Rating: 
Summary: Emphasis on the "personal"
Review: I recently reread The Double Helix and greatly enjoyed it, because (a) Watson conveys vividly (but perhaps not completely) events leading to the discovery of the structure of DNA, one of the great discoveries of the century and (b) he gives a warts and all description and shows that science is not a glorious straightline progression. What distinguishes him from most of the other participants, and explains his passion, is that (as a biologist) he was investigating the structure of DNA to gain insights into genetics. Therefore he saw elucidating the structure as a step to bigger things (e.g. Human Genome Project), not as an end in itself. Most of the other participants as biophysicists were content to find the structure. One of the beauties of the double helix is that the structure itself gave a very immediate indication as to the mechanism of genetic replication. I have been intrigued by the strongly polarised reactions to the book reflected in the reviews on this site. I think that some of the criticims of the book are unfair. Watson makes it clear that it is a personal account and reflects his own perceptions of the events at the time. From reading other accounts (e.g. The Path to the Double Helix by Olby) it is clear that his memories of some events are not shared by other participants in those events, including Crick and Wilkins. I can certainly understand why many readers (and in particular women) object to the characterisation of Rosalind Franklin, particularly the repeated derogatory references to "feminists". On the other hand Watson acknowledges in the epilogue that his perceptions of her at the time of the events described were wildly wrong. Even in the body of the book, he never denies that she contributed key information (although he doesn't explain why they did not acknowledge that contribution more explicitly at the time - Sayre could be right that Watson is trying to put his spin on events to obscure this aspect). As I read the book his perceptions and comments about Franklin were almost entirely reporting or based on Maurice Wilkins complaints about her. Notwithstanding Anne Sayres' defence of Franklin in Rosalind Franklin and DNA (which I recommend to balance Watson's account) it does appear that Franklin was far from blameless in the bad relationship which developed between Franklin and Wilkins. It is also clear, even from Watson's account, that Franklin (and others such as Chargraff) had good reason for believing that Watson and Crick were not serious scientists. So her reserve when dealing with them is understandable. As well as the objectionable personal description of Franklin, Anne Sayre also criticises Watson for the suggestion in the Double Helix that Franklin rejected the suggestion that DNA was a helix. Franklin's private papers disclose that she thought that there was clear evidence that the B form was a helix, and Crick thought that she was not far away from demonstrating the double helical structure through her X-ray crystallography work. However, for most of the period that the events in the Double Helix unfolded in 1952 her work focussed on the A form of DNA which was not clearly helical on X-ray evidence. Both Watson and Wilkins are clear that when the possibility of a helical structure was discussed with Franklin on various occasions during 1952 she reacted negatively (and very strongly). Only in early 1953 did she begin to actively work on the B form and to turn her mind seriously to the detail of helical structures. This reflects either rigorous scientific standards or an overcautious approach depending on which side of the fence you are on. Either way, if she had been prepared to indulge the idle speculations of Wilkins, Watson and Crick earlier she may have found her name on the paper announcing the structure of DNA to the world either alone or with Wilkins, or Crick and Watson.
Rating: 
Summary: Detialed but not quite
Review: This book give lots of information on DNA and is detailed on the events that took place while workin in the lab in England. But it isn't detailed on how the came to there outcomes, its like they went to sleep, woke up, and knew the answer.
Rating:
Summary: The Double Helix
Review: This is a racy & insouciant account of the months leading up to the deciphering of the structure of DNA ____an intellectual achievement on par with Relativity ,Quantum mechanics ,the theory of evolution and psychoanalysis .Watson is as incapable of being pedantic as he is of being dull .
Rating: 
Summary: It does not distort the facts; pay attention when you read!
Review: I read this book for the first time when i took undergraduate biochemistry in college. I could not put it down. Now, ten years later, i found it at a second-hand store and re-read it, and once again read it in two sittings. This book reads like a thriller. You definitively catch a sense of the urgency of their research. I was flipping pages nervously, like i didn't know Watson and Crick were the ones who won the race. In the edition i have, Watson is very thankful about the contributions that Rosalind Franklin made to their discovery. He is crystal clear about how she was the one convinced that the backbone was on the outside, and had not he followed her advice, it would have taken him even longer to figure out the structure, and who knows?, Pauling might have gotten there first. In the epilogue, Watson is all praise about Rosalind, acknowledges how his opinions about her were often wrong, how excellent the quality of her work was, and ponders about the obstacles that she encountered in her career in science for being a woman. I wonder if these comments were missing in other people's books, because according to their critiques, one comes out with the idea that Watson and the male-dominated scientific establishment gave Rosalind the cancer that killed her. This is an excellent, honest account of an event that took place when the author was 25 years old. I could not believe my eyes when i read that sentence. Twenty-five, worrying about girls and tennis and the structure of the most important molecule in the universe. These facts might count for something. This is a must-read book, for everybody, whether you understand science or not.
Rating:
Summary: HISTORICAL MEMOIR WITH UNINTENDED LESSONS
Review: Years ago when I first read James Watson's folksy book on his co-discovery I thought, "my how far an ambitious ornithologist can fly." But I saluted Watson's seemingly unvarnished candor then, and years later I can still manage a sloppy salute. Watson's account discusses the various intrigues such as with Peter, Linus Pauling's son; and some downright espionage leading to the important discovery with Crick [and a phantom Rosalind Franklin] that a double helix is naturally assumed by pairs of DNA. Misogyny seems to lurk behind every condescension towards women and womanhood liberally expressed by Watson. One wonders whether absent his shared Nobel Prize, Watson would get away with it. In all probability, had Pauling reported the double helix first thus collecting his third Nobel Prize (!) and Watson was just another chronicler of DNA's lab history the scientific community would not be so tolerant towards a man who remains nearly pathologically dismissive of women in science. Alas, Alfred Nobel didn't stipulate good manners as a condition for awarding the prize bearing his name. Be that as it may, the now classical memoir by a co-discoverer of the double helix has merit for its place in time and should be read by students and other citizens. What it lacks as a primer of ethics it makes up for in its quasi-truthfulness. The Double Helix contains pedestrian writing that describes a great event. DNA is spectacular. The book about its discovery is merely fair.
Rating:
Summary: Watson's The Double Helix
Review: While I am glad to see the current rush to purchase M. Greene's best seller (which I reviewed), there are good arguments for putting first priority on Watson's The Double Helix. Not only did Watson and Crick win the Nobel Prize for discovering the structure of DNA, but Watson reveals much about what makes a Creative Genius tick (which Greene's book does not). One of these ingredients is non-conformity, even non-conformity with the mainstream of one's own field of research. Watson is non-conformist to the point of embarrassment, revealing his arguments with colleagues whom I would describe as Ingenious Followers in part at least (as well as those colleagues' own weaknesses). Secondly, Creative Geniuses have an unusually strong motivation typically. In the case of Watson and Crick, they had a competitive spirit to win against their colleagues (who were also trying to unravel DNA) in the race for the discovery, and their competitive spirit was an absolute obsession "day and night". Thirdly, they built ingenious toy models of DNA with movable parts which enabled them to use more sensory modalities to help them think. Fourthly, they kept up completely with what their rivals were doing, which is to say that they sought and used information wisely and in a timely manner. Fifth, they used the computer technology of their era to the fullest (which Creative Geniuses sometimes do not do - compare Roger Penrose, whose books I have reviewed). Sixth, they were incredibly mobile - they went to different countries frequently to learn, to attend seminars, to talk with experts in particular areas, especially countries in Europe (where Creative Geniuses are more common, in my opinion, than in most parts of the world). You will find many other characteristics of Creative Geniuses by reading the Watson-Crick story yourself.
Rating: 
Summary: The Double Helix: A NOVEL
Review: James Watson and Francis Crick were both brillian scientists, there is no doubt about that. Although they are given more credit than they are due, they did make a monumental discovery. Rosalind Franklin first interprete the B form of DNA as having a helical structure, and later, in a private, unpublished notebook, as having "interchangability." Although Rosalind Franklin contributed equally to the discovery of DNA, Watson and Crick made the final, crucial step. However, Watson's portrayal of Rosalind Franklin as "Rosy" is inaccurate an inexcusable. Even Maurice Wilkins, another scientist involved with the discovery of DNA and was honored with the Nobel Prize, states this clearly. Although the personality clashes between Wilkins and Franklin caused a lack of communication which may have ultimately impeded the discovery, he says, referring to a ridulous Double Helix passage in which "Rosy" nearly physically attacks Watson, "Jim wrote a novel." I advise any readers of this book to be wary of such departures from the truth, and to read Rosalind Franklin and DNA (widely recognized among educated readers as the clear and balanced account of the discovery of the structure of DNA.)
Rating:
Summary: A peek inside an ivory tower
Review: Double Helix is a worthy read. In a few hours of reading, one catches a fairly representative look into the scientific commmunity, though the eyes of one man. Some people critique this book as being one-sided. Of course it is! Watson admitted that up front. The book was written as an account his perceptions of the events and people involved with the discovery of the structure of DNA, not as a documentary. Like any human, Watson's perceptions of the events were scewed in his own favor. This, however, adds to the value of the book, rather than detracts. From my experience in the scientific community, the issues of ownership of ideas and work, plagarism, and politics are both real and complex. Double Helix does a good job of exemplifying these difficult issues.
Rating:
Summary: A quick read. Goes well with beer and peanuts.
Review: Watson was brilliant in bringing pieces of his vague memory and prejudices. What we have here is in part the fact of history and in part a very enjoyable work of fiction. Really, people who read this book usually finishes in a few hours. This is amazing compared to the time it takes to read the hopeless eulogy given by Anne Sayer. However, as a man of considerable authority, Watson should have taken the usual scholary precautions and double-chekced when he was talking about "people". I think any serious reader must consult Anne Sayer, albeit painful, for a balanced viewpoint.
Rating:
Summary: Yes indeedy, this is a quick piece of fiction.
Review: As a science teacher it is horrifying to me that anyone is being required to read this self-serving piece of fiction for a science class. (Unless perhaps as a negative example of deplorable ethics.) Watson's account of the discovery of the structure of the DNA helix is so fraught with falsehoods that it could at best only be called historical fiction. His need to vilify and degrade Rosalind Franklin (whose essential (and stolen) work he used) can hardly be something that is admirable. For a factual account of events read Rosalind Franklin & DNA by Anne Sayre instead. No, it will not be an easy read, but you will certainly get a different view and it is backed up with facts and dates.
| 
