Rating: 
Summary: Uneven
Review: I'm not sure whether to give this book four or five stars... FIVE STARS - because of how interesting the subject matter is. DNA, it seems, isn't a brilliant piece of software to make bodies. It's more a committee of chemicals each trying to propogate themselves, and often at odds with the other chemicals in DNA (97% of which don't actually do anything!) And this is the stuff that to a large extent makes us US! FIVE STARS - because of how well written some sections are. Chapter 4, for instance, which talks about the researcher who not only can tell you IF you're going to get Huntington's chorea, but can tell you what age you'll get it, simply by counting the number of times a particular gene sequence repeats. I was left haunted by the question, if I had a high risk for H.C., would I get the test done, simply to know when the symptoms would start? FIVE STARS - Because of the research. This is the most up to date book on the subject available at the moment. He cites research done as close as 1998. BUT FOUR STARS - because although some parts were absolutely mind-blowingly interesting and could be considered _classic_ bits of writing, the prose in other parts seemed to get a bit heavy and tedious, and I had to put it down. I was surprised by my own reaction, having been so thoroughly entertained a few short chapters before. But it means I can't give it five stars, because that rating is for out and out classics. (Which this book nearly is. Damn.)
Rating: 
Summary: Things Have Changed
Review: Things have, indeed, changed. This book chronicles the opening of the Genome mystery and the path science has taken to reach today's level of knowledge. It also includes a far reaching discussion of the current discoveries of DNA and the impact (including a realistic cure for Cancer) that they will have on our lives in the future. This is a far ranging discussion, moving from the genetic impacts on sexuality, personality, disease (or more appropriately resistance to disease), longevity, and other topics. It is an excellent, intriguing book for anyone who reads it. The scientific information can get a little overwhelming, but every turn of the page can reveal a new understanding about who we are and how our exploding genetic knowledge might shape our future.
Rating:
Summary: Irresistible Reading to Understand What Your Genes Mean
Review: The field of genetics is doubling knowledge every few weeks. So Matt
Ridley had set himself an impossible task in writing one of the last
books before the completion of the Human Genome project. Yet, he has
created a book of unique value to all of us as the full impact of
genetic knowledge begins to take over our world. Forget 99 percent
of what you have ever heard about genes. The school wasted your time
with obsolete knowledge that wasn't in the ball park, in most
cases. What Ridley has done is given us a roadmap of the kind of
territory and effects that occur within our genes, and among our
minds, bodies, and genes. The interrelationships are extremely
complex and diverse. Beware any simple judgments about what genetics
mean, as a result. What was most impressive to me was the remarkable
potential to use genetic information to shed light on all kinds of
issues. For example, the genetic record can give insights into the
development of species, past expansion of nomadic peoples, language,
personality, stress, memory, sex, instinct and the effect of the
environment. To give us each a full panoply of ideas about
genetics, he adopted the interesting structure of having one chapter
about each chromosome. The chapter is not exhaustive, but picks on
one or a few aspects of what is known or is in the process of becoming
known. Fear not! I never took biology, and know little biological
jargon. Yet the book portrayed the ideas and information simply and
clearly enough that I don't think I got lost anywhere. The only part
of the book that I did not like was a completely unsatisfactory
discussion of what free will is in the last chapter. Skip that and
you'll enjoy the book a lot more. How accurate is the book? In five
chapters, I had read source books or articles referred to by Ridley,
and each was well chosen for what he was trying to do and scrupulously
described. Of course, we are still up against the fact that we know
very little on this whole subject. This is the most stimulating
science book that I have read in a long time. I even liked in better
than The Selfish Gene, which I thought was a terrific book (which is
also referred to and discussed in this book). I found that the
book stimulated a lot of new thinking on my part. Fifteen minutes
with the book led to four hours of conjecture on several occasions. I
liked that feature of the book. Have a great time reading this book
and thinking about its implications for your own life!
Rating:
Summary: A very effective format for Matt Ridley
Review: Matt Ridley proves here once again that he is a terrific writer. He has the easy style of a confident journalist and the wide knowledge of an accomplished scholar. He is learned without being stuffy. He proves too that he is a master of analogy and metaphor, understanding that we learn through comparison. I have the sense that he spent a fair amount of his free time looking for apt comparisons to illuminate the ideas of genetics for the general reader. Some examples:
On page 276 he describes the idea that there is a living thing with no DNA as "about as welcome in biology as Luther's principles in Rome."
Or on page 241 talking about apoptosis, in which our cells are programmed to commit suicide: "the body is a totalitarian place."
He even asserts on page 174 that we cannot hope to understand the process of embryotic development without "the handrail of analogy."
My favorite is this from pages 247-248 where he is talking about gene therapy and an engineered retrovirus that doesn't work: "it lands at random...and often fails to get switched on; and the body's immune system, primed by the crack troops of infectious disease, does not miss a clumsy, home-made retrovirus."
Add a sharp wit and an infectious enthusiasm for understanding human behavior and one can see the reasons for his success as an interpreter of the biological sciences. In Genome, Ridley has found a structure and an approach that allows him to wax speculative and philosophical about matters of particular interest to him and to most people. The result is that the reader is treated to a lively mind at work trying to understand ourselves and this world we live in. He uses the 23 chapters, each emphasizing one aspect or our genetic makeup and each dedicated to one of our 23 pairs of chromosomes, to explore such matters as intelligence, instinct, the nature of disease, the effect of stress, the development of personality, memory, death and immortality, etc., and of course sex and--always an important question for Ridley--free will.
Some highlights:
The chapter on stress includes two startling assertions: One, that low status in the pecking order (instead of high cholesterol), lowers our resistence to microbes in our systems, and is the prime mover in making some of us more susceptible to heart attacks (p. 155); and two, that aggression is not caused by high testosterone levels but the other way around (p. 157). On page 171 he makes a similar assertion, namely that serotonin levels (as found in monkeys) are the result of dominate behavior, not the other way around, as has always been thought. These are exciting ideas since they suggest that we can improve our condition through our behavior (akin to "method acting," I suppose). Ridley's arguments strike me as convincing, but see for yourself.
In Chapter 21, he gives us a brief history of eugenics, noting, by the way, that during its heyday the name "Eugene" became popular in England. He spares eugenics practitioners and true believers not at all. He rips them up in true (and uncharacteristic) PC style, and then gets to his point. He likes eugenics but not the way it was practiced with the state coercing the individual. Instead Ridley would like (quoting James Watson on page 299) "to see genetic decisions put in the hands of users" instead of governments. He calls this "genetic screening" and cites the virtual elimination of cystic fibrosis from the Jewish population in the United States as a positive employment of screening from the private sector.
In Chapter 22 he tackles free will, beginning with a joke about there being a gene for free will. Clearly Ridley is in favor of free will, but reading between the lines one see that he knows he is on shaky scientific ground. He quotes the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy on (David) "Hume's Fork: Either our actions are determined, in which case we are not responsible for them, or they are the result of random events, in which case we are not responsible for them." Ridley believes it is better to imagine the we are guided in our actions by our genes than by our conditioning. He sees nurture as being a more tyrannical dictator, if dictators we have, than our genes. This is not surprising since politically speaking Ridley hates the collective. He would love to have proof of the existence of free will since that is where his heart lies, but I hope that someday he will be comfortable with the understanding that whether we have free will or not (or whether "free will" is even a meaningful concept), one thing is clear: we have the ILLUSION of free will, and that illusion is all compelling. Also, as Ridley notes, society must treat its members as having the ability to make free choices or the whole system of law collapses.
Perhaps the most amazing feat of our genome is the one Ridley writes about in Chapter 12, that of "Self-Assembly." To me that is the really stupefying trick of our genes, to assemble themselves from the code. The twists and turns of such an enormously complex undertaking is, to me, as remote from our understanding and experience as the many dimensions of super string theory.
Other popular writers on science looking for the secret of Matt Ridley's success should note that he gives the reader value both in terms of knowledge and entertainment. He works hard at meaningful communication. He wants the reader above all to understand what he is saying.
Even though I sometimes disagree with him, I always learn something new and interesting from reading his books.
Rating: 
Summary: Always an exception...
Review: Sorry to be the voice of dissent here, but I didn't love it. Decently written, but a bit too simplified, even for the average reader. The major problem, though, is that it doesn't get to the POINT. This books plays up all the quirky little features of the genome--the gimmicks, the bells-and-whistles--but I feel it doesn't explain what the genome truly IS, its deepest meaning for our species and all of life on the planet. For that, try something like Dawkin's "The Selfish Gene" or Weiner's "Time, Love, Memory." Both are written for a lay audience but get a far better grasp on the real truth in the genome.
Rating: 
Summary: Too polemical
Review: Matt Ridley's polemics are as informative about the
mapping of the Human Genome as he is misinformed about the human condition when he draws from this vast storehouse of newly discovered information a similar blueprint for perfection of human societies.
Genes require a cooperate environment to achieve what genes predispose us to. Instinct alone cannot negate free will nor the pressures of external influence. Behavior is subject to a whole lot more than some coded genetic prescription. And interpretations vary because there are just too many variables in the way genes are turned on and off and how some genes may influence other genes. The mapping helps but doesn't tell the entire story.
If there is no environment or conditions for something to happen it won't. Everyone needs opportunity just as everyone deserves an equal opportunity to have at least as decent a life as everyone else. Libertarians want to do away with decentralization to achieve these ends, but decentralizing would do away with regulations and guarantee that many will not have the opportunity for a decent life. Libertarianism is not a recipe for equilibrium of privilege. Ridley's societal conclusions based on the Genome are a recipe for just another hierarchy based on social Darwinism.
Ridley combines science with libertarian social commentary and that is where we depart company. Science is a useful and perhaps the only guide to life but not how we want to live it. If we ever hope to put humanity back in what is human we have to look beyond the survival of those best able to adapt and make it possible for even the least able to adapt to have a decent life.
If he would just stick to the science his book would have been much better. While I found the book useful, it was not the kind of awareness I expected and was looking for in this new and exciting exploration.
Hank Roth
Rating:
Summary: Wish genetics was more interesting? This book is for you.
Review: When I first picked up this book, I expected it to be something like a reference book to help me get a basic understanding of genetics. However, I soon realized that this novel was much better then I could have originally hoped for. Ridley takes the subject of the human genome which includes the 22 pairs of chromosomes plus the one pair of sex chromosomes that make up every human being, and links each pair to a different aspect of the human race both physically and culturally. He links a gene on a chromosome to how it may affect us in our lives in order to show the power that is granted through the understanding of the human genome. The subtitle that Ridley chose, The Autobiography Of A Species In 23 Chapters is extremely appropriate because although he does teach a lot about the genome in this novel, he connects what he teaches about genetics to his many scientific and philosophical beliefs or ideas.
I found this novel to be extremely interesting and that once I started, I could not put it down. The only way that this book isn't helpful to a reader is if they are only interested strictly in the human genome and want to indulge themselves to information through the form of a mind-numbing textbook. For everyone else who wants to read a good book but still pick up some new information along the way, I would highly recommend it. You will learn some of the more complex ideas found in genetics in a way that is extremely audience-friendly. I have had very little experience in the study of genetics and through Ridley's personal and non-formal writing style, he teaches a complicated subject in a way that can be understood by anyone who bothers to read this fascinating literary work. It is as if Ridley is standing in front of you giving you a personal lecture. You know that he knows what he is talking about but he does not try to make the reader feel inferior to him in anyway. Its as if from the moment you open the cover you become a good friend of Ridley who is only interested in helping you. I strongly recommend the reading of this to anyone. Whether you want to learn more about genetics, the moral conflicts that surround the study of the human genome, or if you are just looking for an interesting book to read in your spare time, this novel is for you.
Rating:
Summary: Reminded me why I love what I do
Review: I picked up this book in a book buying frenzy this past summer. I am in my last year of a degree in biology, so to me this book was from the outset inherently interesting. I might therefore have a pretty biased view. I loved it. As other reviewers have noted, some areas did not seem quite right (ie. his research was lacking, or he over simplified some aspect), but for the most part I loved his writing style and his ability to uncover the wonder behind the lab report. Now, I frequently read all kinds of scientific mumbo-jumbo of course, but this book was like candy. It reminded me why I love science so much. I can't think of anything more exciting or mysterious than the complexities of life. I immediately pursuaded my father, who is in business and knows some but not a lot about biology, to read it.
Buy one for a friend, so you can read it together and discuss the chapters. If you don't already know much about the genome, this book will blow your mind. Get ready to see what all us science geeks are so excited about! =)
Rating:
Summary: Capturing Attention after Reading
Review: I read Genome over the course of a year, mostly during orchestra rehearsal (the flute section is far enough away from the conductor to get away with reading or doing homework while we aren't playing). When I finally finished orchestra for the year, I then found myself on tour in Italy with another music group. On the 8-hour flight home from Paris, I was able to read Genome for a long period of time.
Even when I could only read the book in short time intervals during most of the year, I found myself amazed by it. I'm hoping to have a career in medicine myself, but even as a high school student, I gained a lot from the reading. I put Genome in a class of books that I've read that keep me paying attention long after I've finished reading. Other books on that short list include more conventional literature, such as The Great Gatsby. You can take away so much from this book.
The organization was very clever. Since I was reading in short time intervals, it was helpful to me that the book was divided into 23 sections that, while definitely related, were on such different topics that I didn't have to remember the previous chapters to understand the one I was currently reading. I also enjoyed the different foci of each chapter. Each chapter focuses on one gene on the specific chromosome.
Matt Ridley's language was slightly difficult for me to understand at first, but eventually, I grew used to it. My attention shifted from his wording to his meaning. His analogies are brilliant, and the key to understanding science (for me, at least) is analogy. I also liked the titles of the chapters, since I found it interesting that such heavy topics (such as intelligence and immortality) could be discussed in regard to nucleic acids.
I recommend this book to any person, high school student or older, who has any interest whatsoever in the way that we humans work, and I especially recommend it to anyone interested in biology or medicine. I do not recommend it to anyone who has a difficult time with language and reading. This book is brilliant, unless you can't read it or can't deduce word meanings from context.
My personal favorite chapter was "Immortality," which is near the end of the book.
Rating: 
Summary: If you're looking for alternatives to 'pop science' books...
Review: I realize that Ridley's book is a 'best-seller' among popular science publications, and I realize that the majority of the reviews posted here are highly favorable. But I'd just like to add another, maybe different perspective. I've read Ridley's book, as well as many other, similar books. Ridley proposes to tell the 'story of the genome' - a kind of scientific narrative. I had thought that Ridley's book was going to be about the social, political, and of course scientific development of this artifact we call a 'genome.' It was not. It was only about the scientific knowledge of the genome, as if that knowledge existed in a vacuum, waiting to be discovered by scientists. Now, I'm fascinated by science as much as the next person. In fact, my PhD deals with science - although with the social, ethical, and political aspects of science. I've also read alot of historical studies of the fields of molecular biology, biochemistry, and genetics. One thing that always comes across to me is that we often bracket off the human activity of knowledge-production in the sciences, we rarely acknowledge the social, political, and economic forces that are part and parcel of the science. The studies by Lily Kay (Who Wrote the Book of Life?), Richard Lewontin (The Ideology of Biology), Lori Andrews (Future Perfect), and others point to the reality of science as well as its construction within a given socio-historical context. That seems to me to be the most reflexive way to approach something like 'the genome.' Or, more vanguard studies like those of Critical Art Ensemble, Eugene Thacker (Biomedia), or Richard Doyle (Wetwares) ask us to imagine the science right alongside its science fictional aspects. I've become tired with the 'pop science' genre - sometimes I feel that it's almost condenscending to me as a reader. I like to be challenged in my reading about science, even if I am a 'non-specialist.'
|
