Scan barcode
aurigae's review against another edition
5.0
Jane is a researcher at MIT, working to find the cause of the degenerative disease that killed her mother and threatens her and her sister. Her life is defined by her work, by her memories of her mother's illness and death, and by her and her sister's opposing approaches to their grief and fear. But when Jane meets a man whose response to his own similar situation challenges hers - at the same time that she discovers a remote, inbred community of sufferers - her theories must all be reevaluated.
The good: Oh, everything. The world of the novel is highly specific - Jane's best friend's taste in clothing; the failing eyesight of a ferry pilot; the dressing rooms in Jane's father's store. This draws us in while allowing the author to address big issues - disease and death, mothers and sisters, science and faith - without veering into pontification or pointless melancholy.
The bad: A quibble, but the story is set in the 1980's (which matters a great deal - genetic testing has advanced considerably since then) and I didn't feel the period was made sufficiently clear.
The verdict: I have long complained that there are no novels whose protagonists are postdocs. This is only one book, but if it were the only such book it would be enough. Read it.
The good: Oh, everything. The world of the novel is highly specific - Jane's best friend's taste in clothing; the failing eyesight of a ferry pilot; the dressing rooms in Jane's father's store. This draws us in while allowing the author to address big issues - disease and death, mothers and sisters, science and faith - without veering into pontification or pointless melancholy.
The bad: A quibble, but the story is set in the 1980's (which matters a great deal - genetic testing has advanced considerably since then) and I didn't feel the period was made sufficiently clear.
The verdict: I have long complained that there are no novels whose protagonists are postdocs. This is only one book, but if it were the only such book it would be enough. Read it.
bartendm's review against another edition
3.0
I really wanted to like this book more than I did. The characters just weren't quite engaging enough for me and since everyone in the lab was a societal misfit, that made them somewhat unrealistic.
The pacing was pretty slow and it was clearly a novel intended to explore the ethical dimensions of genetic testing, with a pretty clear parallel between the fictitious Valentine's disease and Huntington's disease. The book was so focused on all aspects of that, that I think the storyline suffered. But what really drove me crazy was all the almost, but not quite accurate details about the lab work. As a scientist, it really made it hard to the rest of the book seriously, and apparently there were things about the region that were close, but not quite accurate as reviewed by someone else. So if you want to be wowed by science in a novel, it might be better to chose a different author with more first hand knowledge.
The pacing was pretty slow and it was clearly a novel intended to explore the ethical dimensions of genetic testing, with a pretty clear parallel between the fictitious Valentine's disease and Huntington's disease. The book was so focused on all aspects of that, that I think the storyline suffered. But what really drove me crazy was all the almost, but not quite accurate details about the lab work. As a scientist, it really made it hard to the rest of the book seriously, and apparently there were things about the region that were close, but not quite accurate as reviewed by someone else. So if you want to be wowed by science in a novel, it might be better to chose a different author with more first hand knowledge.
dragonflylee's review
1.0
Why does am author have to resort to sexual descriptions when cleaner options are available. I tried to like this book but at a description of unzipping a guys fly and asking if she wanted to lick his all day sucker, I put the book down for good. (Page 16)
More...