space and time” on the people he trained and interacted with, across the many generations of scientists and places he influenced. This is but a small sample, and perhaps you feel that it is lacking some names that are most associated with Prof. Bard’s early scientific career, but circumstances have had this time we live in one in which we get the call to stand on the shoulders of giants to push forward the reach of electrochemistry.  I still hope you will find it representative, and I encourage you to leave us your messages in the SEAC website at https://seac.online/in-memoriam-dr-allen-j-bard/.

Unlike most Bard group members who came to Austin as students or postdocs, my first meeting with Al occurred when I was a stateless, penniless, and helpless refugee from the Soviet Union.  I still don’t know why Al decided to offer me a postdoc, but he took this chance and patiently tolerated my Russian-style antics during the next 3 years.  I am immensely thankful to him!

20+ years later, Al was turning 80, and we (i.e., Peixin He, Johna Leddy et al.) raised funds and convinced ECS to establish Allen J. Bard Award in Electrochemical Science. The evolution of the Bard Award medal designed by my former student, Yixian Wang is shown below:

Al was a giant in science who with his students and post-docs made a huge number of original contributions to new techniques in electrochemistry. He was also a very warm and thoughtful individual. I recall fondly a few incidents.

One was where he and a student published a very interesting paper on the light emission from electrodes by injection of an electron from a molecule into an electrode under a high applied potential. They obtained many new experimental results. My graduate student, Shachi Gosavi, and I were intrigued by this novel experiment and I mentioned to Al that we were going to do some work on developing a theory to treat the results. Al said that if we did so he would test the theory. Some seven or so years later Shachi and I published a paper on this work, but by that time Al and his group had moved on to new fields.

I recall too an incident where he and I discussed the new and exciting work of John Miller and coworkers in the mid 1980s. They confirmed in the laboratory a prediction I had made some 25 years earlier on the inverted effect in electron transfer, an effect where under certain conditions the more downhill energetically the reaction was the slower the reaction rate was rather than the faster. Al then recalled that in the 1960s he and a coworker had obtained the first evidence of the inverted effect, by showing that because of the slowness of the downhill reaction the system could bypass the barrier by producing instead an electronically excited state (chemiluminescence). it was an indirect proof but he was right, of course.

Al left a lasting legacy. We and so many others will miss him.

Rudolph Marcus (California Institute of Technology)

Al pushed me to the limit of what I knew. He motivated me to reach further, and to argue with him during our Tuesday morning meetings. Argue seriously, on paper or on chalk, against his thoughts. This was quite intimidating at the beginning but became something I treasured later in my PhD. He encouraged me to listen and pay attention to the science of others, and to objectively criticize it. When he ran out of funding for my thesis work on theoretical electrochemistry and got new funding for redox flow battery research, he casually told me it was about time we learned stuff about batteries anyway. He could cruise from research topic to research topic smoothly, effortlessly. He was a scientific mentor like few exist today.

I met Al when he was 76. When I asked to join his lab, his response was simple and sincere: “You should join now, I do not know if I will be alive next year”. But he was, alive and bright and inspirational, for over a decade after. I graduated when he was 80. He asked what I wanted to do in the future, to which I responded I wanted to continue the work I was doing with him. Al looked at me with his glasses low on his nose and said: “That is a stupid idea. You should go out and do something nobody else is doing”. He argued with me until my last day in the lab; but I listened, and credit my success today (if any) to his teachings.

This is an excerpt of the last email Al personally sent to me in 2019:

“I knew you took the job at Johns Hopkins. I’m sure you will do very well there and I’m happy you got such a good position. Getting funding is a problem, but I think with your background and experience you’ll do fine. I’m thinking of getting back into flow batteries. I have some ideas about new possibilities”.

I never got to see the outcome of those new ideas. But we will surely see it through the legacy of talented scientists Al mentored in that field and others. Now, I make my students argue with me, and Al lives in every project we pursue.

A major component of the BSc Chemistry degree at the University of Liverpool, where I studied between 1982-85, was a 20-week research project. My project was supervised by Richard Compton, who said that I should buy and read two books over the Summer of 1984 in preparation – Albery’s  Electrode Kinetics and – if I could manage it – Bard and Faulkner’s Electrochemical Methods. As a 20-year-old undergraduate student who had never done any electrochemistry experiments, opening Electrochemical Methods (the ‘bible’) for the first time was certainly daunting. However, my first edition copy is certainly well-used and has been glued and sellotaped back together on several occasions! Like many generations of electrochemists, Electrochemical Methods got me hooked on electrochemistry.

During my PhD in Oxford in the late 1980s there were far fewer electrochemistry groups and journals than today and it was relatively easy to keep up to date with developments, with regular trips to the library. The most important advances in electrochemistry were invariably reported in 4 journals: Analytical Chemistry, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry, Journal of Physical Chemistry and Journal of the Electrochemical Society. (A quick survey of web of science reveals that Al Bard published about 500 papers in those 4 core journals alone). At the start of 1989, I opened up the latest issue of Analytical Chemistry and came across the first article on SECM from Al’s team.  I was pretty excited about the paper, but put it to one side, as I was busy finishing my PhD thesis and had recently started a 3-year research fellowship at Balliol College, Oxford. Shortly after, Fleischmann and Pons, reported to the global media on ‘cold fusion’ and electrochemists around the world (including Al) were diverted to other types of experiments, at least for a few weeks! When Al’s second and third papers on the theory and further applications of SECM, with Juhyoun Kwak, were published later in 1989, it was clear to me that I needed to change course and go to Austin and join his team. I faxed a letter and CV to Al’s office late one evening to introduce myself and explain my motivation for wanting to join his team. I came into the lab in Oxford the next day to find a faxed reply letter from Al! I wrote a successful application for a NATO Fellowship, proposing some new SECM experiments and resigned early from my Oxford position in the Summer of 1990 to jet across the pond to the USA for the first time in my life. It was one of the best decisions I made!

The lab of Dr Bard (as we all called him) in 1990 was a fun place to be and it was a joy to be part of his group. The group comprised of really talented postdocs (about 20 or more) and PhD students from top groups across the USA and the world. I really enjoyed my time there and made life-long friends. I also discovered that joining the ‘Bard family’ led to deep friendships with earlier and later generations of the group. Al created an environment that fostered creative thinking and he provided a tremendous amount of freedom for people to come up with, and pursue, their ideas.

There were about a dozen of us working on scanned probe microscopy (SECM, STM and AFM) in 1990-91, and we met as a subgroup every Monday lunchtime when Al was in town. We’d gather around a large table in the group common room that also had 2 primitive Mac PCs that were bookable (in 1 hour slots!) for paper writing and data analysis. At the sub-group meetings, Al would ask for news and 2-3 of us would circulate paper copies of figures and images that would be discussed and questioned by the rest of the group. Every week at the full group meeting, one person from the group gave a 1-hour talk, with tough questions free flowing – often from the first slide! I noticed that no matter how the person had presented, Al always found something positive to say to them, with a quiet word at the end of the meeting, before following up with suggestions as to how they could improve further. This approach to mentorship and the creation of a supportive and cooperative environment shaped my approach to supervision when I started my own group at Warwick. Al was an excellent role model.

Al was most proud of the people who came through his group and he kept in touch with former group members as much as they needed. When we hosted Al in Warwick in the early 1990s, we naturally took him to Stratford-upon-Avon, the home of the other Bard! He enjoyed seeing ‘Taming of the Shrew’ at the Royal Shakespeare Theatre with Josie Lawrence in the lead (but naturally had some suggestions for how the production could be improved). Of course, I regret not getting a picture of him on Bard’s walk in town!

It was always great to catch up with Al when he was in the UK and Europe, and to visit him in Austin. In the last few years, he remained fiercely independent and as passionate as ever about science. I arranged a call with him in the early stages of pandemic, shortly before he retired from UT. I’d assumed that he’d be working from home like everyone else, but he was in his office, working on papers, and interacting with his group members, which is where he always loved to be.

Prof. Al Bard has been a legendary figure who shaped my scientific approaches of carrying out effective research. In late 1970s when I started my graduate research, I was inspired by his work on Semiconductor Photoelectrochemistry, an emerging field of light energy conversion at that time. Prof. Al Bard’s group published seminal research papers not only in photoelectrochemistry, but also in electrochemiluminescence, polymer electrodes and photocatalysis. He was a great visionary who identified new research problems early on and laid down innovative strategies to tackle them. Whereas he is recognized as the father of modern electrochemistry, very few people are aware of his seminal contributions in other fields such as photocatalysis. For example, he was first to demonstrate the formation of hydroxyl radicals in photoirradiated TiO2 nanoparticle suspensions (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/j100487a017 ) as well as to carry out photocatalytic deposition of Pt on TiO2 nanoparticles (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/ja00481a059 ).

I had the benefit of interacting with him and his group, when I spent my time at UT-Austin as a postdoctoral researcher in Prof. Marye Anne Fox’s group (1981-83). These interactions helped me to learn new electrochemistry skills. The influence of his research continued after I started my independent career at the University of Notre Dame. It was always a pleasure to meet him during conferences and discuss new scientific challenges. During a seminar visit to UT Austin in 2017, I had the opportunity to discuss his scientific journey. This conversation piece was published ACS Energy Letters (https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsenergylett.7b00566 ). Al Bard has been a great mentor, professional colleague, and a dear friend. Although he is no longer with us, his research contributions will continue to inspire us for years to come.

Prashant Kamat (University of Notre Dame)

Top 5 memorable quotes from my PhD supervisor: Allen J. Bard

  1. The best paper is the published paper.
  2. The amount of useful information in a Figure is inversely proportional to the number of colors used.  
  3. Never give the same talk.
  4. Not all papers are JACS papers.
  5. Ask for first class and settle for coach. (This last one can be applied to so many areas of research
Jeanine Mauzeroll (McGill University)

When I joined in Dr. Bard’s group in 2005, in order to start my work as soon as possible, the first thing I did was to check the lab and to find what it had. Frankly I felt a bit disappointed because I saw most of the instruments looked very old, among them an IR instrument was even older than me. When I talked to him, he fingered his head with a kind smile and said, “A real scientist works with here.” This is the first lesson I learned from him, which benefits all my career life.

Indeed, Dr. Bard was one of the most important scientists in modern electrochemical instruments and the instrumental methodologies. He said, “Scientists are just like the kids who never grow up. They play with the scientific instruments to explore the secrets of nature.” The words touched me deeply. I learned that, firstly, being a scientist requires a childlike curiosity to the unknown world; secondly, scientific instrument is the eye to discover the scientific world. Creative instrumental methods give birth to creative research.

Finally, I would like to repeat the words I had said to him when I left Austin for New York and then Xiamen, “Working in Austin is the best time in my life. I harvested too much here from you and the group members, not only the science but also the friendship.”

Dongpin Zhan (Xiamen University)
Prof. Bard lecturing in 2019. Picture by Shelley Minteer.

I first met Al in person after inviting him to give a tutorial on the fundamentals of electrochemistry at an ECS symposium that I was organizing as a young faculty member. I was honored that he agreed to speak, but I was so impressed that he reached out and asked me specifically what I wanted him to cover and who the audience would be. He gave an incredible tutorial, but it was really aimed at the audience in the way of a “true educator”. I continued to see that passion for conveying fundamental electrochemistry to any audience from that day until the last time I saw Al in person (when I took this photo in 2019), where someone asked a question in the audience and he stepped out of the audience and went to the board to help educate us all.

As a person whose research moved from my training in electroanalytical chemistry to bioelectrochemistry over the years, many electroanalytical chemists would listen to me talk about oxidoreductase enzymes and mechanisms and either tune out or say “sorry, but I don’t know anything about “bio”!”, but not Al. Every single time I had the pleasure of speaking with Al in the audience, he always asked really insightful questions that made me really think about the similarities and differences between enzyme mechanisms and electrochemical mechanisms in new ways. He had a way of making connections between heterogeneous electrocatalysis and biocatalysis that always inspired my research in new directions.

It is hard to imagine any single electrochemist making such vast contributions to our field, decades of young researchers, and electrochemistry pedagogy. Al is not just an icon for our field, but a person who had a lasting positive impact on all of us and our science.

My image of AJB is of him in listening mode. With head slightly at an angle, he is silent as he focuses on the question asked. After a brief pause, the answer is provided in terms best suited to the one who asked. Once I was struggling with understanding a physical system while pouring over a chapter in Electrochemical Methods. I asked my question. AJB paused, and pointed to the text and all he said was “The boundary condition…” And delighted, my question was answered.
AJB’s curiosity and joy in science are boundless. His system for organization of scientific information is the most impressive I have ever seen. Every piece of information held in its place. When he taught, AJB conveyed his view of electrochemistry superbly, his perspective and scientific integrity imprinted on all his electrochemical progeny.

AJB’s curiosity, scientific integrity, and breadth of knowledge cannot be replaced. He leaves us with much to emulate, to advance the science that gave AJB such joy.

Dr. Bard was a great role model. I started my Ph.D. study in his lab in 2007. Back then, when fewer discussions on diversity took place, I felt his lab was one of the most diverse places in the world. I got to interact with students, postdocs, and visiting scholars from all over the world and had a fabulous time in his group. The world map outside his office, filled with all the students and postdocs from his group, was a testimony of the impact he had on science all over the world. He devoted his life to building the careers of so many scientists across the globe. I am so honored to be the last female Ph.D. student to be mentored by Prof. Allen J. Bard.

Dr. Bard’s dedication to science was truly inspiring. He worked in his office pretty much every single Saturday. Many years later during my independent career, on a Saturday, I called his office and he picked up the phone and asked how I knew he was there. I said: “I was your former student and of course I know you work on Saturdays.”

Dr. Bard’s scientific curiosity and pursuit of fundamental understanding of scientific problems still influences me as a professor at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign in my own lab. I benefited greatly from the freedom to pursue new ideas and new research directions in his lab. I still recall when I expressed interest in combining electrogenerated chemiluminescence studies with scanning electrochemical microscopy, his first reaction was: “Mei, this is a very challenging experiment”. To which I replied, “I love challenging experiments”. He allowed me to pursue the experiment, which generated a JACS paper in collaboration with two other graduate students that time, Joaquin and Alex (JACS, 2012, 134, 9240–9250).

On a personal side, I was amazed by his humbleness and courage to acknowledge when he didn’t know something. When I was studying fluorescence quenching of organic nanoparticles as a graduate student, a project derived from my study of electrogenerated chemiluminescence, during one discussion, Dr. Bard said “Mei, I don’t know much about fluorescence quenching of nanoparticles, but here are some books you can read about.”

Dr. Bard’s dedication to empower people of different backgrounds, including those from socially disadvantaged backgrounds, made a huge difference in science and society. I am forever grateful to Dr. Bard for everything I have learnt from him, and for the difference he has made in my life and career. I would like to conclude by quoting my Ph.D. thesis, “I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Professor Allen J. Bard for giving me the opportunity to work with him, to learn from him, for his guidance and advice, for creating such a multicultural environment and providing me with so many personal and professional growth opportunities and for teaching me to think Big.”

Bard alumni map (outside America).
Photo credit, Joaquín Rodríguez-López, 2023
Bard alumni map (within America).
Photo credit, Joaquín Rodríguez-López, 2023
Photo at the ECS meeting after the first Bard Award ceremony, Chicago, 2015. Mei with Prof. Bard and Bard group alumni. Left to right: Chao Kang Gu (Postdoc), Jungdon Suk (Graduate student), Dr. Allen J. Bard, Joaquin Rodriguez-Lopez (Graduate student), and Mei Shen (Graduate student)

In 1980, I arrived in the US as a visiting scholar in Dr. Larry Faulkner’s group at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Prior to my arrival, I had studied Dr. Faulkner’s publications and noticed that his earlier papers were co-authored with Dr. Bard at UT-Austin. The first time I met Dr. Bard was at the SEAC Meeting in 1985 in Chicago.

In 1989, Dr. Bard, Frank Fan, and J. Kwak invented the scanning electrochemical microscope (SECM). Since then, SECM found many applications in various fields. In the early days, due to the lack of commercial instruments, the exploration of SECM applications was limited to a few research laboratories. In 1993, SECM patent was granted to Dr. Bard and colleagues. Dr. Bard contacted me at the 46th ISE meeting in Xiamen, China in 1995 and discussed the commercialization of the SECM.

I visited his lab during the winter of 1995, where he showed the SECM instrument they had developed. We decided to utilize the same Inchworm motors for positioning, but opted to create our own bipotentiostat and positioner controller. We signed the patent agreement in February 1996 and agreed to make the SECM commercially available by 1997. In the summer of 1996, I told Dr. Bard that I would resign from the University of Memphis to proceed with SECM development work and company business. He then suggested for us to move to Austin, since it did not matter where we conducted our business. I told him that I would consider it after we completed the SECM development work. We delivered the first SECM instrument to UT-Austin in the fall of 1997.

In winter of 1997, we drove to Texas and concluded that Austin was a better place for our business. In 1998, Faulkner became president of UT-Austin. It was another good reason for us to setup our business in Austin. Consequently, we purchased land in the Austin suburbs and started construction on our new office building. By the summer of 1999, we had officially relocated our operations to Austin. After settling in Austin, we invited Dr. Bard and his wife, as well as Frank Fan and his wife to our house for lunch. Additionally, I made several visits to Dr. Bard’s office and lab, including bring a Japanese visitor group to meet him.

Dr. Bard and colleagues organized the 1st International SECM workshop in Freiburg, Germany in the spring of 1998. I carried an SECM setup to the workshop and showed it to the attendees. In 2001, Dr. Bard arranged an SECM workshop at the Pittsburgh Conference in New Orleans. where I provided a talk on SECM instrumentation. Here’s a photo captured at the end of that workshop, taken by the Pittcon team.

In 2003, Dr. Bard organized an SECM workshop at UT-Austin. His group prepared an 87-page lab manual for the workshop. We provided a few instruments for the lab work. With his permission we sent the lab manual together with the instrument software to our customers. Although the instrument hardware and software changed several times, the principles and lab procedures remained the same. Between 1996 and 2016, we setup our booth at the Pittsburgh Conference, we would usually bring the SECM instrument for exhibitions. Despite the shaky table, since the cell and the positioner base were mounted together, we could run basic SECM imaging with the instrument. Dr. Bard and Dr. Cindy Zoski would stop by our booth when they attended the conference. Dr. Bard also made recommendations to add Surface Interrogation SECM (SISECM) to the SECM instrument, create a picoliter solution dispenser, and develop a handheld potentiostat/bipotentiostat. We incorporated these suggestions into our product line.

For many years, Dr. Bard assisted us in various aspects, and I am forever grateful for his help.

While I was in Kurdistan-Iraq, mid of 2004, I sought out papers on electrogenerated chemiluminescence and was pleasantly surprised to discover that Allen Bard was still active in his research. Unfortunately, my university lacked access to many publishers and journals at the time. Despite my initial hesitation, I decided to reach out to Allen Bard via email to request some of his full-text papers. To my delight, the next day, I received several of his papers attached to his reply. It was truly remarkable! Not only did Allen Bard respond, but he also generously provided me with the full texts. This was around the time when he had just released his edited book “Electrogenerated Chemiluminescence.” Encouraged by his generosity, I mustered the courage to ask if he could send me a copy as a gift, explaining our limited access to published materials. Without hesitation, he asked for my postal address in Kurdistan and arranged for a copy to be sent to me. Within three weeks, I received his book!

Throughout our correspondence, Allen Bard never once inquired about my personal details such as gender, ethnicity, religion, or nationality. Instead, he recognized my eagerness to learn about science and chemistry. Emboldened by his kindness, I later approached him about the possibility of joining his research group as a research scholar. luckily, he responded positively, and by November 2005, I had the privilege of becoming a graduate student in his laboratory.

Now, it is with heavy hearts that I write to remember and honor the remarkable life and legacy of Professor Allen J. Bard, my beloved mentor. As my supervisor, Professor Bard played an instrumental role in shaping not only my scientific journey but also my outlook on life.

I will always cherish the countless moments of guidance and wisdom shared by him. Their unwavering commitment to excellence, coupled with their genuine passion for science. Whether discussing research ideas in the lab or offering words of encouragement during challenging times, Professor Bard had a remarkable ability to instill confidence and foster growth in those around them.

In 2018, I had the opportunity to collaborate with him once more. Despite his enduring passion for science, his declining health, compounded by worsening eyesight that even prevented him from driving, became apparent. That was some years after his wife’s passing. I came to the realization that retirement was imminent. When I mentioned the topic with him, he acknowledged that age and health necessitated retirement, yet his unwavering passion for science persisted—a sentiment that remains etched in my memory.

May Professor Bard’s legacy serve as a guiding light for us all, reminding us to approach science with passion, integrity, and a commitment to excellence. While he will be deeply missed, and his influence will forever remain in our hearts.

Khalid Omer (University of Sulaimani)

In 1989, while working as a postdoc in Bard’s lab, Pons and Fleischmann announced the discovery of “cold fusion.” The next day, Al gathered the entire group, filled with excitement, and insisted that they attempt to reproduce the results. He called for volunteers, but most members were skeptical and hesitant to join him. Eventually, a PhD student and another postdoc stepped forward.

The following months were exhilarating for Al. He dedicated much time to the lab, constructing an electrolyzer where heavy water was decomposed into oxygen and deuterium, which then recombined in the same cell. Initially, the setup, including a Geiger counter and other equipment, was placed at the lab entrance, forcing everyone to walk around it. Despite Al’s impatience and attempts to tweak the experiment, nothing significant happened. Eventually, the cell was moved to a corner of the lab near my desk, where it remained for about two more months until one day, it simply exploded. It was not a nuclear reaction, but it ended Bard’s lab episode of cold fusion…

These months were some of the most exciting for Al, reminiscent of a young student’s enthusiasm in the lab. I will ever remember him not just as a great scientist, but as a remarkable and modest person.

Daniel Mandler (Hebrew University of Jerusalem)

It’s been over a month since Al passed away and I’ve been thinking about him. He was someone that knew so much and used it to do so much with so many, for so many, and for so long.

Here’s another way I’ve thought of him. There are those that are the self-styled “No. 1 in the room” types and want everyone to know it. Al was not that way. He certainly qualified for the title but was approachable, would listen, and asked questions, good questions. In fact, you could come away from these conversations with him thinking everything from “Why didn’t I think of that?” to “I’m glad he thought that was reasonable.” Whether your reaction was one (or both) of these, you would very likely have gained from your interaction with him.

Bruce Kowert (St. Louis University)
Diane Smith
September 12, 1960 to October 24, 2022
Professor (San Diego State University)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories
No condolences, comments, or memories have been added yet for Diane Smith. Be the first to add one! Click "Add a comment" button and fill out the form.
Royce Murray
January 9, 1937 to July 6, 2022
Professor (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories

Dr. Royce Murray, 85, of Chapel Hill, NC, died on July 6, 2022, after a long illness.  Royce was a faculty member in the Department of ChemistryUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, for 57 years.  He was an analytical chemist who pioneered several areas including chemically modified electrodes and the development of methods to characterize nanoparticles.  His research is described in more than 440 refereed publications.  His research program was recognized by induction into the National Academy of Science in 1991.  He received numerous national and international awards and medals.  For 21 years, he served as Editor-in-Chief of Analytical Chemistry, the premier journal in his scientific discipline.

Royce Murray was born January 9, 1937, in Birmingham, AL, to parents Royce Leroy Murray and Louisa Justina Herd Murray. He graduated from Birmingham Southern College with a chemistry major in 1957 and went on to Northwestern University, in Evanston, Illinois, to complete his Ph.D. in Analytical Chemistry.  His father was an electrician, and this influenced Royce to pursue graduate research in electrochemistry.

Royce arrived at UNC-CH at the age of 23 as a chemistry instructor in 1960.  He quickly rose through the ranks while being father to 5 children.  He was a gifted teacher and researcher and exerted considerable efforts to improve the teaching of science at the University.  In 1968, he began planning a new research building, Kenan Laboratories, the first UNC chemistry building to have air conditioning.  This temperature regulation allowed research during the hot Chapel Hill summers, dramatically increasing the number of departmental publications.  In this era he was director of undergraduate studies and departmental chair.  Later he chaired the Curriculum in Applied Sciences and Materials, a program that evolved into the Department of Applied Sciences.

Subsequently, Royce improved undergraduate instruction through planning Morehead Laboratories.  In 2000, to improve space for all of science at UNC, he chaired a university committee to shape a science complex for physical sciences.  Several new buildings ensued including one named after Royce, Murray Hall.  At the same time, Royce built an internationally recognized research program.  His research interests were greatly stimulated by time he spent as an administrator at the National Science Foundation.  Following this administrative year, he surprised the chemical community by showing that electrochemical reactions could be directed and controlled by chemically modifying electrode surfaces with only microscopic quantities of materials.  The chemical modifications demanded verification, so he adapted various surface analytical techniques.  Later experiments probed electrochemistry at very low temperatures, including at superconductors, and in materials with very high viscosity.  Murray’s later research characterized metal nanoparticles, materials useful in catalysis and as chemical markers.

Mirtha and Royce in Japan.

Royce had numerous interests outside of chemistry.  While in high school he was a mile runner and won the state championship.  Running remained important to him throughout his career.  As a young man, he built a sailboat in his basement and enjoyed using it on Kerr Lake near Chapel Hill.  He was well known for his annual fishing trips along the Canadian border.  He was an ardent Tar Heel basketball fan and had seats on row 12 of the Smith Center.  He also was a car buff.  While a young father, he drove a Volkswagen minibus.  This evolved into a Porsche 914 in his middle years.  Still later he drove pickups that he used to haul fertilizer to his annual vegetable garden.  Royce also loved to travel and experience the world.  He especially enjoyed trips to the southern regions of Chile with his wife, Mirtha, a Chilean native.

The part of work Royce most enjoyed was his interactions with students, post-doctoral fellows, and faculty colleagues.  More than 160 graduate students, undergraduates, and postdoctoral fellows did research in his laboratory.  Many of these obtained prestigious faculty positions or made major contributions in chemical industry.  A large part of his success in teaching arose because he was a patient listener.

I first met Royce in the summer of 1968 (during his minibus phase) as a prospective graduate student.  The military draft wanted me and Royce was kind enough to write letters stating that I was more important to the country as a chemist than as an Army Private.  Unfortunately, the letters did not convince the draft board, and I spent 2 years in the Army.  When I returned in 1970, I joined his group and did research under his direction.  I had a rough start because I had forgotten most of undergraduate chemistry after my Army stint, but Royce was patient and encouraged me to continue.  Eventually, I caught up and enjoyed my research experience so much that I decided to follow his example and become a college professor.  In 1989 (his Porsche phase), I became Royce’s colleague on the UNC chemistry faculty.   Trying to keep up with his example (while teaching, doing research, or running) challenged me to greater exertions in all of these areas.  It is hard to imagine a better mentor and colleague than Royce W. Murray.

Royce Murray was a wonderful mentor for me. In comparison to many new graduate students, I had absolutely no undergraduate research experience to prepare me for graduate school. Royce very patiently brought me up to speed when I joined his research group in 1965 as his third PhD student. He was a superb teacher – one of the best I ever had. His course in electrochemistry attracted me into the field. His wonderfully clear explanation of concentration-distance profiles changing during voltammetry was the deciding factor for me. I still have my notes from his course! He was also very supportive and helpful later when I decided to leave my job in industry and move into academics. Royce was an excellent scientist, having many new ideas and skillfully implementing them experimentally. His solid publications, excellent talks at conferences, and long tenure as editor of Analytical Chemistry made him a prominent leader in the field. I enjoyed reading his editorials and often wondered how he came up with so many ideas to comment on. I will certainly miss him – his humor, his wisdom, and knowing that I could call him anytime.

Royce was a very special scientist and a motivating teacher; well organized with a very pleasant demeanor. I also think of him as a good listener, being thoughtful and always polite; a Southern Gentleman. Royce was careful about data quality and very precise with language. His success as the editor of Analytical Chemistry kept teaching us long after graduation.

As a New Yorker (like my fellow student Rick Van Duyne) when I arrived in Chapel Hill in 1966 it was a totally new experience to meet with people who were very polite, and reluctant to exchange insults. Rick and I had many discussions on this phenomenon while insulting each other for sport behind the local scenes. Royce and Charlie Reilley shared a lab that was appropriately called the Wigwam. Many developments in electroanalytical chemistry occurred there over roughly two decades. An excellent tribute to Royce as a man comes through in his NAS biographical sketch for Charlie’s early passing.

A life well lived! I owe much to his thoughtful advice over decades. I was not one of his PhD students, but I remain his student today.

I have many fond memories of Royce and the times spent with him at scientific meetings. I admired his scientific insight, his pioneering developments and, in human terms, his gentleness and good nature. His also being a faculty member at UNC Chapel Hill played some role, since I started my career in theoretical chemistry at UNC Chapel Hill with the late Professor Oscar K. Rice. We shall miss him and his always inspiring and warm presence.

Rudolph Marcus (California Institute of Technology)

Sometime in August 1976, in the third floor of Kenan Labs in the “Southern Part of Heaven”; a.k.a. Chapel Hill, NC…

HDA: “I am looking for Prof. Murray.”

RWM: “I am Murray.”

HDA: Mentally to himself; “Nice going you idiot! What a way to make a first impression!”

This clumsy first encounter with Prof. Royce W. Murray, represents one of the most career-defining meetings that I ever had and, in fact, will ever have. That meeting was the start of a journey into the field of electrochemistry, in particular and academia and life, in general.

But, let’s back track to a few months before that encounter. I was an undergraduate student at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy New York and was looking into graduate school programs. After a number of particularly brutal days of winter, with tremendous amounts of snow and bitterly cold temperatures, Prof. David A. Aikens, (who had been a Post. Doc with Charles N. Reilley) and with whom I was doing undergraduate research mentioned. “You will never see this in Chapel Hill!”. I was sold! He then mentioned that there was this terrific young electrochemist named Royce Murray and that I should look him up. And…we are back to my “first encounter”.

Royce was an individual of exceptional talent and creativity. His name is synonymous with the fields of chemically modified electrodes, self-assembling monolayers and monolayer protected clusters, among many others. He brought rigor and creativity to these fields and in so doing maintained the decades-long tradition of first-rate electrochemistry at UNC.

Royce led by example and was extraordinarily generous and supportive of people in his group. His former students, post-docs and collaborators represent generations of the most creative individuals in electrochemistry.

At a personal level, his support was unquestioned and knew no limits. I am certain that he did things for me that I don’t even know about. I had the utmost respect for him, as a scholar but most of all as an individual. In fact, it was only after getting tenure at Cornell that I developed enough courage to, for the first time, call him Royce. I have also followed his example in how I treat my own students, post-docs and collaborators; with generosity, respect and with absolute support.

Royce had an amazing ability to bring the best people to his labs. It was there that I made friends that last to this day (close to fifty years!!!) including Henry White, Debra Rolison, Jerome Lenhard and Robert Nowak.

One cannot talk about Royce without mentioning Mirtha Umaña, Royce’s “life’s travel partner” for close to 40 years. Their love and caring was palpable; truly one for the ages.

As I look back, I feel exceptionally fortunate to have had Royce W. Murray as an advisor and mentor, and I know, deep down, that I owe him an enormous debt of gratitude for all that he did for me. I feel that his memory is best served by us emulating what he did, how and why he did it.

Dr. Murray was the formative science mentor of my life and I am so very grateful to have had the opportunity to work closely with him, to observe how he approached his science and his profession. He taught me to be curious and thorough, to have broad interests, to have high standards, and to give back to my profession. He showed by his example what is was like to be a science leader, to pursue original research that changes how we all think about the world, and to serve and draw fulfillment from that service. I will greatly miss his counsel and the example he set for our profession.

Prior to joining the Murray group (joint postdoc for Royce and Tom Meyer) in 1976, I had spent a year as a postdoc at the Royal Institution of Great Britain in London. I felt isolated from the academic community and was very happy to join a thriving research group filled with excellent colleagues – visiting faculty Frank Schultz, graduate students Hector Abruna, Jerry Lenhard, Debra Rolison, postdoc Bob Nowak, undergraduate Henry White and others. Royce was pushing his concept of chemical modified electrodes in many directions, mainly by attaching redox active molecules to electrodes. His paper drafts were filled with his favorite phrase “tailor-made” which morphed into “tailor-madeness”, a transformation that met with disapproval from us, his minions. In addition to defining the basic electrochemical behavior of attached redox centers (e.g., cyclic voltammetry peak height proportional to scan rate, redox potentials close to the potentials of unattached analog molecules), Royce pioneered the use of XPS as a tool for analyzing the composition of electrode surfaces. Collaboration with the Meyer group led to many of the redox centers being complexes of ruthenium provided by Pat Sullivan and others.

Through group interactions and personal discussions with Royce, I matured as a researcher and as an aspiring professor. My own research path built on Royce’s basic ideas in the area of self-assembled monolayers both with and without attached redox centers. This led to work on long range electron transfer across alkanethiol self-assembled monolayers via through-bond tunneling, and the direct measurement of reorganization energies of the attached redox molecules through Tafel plots. Thanks to exposure to Tom Meyer’s group, I was aware of the work on proton-coupled electron transfer of ruthenium and osmium complexes and used an osmium-aquo complex on a SAM to map the pH and potential dependence of the PCET kinetics.

Royce was always kind, humorous, and perceptive with me. I appreciated his hesitations as he thought how to answer my questions precisely. I recall his response to a question on whether he enjoyed his role as Editor of the journal Analytical Chemistry. After a moment, he responded “It’s great … about 99% of the time”.

As I was finishing up my PhD at the University of Cincinnati, I pondered my future and considered postdoctoral research. I applied for a National Research Council fellowship at the Naval Research Lab in Washington, DC and was accepted. My mentor, Harry B. Mark, Jr. and William Heineman suggested that I consider going to the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill to work for Royce Murray, so I applied for a position in his group. I suspect that Harry and Bill had something to do with Royce offering me a position. I accepted, which changed the trajectory of my career in a manner that I had never dreamed of. Royce was a master of nurturing and bringing out the very best in the people that he mentored. First and foremost, Royce was a gentleman.

He was a pioneer in his field but never tooted his own horn. Others realized the importance of his work and incorporated his ideas into their own. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery! On a personal note, in my short tenure of one year in the Murray group, I met the most incredible people, who, to this day remain colleagues and friends. I remember going to the local grocery store in the middle of the night (I have insomnia) to pick up a few things, and there was Henry White, an undergraduate, bagging groceries. He made out OK, I think. Then there was Debra Rolison, who ended up being my first hire at the Naval Research Lab, where I began my career, who has transformed electrochemistry at that institution and well beyond. Héctor Abruña, who was a fellow jogger with Royce, has carved out an amazing career. Jerry Lenhard went on to become a star at Kodak research labs. Mirtha Umaña was there for all of us in sorting out surface science and ultimately became Royce’s soulmate and, in the end, his amazing caregiver to his last days. My short time at UNC was a special time for me. Our friendships have stood the test of time. My only regret is that I didn’t play enough volleyball with the group when I was there. I did engage in poker, which Royce always managed to win, humiliating all of us. Thanks to Debra, we have had two reunions to honor Royce after his retirement, including a private tour of Murray Hall led by Royce himself. Our paths have taken different directions, but Royce and Mirtha created a bond, scientific and personal, for all of us who were fortunate enough to overlap at Chapel Hill so many years ago.

Robert Nowak (Office of Naval Research)

Two-score and nine years ago (Professor White begged me to avoid waxing Shakespearean and lean towards the Gettysburg address in my Murray remembrance), I sat in on Royce’s graduate electrochemistry class and was the only person who responded (and correctly) when he posed an open question to the class — and received a classic Murray twinkle in response, recognizing that I was a lowly undergraduate visiting a graduate student in the class. Little wonder that when I arrived at UNC in 1975 as a graduate student, he was at the top of my list of potential Ph.D. advisors.

Professor Eponymous as the official Murray Hall tour guide (2012)

What does one take on the journey from Chapel Hill after achieving a Ph.D. under the aegis of Royce Murray? A joy for matters scientific. A collegial spirit. And a recognition of the need to blend timeliness and intellectual quality in the pursuit of scientific problems —gently interwoven within an ethical framework where people come first.

All that *plus* the need for a first-rate poker face when playing cards with him and the situational awareness never to get between Royce Murray and a piece of sushi.

And what echoes in the science of 2022 as we remember Royce and all he taught us and let us teach ourselves? The philosophy he established in his pioneering exploration of chemically modified electrodes made self-assembled monolayers the behemoth it became, keeps nano S&T humming, and is part and parcel of making multifunctional mesoscale architectures work. Much of what has moved electrochemical energy storage to new levels of performance — one of the keys to a carbon-neutral future — relies on modifying electrode materials and structures in 3D.

Thank you, Royce. I am grateful we had so many wonderful opportunities to celebrate you and your (and our) beloved Mirtha and your life in chemistry. Thank you especially for a priceless gift: the life-long familial timeline you created for us as members of the Murray clan.

Royce Murray’s science is the basis of much of what we know about films and polymers on electrodes and how to characterize modified electrodes. His science, always clean and creative, grew from his finely tuned perceptions of the phenomena that underpin unique chemical and physical properties. Royce’s support of his students launched many of today’s leaders in electrochemistry. Royce’s support extended to many; he was always interested to talk science. Electrochemistry and electrochemists have been enriched by Royce Murray.

Analytical chemistry has lost one of its most thoughtful and influential members. I first knew Royce when he began serving as Editor-in-Chief of Analytical Chemistry; Royce he handled a number of my lab’s early manuscripts and provided us insightful guidance in navigating issues raised by the reviewers. Royce had a broad perspective in chemistry, which was reflected in the wide range of his innovations and discoveries in research, his leadership as journal editor and in ACS governance, and his impact on the success and influence of the analytical chemistry program at UNC. He will be deeply missed.

What strikes me as I try write this tribute is the realization of the magnitude of impact a mentor can have on someone and their path. I am sure that many of the tributes to Royce will reflect this sentiment, and my feelings are no exception. I spent a year as an undergraduate researcher in Royce’s lab at UNC and the impact of that experience is the reason I am where I am today. He empowered a path into the world of electrochemistry for a student who really had no idea of the impact Royce had already made in the community. I distinctly remember sitting down with Royce while he wrote down ~20 graduate programs to apply to. He told me to pick a dozen and come back when I got in to talk to him about each program and people to meet at each place. This meeting had a lasting effect and throughout my career, I continue to see the impact he has made as a mentor and a scientist. Whether that was through my graduate training with Henry White at Utah or still bumping into Bill Heineman in the halls of Crosley Tower, the reach of Royce’s impact as a mentor cannot be overstated. I am grateful to have had that experience, and I believe we will continue to see Royce’s impact for many years.

A visit with Dr. Murray at UNC.

Royce Murray was undoubtedly a pioneer, a true scholar, and an exceptional mentor and colleague. He was an endless treasure trove of knowledge who was always happy to share it with young scientists who sought his insight. Royce played a key role in our development as electrochemists and analytical scientists, and we are happy to have known him. We will do our best to carry that spirit forward, in his memory –

As a “gas phase Electrochemist” I can probably qualify as an adjunct member of the Society for Electroanalytical Chemistry. My first memories of Royce mostly stem from my sabbatical leave from the University of Nebraska to the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill where I spent part of my leave as a “Senior Visitor” teaching Analytical Chemistry to a large pre-med class of undergraduate students during the 1974-75 academic year. That was my first experience teaching analytical chemistry to such a group and I benefitted greatly from Royce’s generous and very helpful advice as I weathered this challenging experience. Through the years I valued Royce’s friendship, which was of great value to me, especially in our scientific interactions. He helped me to gain a greater appreciation of the true scope of analytical chemistry and inspired me with his breadth. Royce was truly a leader in not just in all aspects of Analytical Chemistry, but of Chemistry in general and I miss him.

Charlie L. Wilkins (University of Arkansas)

I first met Royce when I was a graduate student attending my very first Gordon Research Conference on Electrochemistry. My advisor Larry Faulkner introduced me to him. I remember Royce’s gentle, patient, and articulate way of describing the ongoing research in his group, illustrating it with care using pen and paper. He was familiar with and expressed an interest in my own research, which took me by surprise and meant a lot to me at that time. He later became an influential and motivating force for me as a junior scientist. I am grateful that he continued to show support for me throughout my subsequent academic career. His passing is a great loss for analytical chemistry and electrochemistry, but he has left a positive, enduring impact on both the science and the people in those communities. Thanks, Royce!

I’m a faculty member at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville. It’s heart-broken to learn the passing of Royce Murray.

I was trained as an inorganic chemist. After starting my assistant-professor appointment at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville in 1992, I also became interested in developing materials as new analytical tools. We were fortunate to meet Royce during his seminar visit and later at conferences. He offered his suggestions and perspectives on how to study analytical chemistry. The guidance played an important role in our success. I’m very grateful for his advice and support.

I have many impressions that Royce made upon me, being able to participate in several GRC where he and Fred Anson sat in the front row. They always asked the most direct and hardest questions cutting through the hype and circumstance. In hindsight I better understand how Royce always probed deeply and respectfully into the topic at hand without making the speaker feel like it was to the person but rather to the science. I find this “art” of asking probing questions to the point has now be lost to many public presentations. He really understood to ask for clarity in scientific discussion but also to get the best supporting outcome from the speaker.

The other example is related to the development of chemically modified electrodes and how he approached the science. I followed all his work while a Postdoc at Northwestern (knowing that he graduated there in three years in 1960). It was several years later of course that I met him at UNC and he impressed upon me the importance of electroanalytical chemists to be able to control their own materials to aid more in depth and intimate study. I really took this to heart and leveraged this advice to become a better inorganic and organic chemist to make new materials that enable new understanding and to provide impetus for next generation materials discovery. Royce was well ahead of this time having demonstrated how chemically modified electrodes can advance so many fields of science from chemical sensors, information storage, energy storage and electrochemical energy conversion.

Royce Murray, Mark Wightman and Andy Ewing (2018)

I began as a postdoc in Royce’s lab in 1983. What a time that was, full of excitement to learn about chemically modified electrodes and to get to know Royce Murray as a new supervisor. I only stayed a year, but would have been happy to stay longer. It is a bit complicated, but I obtained two offers for positions at major academic institutions after my first year year of postdoc. I asked Royce for advice as I did not want to bail out on the postdoc after only one year. He said, “You have to take one of these offers or next year no one will take you serious,” making it clear I had to do what was best for my career. Royce was truly one of the great scientists of our time. Not only because he was an imaginative, visionary chemist, but also because he thought about and considered the people around him. Thus, I learned a lot from Royce. Some great science, but so much more. One thing was, as above, always put your people first and good/great things will happen. Additionally, he was extraordinarily well organised and he taught me that this is the trait that makes large projects happen.

A quiet part of Royce was his hugely important service to the science/academic community. Many people know Royce was the long-standing editor of Analytical Chemistry. But, he participated heavily in the work two new building projects at UNC and was very active on committees in the National Academy of Sciences, and much much more. He was selfless in his desire to help the community, his community, of science. There is no better way to remember someone.

I recall how Royce joined the small group of young analytical (and electroanaytical) chemists, led by Ralph Adams, who persuaded the Gordon Research Conferences to initiate an annual conference on electrochemistry and to base it in Santa Barbara, CA in midwinter. These proved to be very successful conferences where many younger scientists were exposed, stimulated and helpfully educated (mostly) by well known, more experienced electrochemical practitioners.

At about the same time Royce helped to create the Western Electroanalytical Theoretical Society, WETS, which was the precursor to today’s SEAC. The founding members used to gather at the beach in San Clemente, CA. just before west coast meetings of the ACS and/or the ECS. I can still recall with pleasure sitting on the beach in San Clemente with Royce and discussing properties of cyclic voltammograms that we drew in the moist sand. Those were the truly good old days.

Royce will be missed in the years to come but surely never forgotten.

Royce Murray, Al Bard, Larry Faulkner, and Fred Anson (1998)
Those who are recalling Royce in this space probably remember him first as a wonderfully curious and inventive scientist. But he was far more. In fact, I came to know him best in a context outside of science – when he chaired a search for a new provost at Chapel Hill, and I was a finalist. We interacted closely over several weeks, and I saw a gentleman-scholar who commanded broad trust across the university for his judgment, his comprehensive grasp of affairs and people, his synthetic thinking, his ability to listen, and his deep commitment to the University of North Carolina. Royce was realistic and practical, but also aspirational and rarely cynical. It was a valuable combination. The best times with him were often the relaxed times, when one could just enjoy the conversation. He was a fine teacher of life and science, not least in these moments. For all of the moments we had together, I remain thankful.

My first interactions with Royce Murray had very little to do with electrochemistry. In my dark period of indentured servitude as department head of chemistry at UIUC, I had periodic need to ask Royce to render both formal and informal advice. The first thing I remember how about these requests was that Royce never said no – he was unreserved in his dedication to our profession and never failed to render thoughtful, insightful, and brutally honest opinions whenever he was asked. I was keenly aware that he must surely have been asked to comment on nearly everyone coming up through the junior ranks in our profession, so it was truly inspiring to observe his generosity in spending his time and energy in support of analytical chemistry and the individuals who practice it.

My second enduring memory of Royce is of his dedication to the highest standards of rigor and scholarship. Many others I am sure will comment on the marvelous work he did in helping build and maintain the outstanding group of chemical measurement scientists at UNC as well as his splendid vision and leadership of Analytical Chemistry. However, my memories are of his dedication to the ideal that each of us, as individuals, should produce the highest quality science that we could. I remember sitting with Royce at dinner at a Gordon Conference at about the time that special issues of journals were becoming popular and asking him why we didn’t see more of these in the journal. I’ll never forget his response – Because they tend to produce (paraphrasing here) “inferior” papers! Enough said, message received.

Early in my career, I recall giving a talk in front of Royce Murray and others at a small meeting. I didn’t know him, except by his papers and enormous stature in the field. He was paying close attention, and he asked a hard questions – intimidating! But within a hour, he and I were talking informally about our work and his own over a beer. Over the years, he was a most amazing mentor and roll model for many young faculty in our field. We were incredibly fortunate to count Royce as one of us.

Reginald Penner (University of California - Irvine)

Royce was an inspiration.  As a graduate student, I was greatly motivated by his work on chemically modified electrodes and still today often have a need to pore over his Electroanalytical Chemistry chapter on the topic. His AC Editorials are filled with timeless lessons. I will remember him for his kindness, thoughtfulness and tremendous intellect. He always will be very much missed.

I first heard of Royce in his role as editor of Analytical Chemistry when, in the early 1990s, he was trying to reinvigorate our journal. The oldest among us (I was ca. 40 at the time) know that he achieved this feat with astonishing speed and under his leadership Analytical Chemistry quickly regained its place as a reference journal in the analytical field. At the time, I was mainly publishing in physical, organic and organometallic chemistry and fundamental electrochemistry journals, so I was impressed even though I followed Royce’s role as a bit of an outsider.

I only met Royce later when I began actively collaborating with Mark Wightman to establish the theoretical framework validating electrochemistry at microelectrodes. It was during conferences. I then had the impression of meeting a “gentleman of science”, patiently listening and giving Mark and me sound advice. Despite his kind interest for our works, he never agreed to edit our manuscripts, considering that he might be biased because of his previous involvement in Mark’s training. Hence, he delegated editing and decision-making issues regarding our works to Rick McCreery. I quote this because it is a gesture of Royce’s righteous attitude in science. In fact, the only time he edited one of my manuscripts was when he invited me to send a first Letter to Analytical Chemistry I decided to send a work about antique Egyptian black makeup and its antibacterial properties as investigated with Pt-black microelectrodes on cells and tissues. He loved this paper and I discovered on this occasion that he had a strong taste for cultural heritage.

Beyond the above, I deeply appreciated him as a person when I received the Reilley award. We celebrated this award with dinner with him, Mark, Al Bard and other friends during PittCon, and his joy in celebrating my award betrayed his generosity. Later, when Mark moved to Chapel Hill, going to see Royce at each of my visits and discussing scientific matters with him in his office or having dinner with him and his wife were special moments whose memories still rejoice me.

I have known Royce Murray for almost 50 years, initially from attending Gordon Conferences on Electrochemistry in Santa Barbara and visiting him in Chapel Hill. In the pre-internet days as a young Australian early career electrochemist, it was essential and only possible  to meet people by travelling long distances and taking advantage of very short periods of time to exchange ideas with scientists from other countries. Royce Murray was one of the people who would always take time to provide constructive feedback to enthusiast  young scientists and was fun to be with, in both scientific  and social contexts, for all the time I have known him.

Over the years I have met Royce in many countries to listen to his lectures and have  discussions on electrochemical topics of mutual interest  and life in general. On one occasion my wife Tunde and I were stopping over at Easter Island on our way to a conference in Chile.  Amazingly, in this remotest of places, and on  visiting probably  the only restaurant on the Island, we were delighted to be greeted by Royce  and his wife Mirtha. We then had a wonderful time enjoying their company before completing the journey to Chile. Royce had many interests  in addition to his love of science  which made conversations with him  so interesting.

During his time as editor of Analytical Chemistry, Royce constantly provided great advice on what improvements  could be made to our papers based on his assessment of reviewer advice supplemented by his own insights, when appropriate. I always found his editorials stimulating and thought provoking. For example, via these and other communications, I knew his view was that short sharp accounts of novel science were preferable to some of our lengthier papers and as a result sometimes we had to shorten our work to meet what he regarded to be a suitable length relevant to the importance of our contributions.

I know that many Australians in addition to myself have greatly benefitted from Royce’s leadership and mentorship. We will miss his inspirational pioneering contributions to the field of electroanalytical chemistry, but fondly remember what he achieved in his stellar career that had a high impact on the global community of analytical scientists.

With fond remembrances.  Vale, Royce.

Royce Murray was a gentleman and a scholar. In my career I was fortunate to meet Royce at meetings and conferences in many places around the world and I had numerous insightful scientific conversations with him. But, my fondest memory of Royce was the time I literally bumped into him and his wife as I turned a corner while strolling through the Rijkmuseum in Amsterdam.  They were heading home from a conference in Poland and I was heading to a conference in Prague.  We both had flight connections in Amsterdam and had decided to spend an extra night there in order to see the paintings and art!  Sporting his ever present favorite hat, we laughed together, chatted for a moment, and then went our separate ways. Whether in Europe, Japan, California or Chapel Hill, I will always cherish the brief times I was able to spend with Royce–a man of great humility who always treated everyone as his equal.

A few days ago, I was reminded of one of my early encounters with Royce. I caught a clip on the news where the Labour Leader of the Opposition, Sir Keir Starmer, walked into a room to meet the new King Charles III. “Your Majesty…..I thought your speech was fantastic” said Sir Kier. “Oh, that’s reassuring” said King Charles, evidently flattered. When I met Royce, I opened in similar fashion (but without the Majesty!): “I really enjoyed your latest editorial in Analytical Chemistry”. Royce put me on the spot with a somewhat different reply: “Really? What aspect in particular?” (or words to that effect). Fortunately, I had read the editorial!

Royce led the way as Editor of Analytical Chemistry and it was through the journal that many analytical scientists got to know him. Nowadays, editorials are quite common in many ACS journals, but it was pretty rare in scientific journals (especially from the ACS) when Royce was writing ad hoc editorials throughout the 1990s onwards. Looking back on a few of them, you get a good sense of Royce’s passions and also see that he was often ahead of his time, for example, when musing “on electronic publishing and reading by the fireside” in 1995!  His editorials have science at the centre, but embrace politics, policy and society. I encourage you to revisit them, or to go and look for the first time.

Royce visited the UK on a number of occasions, usually to pick up an award (such as the RSC Electrochemistry group Faraday Medal) or give a plenary or opening lecture at a Faraday Discussion. In 2005, he was recipient of the prestigious RSC Centenary Prize and we had the pleasure of hosting Royce and Mirtha at Warwick as one of the venues on his UK lecture tour. During that visit he was keen to discuss science with graduate students and faculty alike, as well as enjoy a good dinner or two, where he was excellent company, as always.

Royce was passionate about instrumentation development, evident in a series of editorials he wrote about the importance of graduate students being trained to build instruments (something we have taken to heart at Warwick), but also through his stewardship of the journal. He made Analytical Chemistry the go-to forum for reporting technique developments, which I sensed (excuse the pun!) when working with Al Bard and then in my independent career from the early 1990s. “Royce’s journal” became the natural home for what I consider to be some of our best work. Royce assembled an expert team of co-editors who handled papers, but in the last few years of his tenure as Editor, I had the privilege of Royce handling our papers himself, which he did with consumate professionalism. On one occasion (just after New Year), I wrote and asked whether I could have a chat and seek his advice on one difficult aspect of our research (not something I would do lightly). He replied a few hours later: “I’m on a ship and phone right now. I’ll be back in the office Monday. We’ll arrange a phone time then”. Yes, Royce was approachable and helpful, and his advice was invaluable. He believed in letting the science speak and for that he will long be remembered.

As an undergrad at UNC in the spring of 1976, I enrolled in a sophomore-level analytical chemistry taught by Prof. Samuel Knight.  I learned a great many new things in that course, including a bit of electrochemistry: molecular diffusion, Heyrovsky, and that electrons always move to the cathode. But Prof. Knight was a bit muddy about how redox processes took place at the electrode/electrolyte interface.  Fortunately, I had a lab teaching assistant, Jerry Lenhard, who worked in the Murry lab, and who told me to go ask Royce Murray for a lab position if I was really interested in this electrochemical stuff.  So, with quite a bit of trepidation (Prof. Murray had a no-nonsense reputation among the undergraduates), I knocked on his office door and told him I wanted to learn about electrochemistry.  Prof. Murray offered me a position on that first visit, but with the condition that I first successfully complete his graduate-level Electrochemistry course, Chem 145, being taught later that year.  I thought Chem 145 was a fabulous course, as we learned everything, A to Z, about electrochemistry. I still have my bound set of Prof. Murray’s typed course notes filled with his hand drawings of op-amp circuit diagrams, i-E curves, double-layer structure, etc. that he provided to each student at the start of the course.

Royce was always thoughtful and encouraging as I reported back to him with failed experiments for many months, but we eventually got the science under control.  The Murray lab was a great place for a novice undergraduate researcher, as I was surrounded by grad students and postdocs who were both supportive and a lot smarter than me. Of course, at the time I didn’t have a clue that I would be intertwined with these folks, including Royce, over the next 40 years.  Towards completion of my degree, Royce firmly steered me to Texas to do my graduate work with Prof. Allen Bard. I am indebted to Royce for providing this opportunity to me as an undergraduate.

Over the decades since leaving Chapel Hill, I observed Royce serve as an impeccable role model: creative and rigorous science, attention to serving the university and chemistry communities, and always offering an encouraging word about science and life!  He will be greatly missed.

Theodore (Ted) Kuwana
August 3, 1931 to January 1, 2022
Emeritus Distinguished Professor (University of Kansas)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories
No condolences, comments, or memories have been added yet for Theodore (Ted) Kuwana. Be the first to add one! Click "Add a comment" button and fill out the form.
Janet (Osteryoung) Jones
March 1, 1939 to September 21, 2021
Director of Chemistry Division (National Sciences Foundation)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories

Janet was indeed a pioneer female electrochemist if the word female is not yet forbidden. She had a reputation among some people of being pretty tough…or maybe strident (a better word) with her opinions. She also had a twinkle in her eye and could be a lot of fun. She did not like BS that overhyped science achievements. More of that attitude could be good these days. 🙂 She was very accomplished in the science and had a great partnership with Bob Osteryoung. They were a unique couple, both contributing separately and together.

The last time I saw Janet was in 2001 when I was asked by her #2 in the Division of Chemistry at the National Science Foundation to be the speaker at her farewell party. After my remarks highlighting her many scientific contributions, including her leadership on improving inclusion of underrepresented groups in science, she thanked the NSF folk and then noted that she was going to step away from science for a while, but that she would be back. She never came back. I hope she found joy in the years that followed.

A tremendous loss to be sure. She was a significant role model for me in the early days of my career and I missed her when she left science. Truly one of a kind.

Jeanne Pemberton (University of Arizona)

Fall, 1995, my younger brother had relapsed with leukemia and was given 2 to 6 weeks to live. He was 32. I was due to speak at a meeting Janet had organised and I asked her if I could cancel at the last minute. She agreed. After he died, I met Janet at the GRC and she gave me a huge hug and said, never worry, family is always first. I never forgot. She was tough as well as smart, but she was a gem of a human being inside! I admired her until the end.

Janet was a forceful voice for women in science. I cannot even imagine how much crap she had to put up with during her career. I remember visiting her and Robert at Buffalo many years ago. They had painted the forward, reverse and difference current functions on the wall in their office. Hard to miss! I wonder how many people use “Osteryoung Square Wave” and know nothing about her. I also remember having a great dinner at their house. I hope her current function will always be positive!

She was chair of the Department of Chemistry at NCSU at the time I graduated. There were not too many women electrochemists at the time, and I will always remember being impressed by what she had accomplished, which I know was not easy. I also remember her asking me a question at my final research seminar that I knew the answer to but in my moment of panic could not get it out. It was so embarrassing, but she came up afterward and we had a great conversation and she congratulated me.

In summer 1997, I just finished my Ph.D. with Dr. Bruckenstein at Buffalo and attended my first ACS national meeting at Las Vegas. That year, there was a dinner party for Dr. Bruckenstein who won the ACS electrochemistry award. I was by chance sat next to Janet in the dinner table. She was very kind and taught me the etiquette of American dinner. She also spent time asking me about my career plans and gave me some very good advice. At that time she was NSF program officer and I felt so honored she spent time taking with me. She has been a role model for me since then.

Joseph Maloy
April 19, 1939 to December 6, 2020
Associate Professor (Seton Hall University)
Condolences, Comments, and Memories
No condolences, comments, or memories have been added yet for Joseph Maloy. Be the first to add one! Click "Add a comment" button and fill out the form.