Darwin's Radio

Rating:
Summary: Darwin's Radio
Review: "Darwin's Radio" is one of the best hard science fiction novels of recent years, and I don't say that lightly. Not only does it clearly and concisely explain a bold scientific conjecture, but it also does so in an unexpectedly timely manner. The idea at the center of the story is a genetic structure called a retrovirus that was incorporated into mammalian DNA millions of years back. When examples of retroviruses start appearing and affecting people around the world, causing numerous miscarriages, authorities react by treating it as a disease. However, a trio of scientists believe that this actually marks the next stage in human evolution, and that similar retroviruses were responsible for evolutionary events in the past. The books follows these three as they search for proof of their theory and attempt to explain some startling facets of the emerging virus.

What I particularly enjoyed about this book was how it incorporated the current public attitude towards genetics and biotechnology. We live at a time when there's still a lot of public misunderstanding about medicine and genetics, politicians frequently abuse that misunderstanding, and standards for scientific journalism in the mainstream media are shockingly low. Bear incorporates these facts into his story. There are brief but effective passages designed to show public reaction to the growing epidemic and the scientific community's initial inability to stop it. And there is discussion of how ordinary people are affected by the events described. It is these passages, more than anything else, that make this novel so frighteningly realistic.

Some reviewers have complained about the quality of characterization in "Darwin's Radio". This, of course, is a dilemma that all authors of hard SF face. If too much space is devoted to the scientific aspects of the story, then the literary aspects must suffer. I personally don't think that characterization was a major problem in this book. The major characters all have believable and dynamic personalities. There are a few inner monologues that sound a bit cliched and sloppy, but in the grand scheme of things that shouldn't prevent you from enjoying the book as a whole.

Rating:
Summary: Mixed experience
Review: As I was reading this book, I felt that this theme had been covered before and was doubtful that Bear could add that much new. However, as I continued reading, I realized that Bear's take on a fairly common theme (disease & elimination of humans) was different and I grew to respect his topic. However, I don't think the overall story & the plot gave enough support to his theme.

Darwin's Radio was very interesting at the beginning, less interesting in the middle, and somewhat boring by the time the lackluster ending rolled around. I started getting a little bored when the action shifted from being about science in general and how science is done to being about one relationship. In addition, the entire last quarter of the book felt like a set up for a sequel, which I definitely don't respect. There wasn't a sense of closure from finishing this book.

Overall, some good ideas, some well-constructed writing, some hard science balanced with some boring characters, some uninteresting plot lines, and some lackluster relationships.

Rating:
Summary: An evolutionary threat or a bold leap forward?
Review: Greg Bear's Darwin's Radio was an intriguing look at humanity's grappling with a virus which apparently causes women to have an abortion, but a month after this abortion takes place, the women find they're pregnant again, often without even having had sex. In response to this, riots break out all over the world as people fear these strange occurences and a possible end to modern society as we know it. In the midst of all this is Dr. Kaye Lang, a molecular biologist who has some interesting theories on this supposed virus and its real purpose, and Mitch Rafelson, a palentologist who's discovered the remains of a man, woman and baby from thousands of years ago who may have been experiencing a similar evolutionary process.

The book does a very good job of giving the main characters proper attention. Each character is well defined and their complexities are explored. But, I have to say that the book may have went a little too far in this pursuit. I often found that I wanted more discussion of the attempts at studying and dealing with the virus, but instead much of the book focused on the personal lives of Kaye and Mitch. Although I must admit that the developments between them weren't completely immaterial, the description of the book on the back cover is rather misleading. I would hardly say that Kaye Lang and Christopher Dicken race to solve an evolutionary puzzle.

Despite the fact that the novel headed in a rather different direction than I had anticipated, it was fairly entertaining. The premise was really rather interesting and I liked the questions which were raised by the unfolding events. This novel really had much to do with human nature and questions concerning our own origins. Plus, I hadn't ever read a science fiction novel dealing with evolution so it was a nice change. Overall, I would say read this book if you're really interested. It may not be exactly what you expect, but that doesn't mean you won't like it.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent--easily Bear's best!
Review: I am not a professional reviewer. I read for enjoyment, predominately Science Fiction and some Fantasy. I read the Hugo and Nebula nominees and as many of the "Locus" recommended list as I can every year. I've read several books by Greg Bear including the EON series, The Forge of God, and Moving Mars. I've enjoyed them all; Darwin's Radio may be his best.

So, I will say up front that I enjoyed this book, very much. It is entertaining. It is easy to read despite the medical and biological terminology, of which there is much. As usual, Bear's science is sound, plausible, and seamlessly fits into the story. The science enhances the story.

The characters are engaging and likeable (for the most part); you care about them, especially Kay and Mitch as their relationship develops. However, if you are cynical of today's politicians and senior government officials, you may become even more so after exposure to those characters in the story.

As far as shorting comings, I found the pacing of the story to be a bit inconsistent, but not overly so. I just know that at times I couldn't turn the pages fast enough as I was thoroughly engrossed in the story, while at other times I was saying to myself, "come on, let's get on with it." Once example is the part of the story line where Kay's husband Saul is involved. This sad episode may have provided an extra glimpse into Kay's humanity and compassion; but, the overall book might have been a bit tighter without this strand of the story.

Finally, the ending satisfies and tantalizes. It leaves some questions unanswered; it cries sequel! I hope there is one and I hope it is soon.

Rating:
Summary: Poor story line
Review: I'm going to keep this review short. Just wanted to give a rating so that system is fair, meaning the ratings are not filled with all 5 star people telling you to buy it.

The book meanders through needless details that do not contribute anything to the story. Main characters husband commits suicide, big deal. They find neanderthals with speciation, big deal.

Read Eon by Bear, it is much better and more imaginative.

Rating:
Summary: Needs an editor
Review: Needed an editor
Reviewer: A reader from Malden, MA USA
This is book built around a perennially, if not original, great idea-Man's next step in evolution. Unfortunately, as with other books (e.g., Eon) by this author, it's much too long (538 pages) and drawn out. It needed an editor badly. It could have been much more exciting and suspenseful if tightened up and shortened by about 200 pages; and the extraneous backroom-politics junk omitted. Then it might have lived up to its aspirations to be another Midwich Cuckoos (by Wyndham) or Childhood's End (by Clarke), from which it draws its themes heavily (as it does also to some degree from Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale).
Darwin's Radio drowns the reader in technical biological details and jargon that are unnecessary for one's appreciation and comprehension of its ideas. No work of fiction should need a glossary of terms-if you can't explain the science simply, then you probably don't understand it yourself; and you lose the reader. Although I am fascinated by science and fairly proficient in it, I nevertheless found myself skimming a lot of the long, overly technical passages.
Bear has written a couple of excellent (shorter and tighter!) novels like Blood Music, a chilling masterpiece of ideas and suspense; and Queen of Angels. I wish he'd go back to that style.
Also, the edition I read (the paperback) was full of typographical errors, like when Jack walks over to Mitch and squats beside him to talk: "Jack squatted beside Jack." You'd think that by the ninth paperback printing the publisher would have cleaned up the text a bit.
I recently learned that there's a sequel, but unless it's significantly shorter I'm not going to waste my time reading it.

Rating:
Summary: 5 stars for scientists, 4 stars for most of the rest!
Review: Wow! What a story! It starts out somewhat slowly, almost in fits and starts, but once you get past about page 75 it's a real page turner -- the character development picks up, and, one by one, the threads of the story start to come together.

So, what do a mummified Neanderthal family found in an ice cave, massacred villagers in Asian Georgia, and modern molecular biologists, virologists, and anthropologists have in common? Read and find out!

As a biologist, I routinely read science based fiction, as well as non-fiction work, including books on interactions between evolution and development (e.g., "Wonderful Life" by Gould, "The Shape of Life" by Raff, "Extinction" by Raup, "Shapes of Time" by McNamara, etc.). While my training made it possible for me to completely enjoy the possibilities offered in "Darwin's Radio", I can see how many non-scientists reading this book could become lost, confused, or put off by the frequent introduction and use of a wide variety of scientific theories and jargon (though I must admit that the author did a grand job of introducing scientific content without requiring the reader to jump directly into the deep end.)

I appreciated the author's delving into the politics, as well as the science, that often accompany situations like the one presented in this book. So, how far should we push and support current paradigms? That's a question that pops out of this book.

If you enjoyed books like "Carriers", "White Plague", or "Hot Zone", then you will probably like this one too.

The only reason I did not award 5 stars for this book is that many readers may be put off by the mass of technical scientific information presented. For me it was a definite 5-star offering, but probably 4 stars for the more general readership.

I hope these thoughts were helpful to you.

Alan Holyoak, Dept of Biology, Manchester College