First reactions. Telephone interview, October 2025

“Some people thought it was a whole load of rubbish. But it didn’t turn out that way.”

Richard Robson’s new concept for molecular architecture, which occurred to him while building models for teaching, was the starting point for the burgeoning field of metal–organic frameworks. In this conversation, he recounts how this new idea emerged and how, in the end, he just had to do something about it. He also offers some modest reflections on a long life in chemistry, which he says wasn’t exactly a vocation: “I sort of drifted into it, I couldn’t think of anything better to do.”

Transcript

Richard Robson: Hello?

Adam Smith: Hello. Am I speaking with Richard Robson?

RR: You are, yes.

AS: Professor Robson, this is Adam Smith calling from nobelprize.org. First of all, congratulations on the Nobel Prize.

RR: Thank you.

AS: It is a day in which the world gets to celebrate chemistry and to reflect a little bit on the beauty of chemistry. And that’s a lovely thing.

RR: I agree.

AS: And how do you feel about the news of the prize?

RR: Well, there are upsides and downsides, and I’m quite old now. And handling all the nonsense that’s going to happen is going to be hard work.

AS: By nonsense you mean?

RR: The facility with words that I had quarter of a century ago has disappeared, so it’s a bit of a struggle. Anyhow, this is a taste of what’s to come.

AS: What brought you to chemistry in the first place? What was it that made you a chemist?

RR: Gee, that’s a difficult question. I can’t say I was particularly thrilled about it at the time. I always felt sort of second-rate for not being a mathematician. I always thought of mathematics as the highest of human activities. So yes, I sort of drifted into it. I couldn’t think of anything better to do.

AS: Well, it seemed to work out.

RR: Yes. It may very well not have done as well, but anyhow, that’s, that’s life, isn’t it?

AS: Yeah Indeed. I’m very struck by the fact that you say that everything that has arisen in this field was predictable in a way from your very…

RR: Well, not the details, but the general development. Yes, certainly, it was. Very simple-minded stuff, you know, it really was.

AS: Still, it was a leap to think that you could build these net-like structures.

RR: Yes, and I must say that some people thought, at the time, that was in the middle eighties, it was a whole load of rubbish. Anyhow, it didn’t turn out that way.

AS: And it was teaching. It was teaching molecular structure and building models.

RR: Oh, yes, absolutely. My job was to construct models of basic inorganic structures like sodium chloride and diamond, and so on. Iiterally sat down with log tables and had to figure out all the angles that the workshop, we had a workshop in those days of six or seven men. Workshops nowadays in chemistry and physics departments have disappeared. So, literally, with log tables calculated the angles at the workshop. Very skilled men had to drill the holes into these wooden balls and then construct the model. And at the time, I’d been playing with organic ligands that bind two metal ions in close proximity, but leaving a gap where interesting things might or might not have happened. And also ligands that bound four metal ions in very close proximity and what effect would they have on species that became attached to them. So all of that was at the back of my mind, and as I was constructing these models, plugging metal rods of clearly defined dimensions into wooden balls with accurately drilled holes, the thought arose: What if we used molecules in place of the balls and chemical bonds in place of the rods? And everything else followed from that. That was in 1974. I had that idea and scribbled a few things down and then forgot about it until that area of chemistry came up in next year’s lectures. You know, for a couple of lectures we talked about solid state structures. Each year I’d think that was not a bad idea, I ought to do something about it. But I didn’t for best part of 10 years, and then in somewhat of a state of desperation, I did a lot of bench work myself, I started to try to make things that might polymerize with metal ions into structures in the middle eighties. And the whole thing started to look very promising, but it was all, it really was, very common sense.

AS: It’s fascinating, a fascinating story. And also very interesting that you didn’t let the thing drop. It’s easy to have an idea and then not do anything with it, and even though it lay dormant for a while.

RR: Yeah, well, I kept being reminded of it each year when these lectures came up. I thought, I really ought to follow that up. And eventually I did.

AS: How good that you did and what’s inspired again coming back to this, although you don’t seem to be surprised by how it took off.

RR: Not at all. It was obvious it was going to happen.

AS: It’s a different view. It’s a lovely refreshing view of innovation.

RR: Yes, it needs a sort of obsessive individual, neglecting other responsibilities. And that’s the way I was.

AS: That does seem to be a common feature of laureates, doesn’t it? Or great scientists generally. Of people who achieve great things. Let’s expand it to that, some ability to shut other things out.

RR: Yes, indeed. That’s quite right.

AS: Would you characterize yourself as the kind of epitome of the lone scientist then?

RR: Yes, more or less, I think I would. That’s not to say I haven’t had people working with me have been absolutely invaluable. I mean, I just mix things up and get compounds, but the real science is numbers and angles, and bond distances and things like that. Things that I’d never have achieved myself. And so the crystallographers I’ve worked with, Bernard Hoskins in particular, and Brendan Abrahams more recently, have given the whole area respectability that it wouldn’t have had. And they’re just nice guys as well, so that was good.

AS: Yes. Well, hopefully in the coming weeks will introduce you to some new nice people. So it’ll work out nicely. I simply love your understatement that you just mix things up and get compounds.

RR: It’s the truth. That’s what I do. And lots of them don’t work.

AS: Yes.

RR: So you say hooray when they do.

AS: I suppose that’s what young people have to learn in science. It sounds like your celebrations of this will be modest, but do you…

RR: I think that would be an understatement, yes. I’m now 88 and you know, the people I knew pretty well 25 to 30 years ago, they’re all dead or close to it like myself.

AS: It reminds me of a statement Noël Coward made once. I think it was Ralph Richardson, was saying to him: “Aren’t you sad that all our friends are dying?” And Noël Coward said: “Well, personally, dear boy, I’m delighted if my friends make it through lunch”.

RR: Yes, I liked Noël Coward ‘s stuff.

AS: Well, I wish you a lovely evening in Melbourne.

RR: Well, it’s a late evening now. Yes.

AS: Thank you very much for talking to me now. It’s been a great pleasure.

RR: Thank you for calling, and yes, we may meet in the future.

AS: I very much hope so. Bye.

RR: Okay, Thank you, bye. 

AD: Bye.

Did you find any typos in this text? We would appreciate your assistance in identifying any errors and to let us know. Thank you for taking the time to report the errors by sending us an e-mail.