Rating: 
Summary: A wonderfully fun, topical and well written book. I loved it
Review: This book has it all. Its fresh and topical, painstakingly researched and so well written. It deals with some very important issues in a fun and entertaining way. Its the perfect book to give to a friend who is interested in the way science influences our lives, or just wants a thouroughly enjoyable book to read. The writting is intelligent and fast paced. You will care about the characters and want to stay up all night as you follow their adventure. The writer has a gift for getting the reader involved from the first page. I am already looking forward to John Darnton's next book. Just a pleasure to read. I loved it.
Rating: 
Summary: It had hardly any plot and was confusing.
Review: Please don't read this book unless you want to spend 24 hours a day 7 days a week for the rest of your life trying to figure out who the bad guys are. I really didn't get this book and all, and I felt confused everytime the actual 'experiment' came up.
Rating: 
Summary: Cutting Edge Thriller. Smart, Fast Read.
Review: Whew! I sat up all night with this one. Besides a plot that doesn't let up, this spooky, vivid tome is filled with very readable science. This CAN happen! Darnton is a terrifingly great writer. Eat your heart out Thomas Harris!
Rating: 
Summary: Read "SPARES" instead
Review: For a far more solid approach to the controversial issues ofcloning and a stronger thriller read Michael Marshall Smith's"Spares". John Darnton's books is so similar in many ways to "Spares" although "Spares" predates "The Experiment" by at least three years. The ideas and concept of "The Experiment" are admirable and it could be worthy of five stars but sadly, John Darnton's sluggish prose and lack of range lets the book down, which is a suprise after the excellent "Neanderthal". The idea of cloing is not a new one for techno/sci fi literature and with the hype surounding "The Experiment and Wes Craven's novel "The Fountain Society" on the way it looks like the cloning genre is set to repeat itself again and again and again.
Rating:
Summary: Poorly written and unoriginal
Review: How many more "cloning" plots are going to appear in novels? Sigh. I thought I'd give this one a chance, based on the reviews I have read in The New York Times, but this really has to be one of the worst of its genre. I'm especially surprised at the clunky writing in parts, considering Darnton's Pulitzer Prize-quality journalistic talents and that army of editors at Dutton. Darnton is the culture editor at The New York Times -- which explains why he got not one, but two favorable reviews in the pages of that newspaper. Every worn-out cliche is trotted out in this one. The characters are wooden and, frankly, amateurish. Furthermore -- and this is where I get rankled -- he gets some of the science right (hardly "prescient," though) but many key aspects are wrong or misrepresented. Here is yet another journalist "vamping" the science stuff just to try to be the next Michael Crichton. These books are creating their own sub-genre of terribly bad books. Pass on this one, my friends.
Rating:
Summary: Superior scientific thriller
Review: At first, "The Experiment" by John Darnton covers familiar medical-science thriller ground: a secret society of 'mad' scientists, possible cloning, medical experimentation gone horribly wrong, etc. What separates this thriller from the rest is the complexity of the leading characters (Jude, Skyler, and Tillie), who react -- mostly -- in realistic ways to fantastic plot points Darnton piles onto the story. The basic narrative deals with two men, Skyler and Jude, almost identical 'twins', whose quest for the truth leads them from New York to Arizona to the Sea Islands off the coast of Georgia (where Skyler was raised on a small island by a mysterious group). Tillie, and expert in twins studies, is Jude's lover, but also connected indirectly to Skyler, providing a different kind of romantic tension. Although the reader can guess some plot developments well before the characters, Darnton adds enough surprises to keep you guessing. In addition, it is enjoyable to see how the characters deal with the discoveries they make, and the affect these discoveries have on the emotional triangle at the heart of the novel. One major fault is the last quarter of the book, which moves very quickly; although the major answers to the reader's questions are given, there's enough ambiguity to possibly pave the way for a sequel. A cut above the average book of this genre.
Rating:
Summary: Great Book!
Review: I read this for my sophomore biology class in high school, only because we had to read a book off of her list, and she claimed this was the least goriest option. I'm not a science fan AT ALL, and I hate blood and guts, so I was very wary of this book at first, but, much to my surprise, I absolutely loved it! It was incredibly fascinating, and the best sci-fi book I've ever read. It was enlightening, and the DNA descriptions and so forth were very understandable and interesting--even to a non-scientific person like myself. If you enjoy sci-fi, I highly reccomend this book.
Rating:
Summary: Kooky plot, forced characters
Review: Darnton did an excellent job for such a scientific tale. True there were errors (saying you couldn't more than identical twins, the fixed slides), but he had a good grip on the ideas of biology. He introduced RFLPs, the idea of introducing genes via a virus vector- all things that are commonly used in molecular biology. The tale was enthralling and for a man who does not enter the lab every day, excellent.
Rating: 
Summary: Rather Slow
Review: This is the first book I read of this author. This novel is basically a mystery. The reader doesn�t know who are the bad guys and what they are doing until the last chapter. In a nutshell, a team of scientists have devoted their lives to cloning humans. During their long research they developd a more selfish goal: they want to give their kids a gift of doubling their lifespan. However, in achieving this goal, they have to execute a very evil plan of human cloning. Since this is a mystery, I am not going to spoil the plot. � Character Development: Like a number of other novels, character development is not strong. We never have a good feel for the heroes and heroine. The heroine is a research doctor; however, the author never makes good use of her talents. Other than in the beginning of the book that she goes into a rather long and somewhat boring description of the of her twin research, she is portrayed as just another character. As a result, this book is mostly event-driven. Score: 2. � Pacing: The pacing is uneven. Parts of it were gripping, but there were a number of dull moments. Score: 2.5. � Plot: The plot is the best part of this novel. I really liked the human cloning idea. The final chapter was a real surprise. However, I also got the idea that the author was rushing to finish the book instead of spending the time to fully develop the surprise. Score: 3.5. � Storytelling: The chapters are relatively long, average about 20 pages each. It is a sign of problem if I feel the chapters are too long. I didn�t enjoy this author�s writing style. His treatment of scientific details was rather clumsy. Quite a few times, I just skipped over them. I can�t help but compare his style to Michael Crichton, who always does an excellent job of explaining complicated scientific ideas in easy English. In addition, the author has the tendency to describe objects and events that do not add significant value to the book. Here is an example: the author describes the hero stopped in a ghost town. There are three deserted houses. The author feels obligated to describe each and every house. I just don�t see why I need to know what are inside these houses. The list goes on and on. Score: 2.
� Reviewer�s Lean: When I tallied up the score, it came to only 2.5. I think this book deserves a 3 for the simple reason that it has its good moments. In the part where the heroine is caught spying in the Lab, the way she talks herself out is really funny and deserves mentioning. Therefore, I�m adding half a point to make the overall score 3.0.
| 
