Robert's Reviews > Darwin's Radio
Darwin's Radio (Darwin's Radio #1)
by
by
So I keep on reading Bear novels, feeling disappointed, waiting a while, then rinse and repeat.
This time I've clarified why I am so ambivalent about this guy: he has fascinating ideas then writes dull books about them. The premise here is an extreme example. Our "junk" DNA turns out to be a collection of emergency rapid-response evolutionary accelerators - and the emergency response has just been triggered. Cue mysterious pregnancies, peculiar facial mutations and a really big scientific mystery that turns very political very fast. The detail is very convincing - Bear did a heap of research.
But here's the problem: almost every event of a dramatic nature happens off-stage and the middle part of the book, between the initial scientific drama and the political nightmare at the end bogs down severely. (view spoiler)
There is a theme of the disaster that occurs when science gets forced into the political arena; you only have to look at the climate change debate to know how that goes. It is very realistically handled but develops too slowly. I am reminded of Kim Stanley Robinson. Several of his works deal with science and internal and external politics and how real science is done and I can't help thinking a more interesting novel would have resulted if he had started with the same material.
I acquired Darwin's Children without realising that it was a sequel and then picked up this book subsequently. I will probably read Darwin's Children at some point, since it is lying around and because it really ought to cut to the chase, with the background already painted in with excessive attention to detail but I shall try to resist the urge to buy any more Bear novels regardless of how interesting the premise sounds...
This time I've clarified why I am so ambivalent about this guy: he has fascinating ideas then writes dull books about them. The premise here is an extreme example. Our "junk" DNA turns out to be a collection of emergency rapid-response evolutionary accelerators - and the emergency response has just been triggered. Cue mysterious pregnancies, peculiar facial mutations and a really big scientific mystery that turns very political very fast. The detail is very convincing - Bear did a heap of research.
But here's the problem: almost every event of a dramatic nature happens off-stage and the middle part of the book, between the initial scientific drama and the political nightmare at the end bogs down severely. (view spoiler)
There is a theme of the disaster that occurs when science gets forced into the political arena; you only have to look at the climate change debate to know how that goes. It is very realistically handled but develops too slowly. I am reminded of Kim Stanley Robinson. Several of his works deal with science and internal and external politics and how real science is done and I can't help thinking a more interesting novel would have resulted if he had started with the same material.
I acquired Darwin's Children without realising that it was a sequel and then picked up this book subsequently. I will probably read Darwin's Children at some point, since it is lying around and because it really ought to cut to the chase, with the background already painted in with excessive attention to detail but I shall try to resist the urge to buy any more Bear novels regardless of how interesting the premise sounds...
Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read
Darwin's Radio.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
Comments Showing 1-16 of 16 (16 new)
date
newest »
message 1:
by
Wealhtheow
(new)
20 juin 2012 02:27
reply
|
flag
He is definitely no prose stylist. I have a friend who works in epidemiology, and he really loved how the science was portrayed here, but that wasn't enough for me, alas.
No, it's certainly not going to light a fire in young people to get into science.
I don't think any realistic portrayal of academic science would inspire people to get involved, since it could only highlight the yawning gap between the ideal and the disaster that is caused by the way science is funded, whether by government or the private sector...
That's probably right... cynical, but right. I do have some friends in science who have a ton of fun at their jobs, but it probably wouldn't make for a good story. And then we had margarita night! not really being about the science.
Fortunately, it actually works despite all the problems, because the method is self-correcting. Mistakes, hoaxes and suppression always slow down but never stop science.
What does? This book certainly doesn't.
What does? This book certainly doesn't."
What you wrote reminds me about Dick: "It really is a fascinating premise - it's frustrating that t..."
OK - there is a really big contrast, though; where-as Dick wrote more-or-less surreal fiction heavily involved with questions about identity, reality, drug use, paranoia and other unusual mental states, Bear is all about "hard" SF, usually of a biological or physical bent.