Shock

Rating:
Summary: One of the most ineptly written books of all time
Review: Simply put, this book should never have been published. (It ranks up--uhh, I mean DOWN--there with Patricia Cornwell's "Isle of Dogs" as an example of how a "name" author can churn out drek and and get it published. I realize that they have "quotas" of so many books per year they have to write, so quality is of little concern.) The dialogue lumbers and is completely unrealistic, for starters. "I guess we'll have to spoon," says one young woman when the two heroines get in a small car trunk. I stopped counting the number of times that one woman "rolled her eyes for the other's benefit." Just awful, awful, awful. And the more than abrupt ending leads one to think that we'll be faced with "Shock, Part II." Thank god I got this book from the public library and didn't spend any money. Sorry, Dr. Cook....I used to love your books, but no more. You--and your editor--should be ashamed for foisting this inane drivel upon your readers.

Rating:
Summary: A new low for Robin Cook
Review: I've read most of Robin Cook's earlier novels and enjoyed them immensely, despite his tendency to send protagonists on foolish, "Nancy Drew"-style amateur investigations. This one, sadly, is far below Cook's usual standard. If a lesser-known writer had produced this, it would never have been published.

Rating:
Summary: Shock - ingly Bad!
Review: The title Cook gave this novel was "Shock". The title should have been "Laverne & Shirley Meet Dr. Frankenstein". If this novel was translated to the screen without major dialog modifications, I suggest it be done as a comedic farce. The female lead characters are at once Ph.D. candidates yet devoid of any common sense, planning ability or street smarts. At no time was this reader ever concerned about either heroine [the gene pool would have improved without these two ditzes in it]. The "menacing" staff at Wingate were uniformly two-dimensional and about as scary as last year's Halloween costumes. To make up for the stringy and fragile plot, Cook bores the reader incessantly with long-winded descriptions of barely relevant scene, building and equipment details. {A Reader's Digest condensed version of this novel would contain half the words without degrading this story.} I hadn't read a Cook novel for years and the contrast between this one and, for example, Coma is striking. Cook needs a new editor who will prod him to write well again or suggest he take a sabbatical or try a new career.

Rating:
Summary: Not a complete waste
Review: This can be a fun read, if you are willing to suspend belief for most of the book. It has its thrilling parts (espionage, chase scenes, etc.) it's just not all that believable.

In summery, two young women working on their doctoral theses respond to a newspaper ad in a campus newspaper for egg donors. The infertility clinic is offering an unbelievable amount of money for the donations. You know what they say about something that seems to be too good to be true? Well apparently these Harvard educated girls have never heard that saying. The rest of the book goes on to show what the infertility clinic is really up to. Unfortunately, the plot has to rely on the stupidity of the girls to make it work. I don't think Robin could come up with a plausible ending for the story, so he just ended it anyway.

It wasn't a complete waste of time though, I enjoyed parts of it and it isn't all that long.

Rating:
Summary: One of the most ineptly written books of all time
Review: Simply put, this book should never have been published. (It ranks up--uhh, I mean DOWN--there with Patricia Cornwell's "Isle of Dogs" as an example of how a "name" author can churn out drek and and get it published. I realize that they have "quotas" of so many books per year they have to write, so quality is of little concern.) The dialogue lumbers and is completely unrealistic, for starters. "I guess we'll have to spoon," says one young woman when the two heroines get in a small car trunk. I stopped counting the number of times that one woman "rolled her eyes for the other's benefit." Just awful, awful, awful. And the more than abrupt ending leads one to think that we'll be faced with "Shock, Part II." Thank god I got this book from the public library and didn't spend any money. Sorry, Dr. Cook....I used to love your books, but no more. You--and your editor--should be ashamed for foisting this inane drivel upon your readers.

Rating:
Summary: A new low for Robin Cook
Review: I've read most of Robin Cook's earlier novels and enjoyed them immensely, despite his tendency to send protagonists on foolish, "Nancy Drew"-style amateur investigations. This one, sadly, is far below Cook's usual standard. If a lesser-known writer had produced this, it would never have been published.

Rating:
Summary: Shock - ingly Bad!
Review: The title Cook gave this novel was "Shock". The title should have been "Laverne & Shirley Meet Dr. Frankenstein". If this novel was translated to the screen without major dialog modifications, I suggest it be done as a comedic farce. The female lead characters are at once Ph.D. candidates yet devoid of any common sense, planning ability or street smarts. At no time was this reader ever concerned about either heroine [the gene pool would have improved without these two ditzes in it]. The "menacing" staff at Wingate were uniformly two-dimensional and about as scary as last year's Halloween costumes. To make up for the stringy and fragile plot, Cook bores the reader incessantly with long-winded descriptions of barely relevant scene, building and equipment details. {A Reader's Digest condensed version of this novel would contain half the words without degrading this story.} I hadn't read a Cook novel for years and the contrast between this one and, for example, Coma is striking. Cook needs a new editor who will prod him to write well again or suggest he take a sabbatical or try a new career.

Rating:
Summary: Shockingly bad !
Review: This is quite possibly the worst book that I've ever read. The dialogue is 1930's English schoolgirl stuff--eg. "my word" said bt a grown, educated woman in her 20's, plus many other equally inane phrases. The story involves crooked doctors at a private clinic cloning babies from donor ovaries, sometimes harvested illegally--eeugh!! I have another book by Robin Cook, waiting to be read-"Yector". I can only hooe that Dr. Cook was having a few bad days when he wrote "Shock".

Rating:
Summary: Shock-ingly awful
Review: I have been a huge fan of Cook for a long time, but I probably won't pick up his next book. Shock was an absoultely appaling novel.

There are so many things wrong with this book that it is difficult to know where to begin. I guess perhaps the compelte implausibility of the plot would be a start. I can't believe Cook thought anyone would buy this story. I have worked in human resource positions, and there are very few laboratories or clinics that would hire new employees without verifying Social Security numbers (I would say none do, but I'm sure I could be proven wrong). The ridiculous nature of the story simply continues from there.

My second huge complaint is the dialogue, especially between the two graduate students at the center of the novel. I don't know any graduate students who talk in the stilted, superficial way these two characters do. What ever happened to spontaneity? Slang? CONJUNCTIONS???? The dialogue is horrid! I can't remember the last time I read something so uncreative.

Finally, is the buzz I hear about a sequel true? God forbid! If a publisher has agreed to a sequel to this book, I won't feel sorry if they go under in the future. Editors and publishers are supposed to protect us from drivel like this, not inflict it upon us.

DON'T read this book. Read one of Cook's earlier works, like Coma or Fever, even Toxin for that matter. You'll be much better off.

Rating:
Summary: I cannot believe this book ever got printed
Review: Facile, predictable and badly written. This possibly the worst book I have ever read. A poorly educated teenager with a medical dictionary could have done a better job.