Sunday, March 16, 2025

Greta Gerwig: Telling Our Stories, Editing Our Code

When I watched Lady Bird for the first time, I remember thinking: “Wow, someone finally understands what it feels like to grow up and not always fit neatly into your own life.” Greta Gerwig did not just direct a coming-of-age film – she bottled up a universal yet deeply personal experience of adolescence. Like Jennifer Doudna, who turned a microscopic immune system into one of the most powerful tools for editing human DNA, Gerwig took the everyday struggles of young women and transformed them into something revolutionary: a narrative that felt authentic, complicated, and unapologetically female.


At first glance, you might not think a filmmaker and a scientist would have so much in common. But both Gerwig and Doudna are editors and visionaries in their own right. Both took what already existed – be it the DNA of life itself or the tropes of film – and reworked them to tell entirely new stories.

    

Editing Narratives, Editing Genes


Greta Gerwig’s films are like precise emotional edits. She does not need to change every scene of a familiar genre; instead, she tweaks it just enough to make us see it differently. Lady Bird is not just another teen drama – it is filled with nuanced characters who make choices that feel real, raw, and imperfect. Little Women reorders a well-known story, adding layers of meta-commentary and feminism that feel urgently modern. And Barbie? Somehow, she made us laugh at a doll’s existential crisis while questioning beauty standards and capitalism.


Doudna’s CRISPR discovery works the same way. It is less about rewriting the entire genome and more about making precise, intentional edits. A small cut here, a slight modification there, and suddenly you have the power to silence a harmful gene or fix a mutation. Both Gerwig and Doudna show us how carefully considered changes can ripple outward, creating profound effects.




The Creative Process: Controlled Chaos


Gerwig’s creative process, much like Doudna’s scientific process, starts with observation and questioning. In interviews, Gerwig often talks about how much of her writing is autobiographical – how it comes from long walks, journaling, and listening to other people’s conversations. There is an element of trial and error, a “what if I rearranged this scene or rewrote this moment?” vibe to her work. Similarly, Doudna’s journey with CRISPR involved long periods of experimentation, uncertainty, and collaboration before landing on something that could actually work in human cells.


What both women understand is that creativity – whether in a lab or a writer’s room – isn’t a straight line. It is a series of questions: What happens if I change this detail? How can I make this story or this DNA sequence work differently?



Who Gets to Write (or Edit) the Future?


Both Gerwig and Doudna have also forced important conversations about who gets to shape the narrative – whether that is the story of women on screen or the genetic story of life itself. Hollywood has historically sidelined female directors, just like science has long struggled with representation. Gerwig’s success in taking Barbie, a brand often criticized for reinforcing stereotypes, and transforming it into a smart, feminist blockbuster is a reminder that who tells the story really does matter!


Doudna faced a similar ethical debate when CRISPR exploded onto the global stage. The question was not just, “Can we edit genes?” but “Who should have the right to do so?” The technology is powerful, but Doudna herself has advocated for caution and global discussions about its responsible use. Both women have opened incredible doors – Gerwig by making space for more women-centered narratives in mainstream cinema, and Doudna by democratizing a technology that could shape humanity’s future.



Redefining Possibility


At the heart of both Gerwig’s films and Doudna’s science is the idea of possibility. The possibility that our stories – whether written in a screenplay or our DNA – are never set in stone. They can be reworked, reimagined, rewritten.


When I think of Lady Bird and Barbie, I am reminded that storytelling has the power to shift culture. When I think of CRISPR, I realize that science has the power to shift life itself. Greta Gerwig and Jennifer Doudna both show us that sometimes, the most powerful changes come from looking at what already exists and daring to rewrite the ending!

7 comments:

  1. Hi, Najiya!
    I really enjoyed how you described Gerwig's unique creativity that transcends the screen. I have loved every work of hers that I've seen! I never would have made the connection between her and Doudna, but you definitely convinced me! The idea that these two strong, female creatives are so intentional with their creative products—making small changes to BIG effects—is inspiring. I also appreciate your explanation of Gerwig and Doudna's ability to make us see new perspectives and question the institutions around us. What an amazing blog post!

    ReplyDelete
  2. You did a great job of synthesizing the two themes of these two creatives. I have had a similar experience with Gerwig's films, and I had not thought about the intricacies of both processes. Your conclusion, that both creatives understand that creativity is not a straight line, was very well supported, and I enjoyed reading your opinions on these two women. Connecting these two creatives is hard, but I think you did it very well, and I enjoyed reading your post!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think you did a wonderful job not only writing about, but connecting these two incredible women! I wouldn't have initially seen a tie between the two, but your blog post definitely made it clear. I have to say that my absolute favorite line from your post is the very last one: "sometimes, the most powerful changes come from looking at what already exists and daring to rewrite the ending." It's a beautiful, and incredibly true sentiment, and something both Gerwig and Doudna both embody. I also feel like, quite frequently, creativity is thought of as creating something brand new and making it from the ground up. These women can show us that starting with something that already exists and bringing your own ideas to it is no less creative, and certainly no less impactful!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Najiya!! I love this post. You did such a beautiful job illustrating the connections between these two women. I would have never thought to put Gerwig and Doudna in the same conversation but the crossover was fascinating. I was interested in the conversation about creative editing and how they each do it in their own ways in their separate fields. I think it is cool that there can be similarities in the creative processes of two different women in two very different professional industries.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I thought you did a great job of diving into the reason why Gerwig is such a popular person in the movie scene --- she has an innate ability to make people feel seen in uncomfortable and yet simultaneously comforting ways. I love the way that you talked about the overlap between Gerwig and Doudna's work, and how they both encourage the idea of building off of what already has. I also think that this shows a trend in appreciating our predecessors work by expanding on it and maybe doing things that they did not have the time or resources to do.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi Najiya! I really enjoyed this blog post. I especially love how you have explored who gets the choice of editing/writing in the future. I think exploring the lens that these 2 powerful women were able to open doors to how we should accomplish different things whether it be in movies or CRISPR is so important for our futures. They both approach certain issues and come up with ways to fix/mediate the issues. Then, they are able to also question how/what is the most efficient and ethical way to explore this. This is a great connection!

    ReplyDelete
  7. The way that you synthesized the work of these two creatives with such different backgrounds was awesome. I love Gerwig's works and her inspired takes on films. I have not personally read Codebreaker and am not particularly interested in science, but the way you described Doudna's work made sense and I could clearly see the connection between the two. This speaks to your own creative abilities I think.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.