Sign in with Facebook
Udeni's Reviews > The Gene: An Intimate History
The Gene: An Intimate History
by
by
Sorry, people. I couldn't finish this book. Billed as a prequel to the brilliant Emperor of Maladies, this was just too confusing and frustrating a book for me. My major difficulty with Mukherjee's approach is that the book is a history of genetics which never properly explains what a gene is. So the reader follows the scientists down blind alleys and back out again while getting dizzy from the increasingly long list of names and biological terms. I ended up trying to sketch out a diagram of how the gene relates to the genome and to a chromosome and to a cell. And then gave up because I was too confused. A chapter outlining the basic biology would have been helpful for non-biologists.
The florid writing regularly tips over into incoherence also annoyed me. For example:
"If haemoglobin's capacity to deliver oxygen to distant sites was disrupted, our bodies would be forced to be small and cold. We would wake up and find ourselves transformed into insects."
No, we wouldn't wake up at all because we would be dead. And what's with the pointless reference to Kafka's "Metamorphosis"? It felt like showing off.
One star for the sheer ambition of trying to write a book about the history of genetics; another star for the incredible detail in the book, and third star out of sentiment, because I loved "Emperor of Maladies" so much. Probably best enjoyed by those with a better basic grasp of genetics than me.
The florid writing regularly tips over into incoherence also annoyed me. For example:
"If haemoglobin's capacity to deliver oxygen to distant sites was disrupted, our bodies would be forced to be small and cold. We would wake up and find ourselves transformed into insects."
No, we wouldn't wake up at all because we would be dead. And what's with the pointless reference to Kafka's "Metamorphosis"? It felt like showing off.
One star for the sheer ambition of trying to write a book about the history of genetics; another star for the incredible detail in the book, and third star out of sentiment, because I loved "Emperor of Maladies" so much. Probably best enjoyed by those with a better basic grasp of genetics than me.
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
The Gene.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
January 16, 2017
–
Started Reading
January 16, 2017
– Shelved
January 21, 2017
–
Finished Reading
Comments Showing 1-10 of 10 (10 new)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
carol.
(new)
Jan 22, 2017 11:03AM
I'm with you on his writing style. I tried to get through The Emperor, and there was too much in there. You are right, he lacks the gift of being able to translate the scientific concepts easily and instead resorts to more metaphorical flights of fancy. Maybe Emperor was better because he included case studies of people.
reply
|
flag
Carol. wrote: "I'm with you on his writing style. I tried to get through The Emperor, and there was too much in there. You are right, he lacks the gift of being able to translate the scientific concepts easily an..."Thank you for taking the time to comment on my review, Carol. With your many years of oncology nursing experience, it's interesting that you also found his explanations to be confusing. I agree that the lack of case studies in Gene is a loss. He seems too detached from much of this material.
"If haemoglobin's capacity to deliver oxygen to distant sites was disrupted, our bodies would be forced to be small and cold. We would wake up and find ourselves transformed into insects."No, we wouldn't wake up at all because we would be dead.
Ha! The basis of your comment is science. The basis of the author's is unknown. Well said. May have to take this one off my list...
Lata wrote: "I guess I won't bother reading this."It's a real love-hate book, Lata. The people who love it really, really love it! I think they are less bothered about understanding the science and more fond of his vivid descriptions of people and history. Not my cup of tea. As they say in Manchester!
Monica wrote: ""If haemoglobin's capacity to deliver oxygen to distant sites was disrupted, our bodies would be forced to be small and cold. We would wake up and find ourselves transformed into insects."He loves his flowery turn of phrase, for sure. A ruthless editor is what this book needed.
If the science isn't right in a science book, I get annoyed.
Lata wrote: "If the science isn't right in a science book, I get annoyed."I don't remember if I reviewed Maladies, but I really feel like there is something that doesn't track clearly in his storytelling. His narrative jumps around a great deal, from small little historical stories to normal history, to scientific explanations to current stories about patients. Like The Night Watch, I feel like I'm reading thoughts that first happened in another language.
This book is practically a detective story on gene, so it is kind of nice to not know what a gene is. You see the conundrum of heredity through the eyes of Mendel, who only managed to isolate the concept instead of its physical/chemical properties and its biological functions.
Thanks for that comment. An overwhelming desire to wax lyrical at the expense of reason and logic can be utterly annoying. My mum does it sometimes too.I guess there is a win-clinching difference between writing a science book and a popular-science book. Siddharth seems to have settled for the blander variety.
I am going to pick another book to listen to today.
