Points to ponder through out the day, applicable to the needs in one's spiritual life are Scripturally based and are clearly and insightfully represented by Dr. Packer. I have read this book again and again for inspiration.

For fans of military stories, this would be a great addition to your library. Chief Watson, who was first made known through Richard Marcinko's Rogue Warrior book now speaks of his experiences in the military, spanning 30 years of service in the Navy. He vividly recounts dangerous operations and battle stories in the jungles of Vietnam that were routine to his group of Seals. For fans of the Rogue Warror series, he gives his personal prospective of serving under or for Mr. Marcinko, a perspective that you can tell is rooted in respect. No real surprises here for fans of military reading, just great stories, colorful characters and knowledge that America is lucky to have guys like this defending our country.

I read "Point Man" and "Walking Point" with great interest. I have looked at quite a lot of SEAL literature, and find that these two books stand out above all the rest of the genre. You wanna know about SEALS? Read about the Chief himself in Point Man and Walking Point!!! I have met the Man and am glad to report he is a REAL DEAL SEAL! He also wrote 3 works of SEAL fiction that will keep your adrenaline pumping from page to page! (Top Secret series 1-3, and a 4th being developed for July 99) Good going, Chief "Patches" Watson!!

I think that this is a great book! One of the best I have ever read. It tells you a great deal about the Navy SEALs and their adventures in Nam! I hope to become a SEAL someday soon, and hope to work with people such as those described in the book. I liked it so much that I contacted Chief Petty Officer Watson telling him just that.

If you are interested in the science of genetics (What exactly is a gene? How does DNA work? How does genetic fingerprinting work? How do they do that?) then this book is for you. If, on the other hand, you are interested in the social implications of genetics (Is genetic profiling ethical? Should we be exploring gene therapy? Does genetic testing of fetuses promote abortion? What good is the human genome project?), then this book is ALSO for you.

Indeed, one might criticize this book for having an identity crisis as to whether it is about science or ethics. However, I have come to realize that in genetics, perhaps more than in any other discipline, science and social issues are inexorably linked. Even so, while I found the book fascinating from cover to cover (almost), I would have to say that it tends to be disjointed in places, leaping from subject to subject a little haphazardly. It is almost as if the writer was ticking off items on his "things to write about" list. As such, the book loses its cohesion from time to time. For example, a chapter on the early Soviet Union's biology program is wedged in between accounts of recent searches for pernicious genes and studies of twins.

But this is a minor point. Mr. Watson is not only a top notch scientist, he is an excellent writer. Although the chapter on Soviet biology left me scratching my head, it was amusing, interesting and well-written, as was the rest of the book. And for that, I can forgive a great deal. The proof is in the pudding. Over the last few days, I have engaged a number of colleagues, as well as my wife, in discussions on genetics issues and have found that this book has greatly enriched my understanding of the field and reinforced my interest in the subject. It's also worth pointing out that if you are in the process of building a family, this book is full of the kind of scientific background that will hold you in good stead as you examine options like genetic testing, in-vitro fertilization and the implications of family histories of disease.

I will levy only one direct criticism about this book. It tends to wander aimlessly toward the end. It is almost as if Mr. Watson couldn't decide how to end it, so he chose to do so multiple times. The result is a rather off-putting set of diatribes espousing the author's agnostic and highly utilitarian approach to the subject. (Incidentally, those of you on or near the religious right will find plenty of fodder here.) Not that I minded hearing the author's views, it's just that "I got it already."

However, this is a minor taint to an otherwise excellent book about the science and ethics of genetics. For you armchair scientists out there, I would put this one toward the top of the "to read" stack.

When I picked up James D. Watson's "DNA: THE SECRET OF LIFE" it
didn't seem an entirely promising read. It looked like it might be
just another uninspired "rehash" survey of the subject of genetics
(and genomics and so on), an impression reinforced by Watson's
comments in the foreword that it was partly derived from a TV series
commemorating the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the DNA double
helix by Watson and his colleague, Francis Crick, which won the two
the Nobel Prize.

On reading into "DNA", I quickly realized that this was no mere
rehash, but a very cleanly written and highly readable survey of
genetics. Watson, who has the advantage of a central viewpoint
in the field, neatly weaves together a history of the field, a
technical explanation of it, an exploration of its business and
politics, and something like a professional autobiography.

The writing is outstandingly clear and even witty -- Watson comments
in an understated but clearly pleased fashion how another genetics
researcher named his Siamese cats "Watson" and "Crick". An educated
layperson, clearly the target audience for this book, could hardly
hope for a better introduction to the field, and a nonprofessional
would hardly need to know much more than it provides.

However, this is not saying this is an effortless read. Although by
no means resembling a textbook, "DNA" covers an enormous amount of
ground and range of concepts, and anybody who would claim that he
could pick it up in one reading from end to end is either a real
genius or, more likely, a fraud. My initial reading went cover to
cover and amounted to no more than a survey, to be followed up later
by an extensive session in note-taking.

* Having said all these things, there is a subtler aspect to this
book. In the initial chapters of "DNA", Watson mixed his history of
the early days of modern genetics with a discussion of the "eugenics"

movement, an effort to improve the human race by breeding up
desireables and (more to the point) breeding out undesireables.
Eugenics was weak science and strong racism.

That story was interesting, but I wondered if Watson had a
politically-correct agenda. Further reading showed this not to be the
case -- Watson sees the left-outfield politically correct crowd and
the right-outfield fundamentalist crowd as both obnoxious influences
in his field, and in fact he hardly sees them as being much different.

What emerges is that Watson has an "advocacy agenda". This is not to
say this is the sole focus of this work, it's just that genetics has
certain social and ethical implications that are so unavoidable that
they end up having to be discussed as part of a real survey of the
topic. Fetal genetic screening, for example, has immediate
implications relative to abortion rights, and of course human genetic
engineering is controversial on the face of it.

Watson has his views on such matters, laying out skeins of a general
argument about the social and ethical aspects of his work and then
tying them up in the relatively short final chapter. Of course, there
are weaknesses in his arguments -- for example, he blasts the
authorities for making decisions on a political and not a scientific
basis, which seems a bit silly. (A government organization makes
decisions on a political basis?! REALLY?! Gosh! Who knew?!). His
final argument also was the sort of thing that I wouldn't touch
myself, since long experience with Internet forums told me I would get
nothing out of it but a loud, mad, pointless barking contest.

I do not mock him, however. This is not really my battle but it is
clearly his, and if he seems to struggle with it, well, that's because
it's troublesome stuff. And I on the same wavelength with him in one
respect. He does not see the issues in terms of liberal and
conservative. He sees a clash of two beliefs.

The first belief is that anything that poses any potential public
hazard should be forbidden. The alternative is that people should be
free to do anything that does *not* pose a demonstrable public hazard.
The first belief is that of the control freaks of both left and right.
Watson believes the second and I am in the same camp.

He also does his advocacy the right way, stating his views carefully
and embedding them inside a powerful narrative of facts and details,
which lends them far more credibility than hollow assertions of
opinion. In fact, although Watson's views might infuriate extremists,
the book remains outstandingly informative even if his views are
disregarded. The willingness of the author to confront controversy
does not affect the fact that "DNA" is an excellent piece of science
writing.

* I did catch the author in an exceedly minor error that I point out
not to nitpick but because it's an amusing detail. In his list of
inherited dog traits, he refers to greyhounds as "twitchy".

I used to believe this myself, but there's an "adopt a race dog"
program in my locality, quite a few people around here have
greyhounds as pets -- and all report that the dogs are absolute
couch potatoes who take life easy when not actually chasing
something. On consideration, this is the ideal behavior pattern
for an animal that spends much of its life in a kennel, and an
impressive example of the power of controlled breeding. I think
they just *look* high-strung.

And I suppose while I'm at it, I might add another interesting
inherited dog behavior pattern that wasn't mentioned in "DNA" -- how a
Rottweiler will come up alongside you and give you a small but
powerful sideways NUDGE that will literally throw you for a loop if
you're not expecting it. I was surprised by this when I first ran
into it, but it turns out to be an instinctive herding behavior.

This is an outstanding book, perfect for the 50th anniversary of the discovery of the structure of DNA, that reviews the history of genetics and the many advances that have been made in genetic research. It is a very readable book for a layperson with a huge wealth of information about who discovered what and when. The book is thus written for a non-biomajor who wants to understand the history of genetics and gain a broad appreciation for the many discoveries. The book provides insight into the personalities of geneticists and the inner squabbles and politics of genetic research. As packed with information as the book is, every chapter could easily be expanded into a separate book as readable, lucid, and stimulating as the original book. What great reading that would be!

This book was very exciting and influential about the lives of SEALS in the Vietnam war. i would recommend to anyone.

Your in the jungle...... charlie is all around you, what do you do? Blow the c**p out of them, thats what. If enjoy special forces novels this is the book for you!

This book really does justice to the SEALs who risked their lives in the jungles of Vietnam. The use of a hydrogen bomb in the story really pulls the reader in and the book never gets boring. I just can't wait 'till the next one comes out.

This text covers every important aspect in the field, from experimental techniques and basic concepts to reviews of immunology, cancer, and developmental biology. I used it as a reference in four different undergraduate classes, and have prepared for several job interviews by reviewing the relevant information in this book. The illustrations are all relevant, the organization is excellent, and the prose is so well written that I take the book off the shelf and read it for fun. A new edition would be useful - some of the more speculative information is outdated - but this is still the best textbook I own.

Most people, when commenting about this book, tend to compare it to Lodish's Molecular Cell Biology. I own both, and I must say that they are quite similar in their content but different in the way of explaining concepts. Although Lodish's book is a little more up-to-date, it's just a matter of time until a new edition of MBoC is published. In fact, a great number of concepts are clearer in Molecular Biology of the Cell... and vice-versa. About the book, it is the authoritative text of molecular biology for beginners and a reference guide to all fields of cell biology. The chapters concerning the structure of the cell and of the organelles are amazing and include in-depth explanations. It also comprehends the best revision chapters on macromolecules compared to Lodish's. The team of authors was accurate to compose one of the best books in molecular biology for students of all biological and biomedical sciences.

Well, considering that this book got me through a full year of molecular and cell biology as an undergraduate, I'm pretty fond of the book. Especially considering that the second half of the year was taught by two people who had never taught a class in their lives before. Reason for the five stars is that this is an INTRODUCTORY level textbook written about 7 years ago. Even considering that, it's thorough enough and comprehensive enough for an entire year. I wasn't expecting work done last year to be included and I wasn't expecting that it would delve into the intricate details of photosynthetic reaction centers or the latest in optical methods in single molecule dynamics. If you want that kind of detail, go to the journals or specialized texts. However, for those undergraduates undertaking a full year of MCB, I can't recommend this text highly enough. And if you're looking for prokaryotic information, I'd go pick up a copy of Prescott, Harley, and Klein's "Microbiology."

James D. Watson's "A Passion For DNA, Genes, Genomes, and Society," Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, 2000, is an interesting historical and non-technical read of 25 essays on a variety of topics dear to his interests. His keen assessment of various individuals and groups that impacted the progress of DNA research can be appreciated by all readers both technical and non-technical.

However, with all respect, I must point out that Dr. Watson departs from his scientific principals when he promotes his positions in the "...ethical, legal and social implications (ELSI) of the new resulting genetic knowledge." [Genes and Politics, p.202]. Especially when he concludes "Thus I do not see genetic diseases in any way as an expression of the complex will of any supernatural authority, but rather as random tragedies that we should do everything in our power to prevent. There is, of course nothing pleasant about terminating the existence of a genetically disabled fetus. But doing so is incomparably more compassionate than allowing an infant to come into the world tragically impaired." [Good Gene, Bad Gene, p. 225]. Jim Watson then takes the position that since "terminating the existence of a genetically disabled fetus" is a "good," only "...the potential mother should have this authority.," never the government, ibid. p. 225.

I see no evidence that Dr. Watson has ever studied "ethics" and/or other philosophical positions that utilize principals and methodologies that "scientifically" examine questions concerning the possibility of the existence of "human souls," the possibility of their immortality, and the nature of their origin, i.e., the possibility of their Divine creation. By restricting himself exclusively to the possibility that all there is to human life is "physical" reality studied in his career as "biological reality," it is inevitable that Dr. Watson's ethical positions concerning the "good" for individuals, families and society be measured and evaluated exclusively in terms of the consequences of physical "evils" and other "random tragedies" generated by the "horrors of genetic disease." Ibid. pp. 224-225.

With no demonstrated knowledge of the existence, or proof of the lack of existence, of human souls, their origin and destinies, Dr. Watson is on very shaky ground "scientifically" to be suggesting this type of solution, i.e., termination of the existence of genetically disabled fetuses, for "victims of unlucky throws of the genetic dice." Ibid. p. 224-225.

For those of us who have established "scientifically" and thus have validly established that the human soul is immaterial and what is more, is immortal, and whose existence as an immortal soul is due to the efficient causality of an uncaused cause, i.e., God, our ethical principals support the "compassionate" caring for the genetically deformed by not only the individuals who they are born to but, also as an obligation of society since this care most often exceeds the resources of any one or two individuals. This position can only be understood by those who either have the knowledge of these truths arrived at by the use of reason and logic (philosophy) or by the tenets of a revealed "faith" (scripture and theology). Yes, Dr. Watson, you believe that the "evolutionary process operating under the Darwinian principles of natural selection" is the only explanation for the existence of "human as well as all other forms of life" Ethical Implications, p. 175, precisely because your scientific method is restricted strictly to the material, physical and hence measurable aspects of existence. But have you examined the arguments (including the starting points and methods) of those of us who do see "evidence for the sanctity (holiness) of life."? You certainly don't present and evidence in your essays of this book that you have, you only present a biased assertion.

I agree with Dr. Watson's principal on page 225, Good Gene, Bad Gene, "Working intelligently and wisely to see that good genes - not bad ones - dominate as many lives as possible is the truly moral way for us to proceed." But this principal does not support "terminating the existence of a genetically disabled fetus" but rather more humanly and Divinely supports the hard work of intelligent research and development of technologies that reduces the possibilities of future "unlucky throws of the genetic dice" happening or occurring before conception or that supports life supportive therapies during fetal growth and after birth resulting in the elimination of or the reduction of genetic disease. As Dr. Watson has said in another place, "Good luck with hard work." I second that!

With the release of "Genes, Girls, and Gamow", this earlier book has suddenly been ignored, overlooked, and forgotten. Nobody, of course, forgets "The Double Helix", and now we have this sensation called "Genes Girls and Gamow". With a bad choice of title and an equally bad choice for a cover---a large close-up picture of a geeky young biologist---making such a mockery and preposterous idea of what appeals to girls in general, I can only salute Rosalind Franklin for her exquisite determination not to be lured by this sly personage. If one wants to examine the life and perspective of the codiscoverer of the structure of the double helix from a more venerable perspective, "A Passion for DNA: Genes Genomes and Society" will earn the reader's respect. From the cover alone of this book, it is almost galling that, by comparison, "Genes Girls and Gamow" gets more brouhaha, hoopla, and hoolabaloo.

It is understandable that right to life advocates are desperate to find soap boxes for their religious and political views. However we think it inappropriate to abuse this forum intended for the evaluation of literary works. The expression of political and religious opinions should be reserved for those venues intended for those puposes. Dr. Watson's book is a scientifically insightful and humanistically compassionate work deserving of serious attention.

This book made me want to scream, or cry. The characters are beautifully rendered, and some of them are dispicable people. That's what made it so unenjoyable to read for me.

The heroine, Isabel Archer, begins her adventures with much vitality and promise, yearning to see life and the world and not to settle prematurely into marriage and domesticity. Although James shows she's not perfect -- she's naive and somewhat conceited -- it's still pretty easy to fall in love with her. You look forward to seeing what great things her life will bring.

And then it all falls apart. After 200 pages of building her up, James marries her to a scoundrel and spends the next 300 pages suffocating her, one liberty at a time. Others have described this book as "uplifting" and spoken of Isabel's strength and courage; I honestly can't see what they could mean. I found it genuinely painful to see such a beautiful character destroyed. With all credit to James's writing skills, this book made me miserable. I couldn't wish it on anyone.

The best thing about 19th century novels is that they take so long to unwind, you know that you are guaranteed a long and satisfying trip into a story. I initially bought this book after seeing the Jane Campion film, (which I actually wasn't too crazy about)but I always think it's a good idea to read the source material. After a few false starts (warning: one needs to devote all their attention to James in order to enjoy him)I finally got into this book, and couldn't put it down. From the great settings of the novel, to the variety of fascinating characters (the liberated Henrietta Stackpole, the sinister Madame Merle, the beloved Ralph Touchett, Ralph's eccentric mother, the flighty Countess Gemini, the deadly Gilbert Osmond, and of course, Isabel Archer herself... James gives characters great names as well) "Portrait" is a great novel not only of self discovery, but self deception. How many of us in this world have liked to have thought ourselevs as free to make our own chocies, and were excited by a future full of "possibility" only to allow something (or usually someone) to get in our way and make us realize just how quickly we can lose our freedom and be in a cage that we need to get out of. (Pardon my bad grammar.) Those of you looking fora Jane Austen type ending, this may not be the book for you, but I think this book is more of a spiritual cousin to Austen than we may think. It all comes down to making choices, and teh effects of those decisions. Throw off any reservations that you may have because this book was written over a century ago, it's as fresh, funny, tragic and riveting today as it was then. (And hey, buy the film soundtrack which perfectly captures the mood of the story for accompaniment..that was a plug!)

The novel Portrait of a Lady is a beautiful. It starts out with a girl named Isabel Archer who goes with her Aunt Touchett to England. Isabel is portrayed beautifully by James in the novel as a curious, independent, intelligent lady. She arrives in isolated Gardencourt where she meets her uncle and her cousin, Ralph Touchett. Soon, she is proposed to by Lord Warburten portrayed as a polite, wealthy, radical gentleman but rejects him because her curiousity expects another, better suiter. Caspar Goodward, her other lover, fallows her to England and is determined to marry her. The two men come in even further in the novel when intrigue and scandel take place. Isabel travels all through Europe but is eventually entrapped and decieved. Drama and intrigue take the stage then. By that time it may sound like some domb soup opera, but really he refines the situations and makes them realistic but still dramatic unlike most stupid soaps. Some parts may seem long and dull because he explains himself so explicitly with huge paragraphs about one subject but it's worth it when your finished. The characters are done superbly with wonderful description. There is much irony, too, but if you immiedietly think irony is funny like some people its not in this novel. Its as a whole a serious novel. The ending is very well done if you think about it. Though,it may seem odd it is as a whole witty and crafty.

Worn out from a recent excess of cases, Holmes and Watson are taking it easy when a telegram reaches them from Inspector MacDonald, a man Holmes greatly respects. It seems that Professor Josiah Addleton, an eminent historian, had been killed under grotesque circumstances at the village of Little Stoke in the Vale of the Bittern.

Rushing off to the village, Holmes and Watson discover that Addleton had been excavating a barrow near the village. In addition to the prehistoric contents of the barrow, the Professor was also on a quest to discover treasure stolen four centuries before from a local monastery. In addition there are two equally ancient royal charters. These charters were needed to resolve a long standing argument over land holdings between two prominent local families - The Grey's and the Forrester's. Something the Professor knew triggered his murder, but what is a mystery.

Watson investigates the village, talking to the people and accumulating lore about local legends and myths. Children's rhymes and old men's tales. Little Stoke was the site of a colorful 16th century history, from smugglers to knights, as well as a rich prehistory full of barrows and cairns. Holmes, on the other hand, focuses on the chief players. Rowland Forrester, and William and Mary Grey are the opponents in the argument over land rights. Professor Frey and Portland Donner, were Addleton's partners at the dig. There are many others whose roles are less clear, but whose part in the mystery is undoubted. Holmes and Watson uncover layer after layer of mystery and deception as they seek the murderer, the missing treasure and documents.

The tale itself is mystifying and entertaining. I found myself immersed in each of the several stories that unravel under Holmes' piecing eye. There is something here for everyone, from horseracing to archeology, and the pictures of rural England make it a 19th century travelogue as well. Only a few qualms have kept me from giving the novel a 5 star rating.

The first is the writing style. Since none of Doyle's stories really classify as full blown novels, writers who venture into this territory must create a believable Watsonian style for themselves. In James Stefanie's case he had adopted some of the approaches that Doyle uses elsewhere, and backfilled with his own invention. Unfortunately, while the writing is good, it does not always ring true to Watson, showing much more attention to local color and far more philosophical brooding than Doyle's Watson ever demonstrated.

Throughout the first hundred pages of "The Charters Affair" you might ask yourself why James Stefanie included so much detail and description. If you did and continued to read until the plot took over, the answer became self-evident: familiarity. You gain a such feel for the area and its inhabitants that you almost become one of the people sitting in the parlor as Holmes unveils the perpetrator at the end of the story.

For a first-time reader of the Holmes genre, like myself, the Charters Affair included just the right amount of background and reminiscence to answer some of my questions concerning the relationship between Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson. It also allowed me to see the two men as separate and distinct personalities. Holmes with his systematic, unidirectional, unbending, and often Machiavellian drive contrasted starkly with Watson's thoughtful, sometimes muddling, optimistic and occasionally flustered, all too human view of life. Seeing Holmes through Watson's eyes, with a doctor's concern for the physical wellbeing of a friend, was illuminating, and added depth to the narrator.

And as the story is a reminiscence, the author's use of somewhat antiquated language worked well. My studies in England acquainted me with the style and verbiage employed by Mr. Stefanie in telling this story, and for me enhanced the experience markedly.

Without giving away the plot, the tale is a complex interwoven fabric of many eras, including a tribal burial in pre-Druid times, the monastic middle ages, the granting and misplacing of land charters, the pirate trade, and a Holmesian-era expedition to excavate the tor that brings Holmes and Watson to the area to solve a murder mystery. All in all, great intellectual fun with twists and turns, a complex plot, and very interesting characters.

I had the good fortune to tip a pint or two with James Stefanie shortly after his novel was published, and after our conversation wondered not whether Sherlock Holmes had actually lived, but whether Dr. Watson had ever actually died.

I have read and re-read the Sherlock Holmes mysteries over and over for the past 60+ years. Mr. Stefanie has captured the essence and being of both Holmes, and Watson - a feat yet to be accomplished by writers of Holmesian stories in this day and age.The description of places and people in this book are without equal. If you've never been to England, you will upon reading this book, immediately want to pack your bags and seek out these bucolic villages and quaint places. If you've already been to England, the nostalgia will be overwhelming. His vivid descriptions paint a picture of Holmes' Victorian England that will send the reader back in time. Here is a writer who may be an alter-ego of Sherlock Holmes, or a reincarnation of Conan Doyle. This book is a "keeper" - to be read, and re-read, each time with the expectation of once more meeting the great Sherlock Holmes and his side-kick the erstwhile Dr. Watson ala Conan Doyle.

Welcome to the original SEALs where author James Watson could be expected to break all Ten Commandments in order to get the job done. PROVIDED THE JOB IS DRINKING! In all the other Special Forces books I read with amazement how Force Recon Marines, Snipers, Delta Force and Rangers spent up to a week in the jungle gathering intel while avoiding not only booby-traps, ambush and detection from the enemy but tigers and leopards. Watson's idea of a mission in Vietnam was going out for 2 hours in Levi's blue jeans then getting back to base to get drunk before dark. Basically "Charlie" had very little fear of this alcoholic with a green face. He once looked so exhausted his superior suggested he stay in while his men go on patrol. Was he overworked? Obviously not as his men weren't. He was exhasted from spending all his free time drinking rather than resting or sleeping. So when they came to tell him his men were under fire guess where he was? In the bar getting drunk of course. I have the utmost respect and gratitude for those who served with pride in the Vietnam War because preserving freedom is always a just cause. Unfortunately that cause never occurred to shoot-first-Watson who killed a newborn baby at its mother's breast with a shotgun then blamed the enemy for bringing his family to a war. Whose country did he think it was? Watson was far too busy lying to superiors, stealing from anyone and cheating to increase rate (rank) to do any recon for his "missions."

I have read over a dozen books on Special Forces (all nonfiction) and James Watson's two books: Walking Point and Point Man were by far the worst. Forcing myself to finish this diatribe was far more painful than any training Watson endured to become a SEAL back in the days when you smoked between sneaking out of exercises. Basically it's a self-serving story profiling how chronic alcoholism increases delusions of grandeur and the self-glorification of an undisciplined wannabe tough guy. Not only was James Watson an unprofessional soldier but he tends to brag about it. A real man doesn't sucker punch a fellow soldier in a bar then give himself a pat on the back.

...

Chief Watson does a very good job giving the readers some insight to what the Vietnam war was like to Navy SEALs. I found that many parts of this book are very much like Richard Marcinko's Rogue Warrior. I learned many things about the Navy SEALs and their techniques from reading this book, granted they were techniques from over 30 years ago. I commend authors like Watson who give the public a glimpse of what their world looked like in war times.

with all due respect reader from miniapolis, u are wrong in everything u said. Chief Watson is a great SEAL...after successful ops SEALs always went to a bar to party and bond...its called UNIT INTEGRETY...after enough partying all SEALs within a unit should be able to finish each other sentences and trust each other with their lives (which they may have to sometime). And the way u put it is that Chief Watson sucker punched the guy for no reason...well if u read the book, the Chief was a guest in the O Club and some other chief (also a guest) came over to one of Watson's superior officers (a LT) and said "Your one of those Loud mouth SEALS arent you?" and then Watson even asked the LT's permission before punching him...then when the XO escorted him out he told Watson that he would have loved for him to stay but it would make him look bad...so in conclusion until u have gone to war and been out in the jungle with someone trying to kill you, or until u have had all of ur body messed up by a mine then please dont go badmouthing a war hero...thank you

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.

This book by James Watson tells his story, in the years he worked on the structure of DNA. As another review noted, this is the story "warts and all," including his and others' worries about grants being renewed, family, relationships, jealousy, pride, food, and living in England where the labs and accomodations were always cold in winter.
I know almost no biology, and while a lot of the discussion was over my head scientifically, I followed the gist of it.
The ghost of Rosalind Franklin continually follows James Watson. I've heard Dr. Watson speak publicly twice, and each time he was asked about her. When he was interviewed on NPR, the interviewer persistently went into the interactions between Watson and Franklin. The gist of his response is that she lost the recognition she should have gotten because she refused to collaborate and work with others, and she refused to work with models. Clearly, while Franklin's X-ray photograph of DNA was a major step in pointing Watson and Crick to the double helix AT GC structure of DNA, it was NOT a self-sufficient proof of the double helix, as she herself refused to consider a helical structure of DNA.

I found the book to be the complete antithesis to the expected writings hidden behind the scientific cover. Watson and his clan's quest for the helixical structure of DNA made for an entertaining voyage within these pages. Unexpectedly, as many scientific based books that I have been privy to read lately, this book was very approachable, dare I say readable. The exploits recounted by Watson were very entertaining; they could even be considered witty and humorous although it was biosciences humor. The teamwork and competition aspects of the discovery of the double helix were unexpected but welcomed because I felt that they were the driving forces behind the people. I was impressed by Watson, Crick and Franklin all bringing something to the proverbial table even though I found it a tad bit lucky or coincidental, but that is how these things work sometimes. This, accompanied with the race against Linus Pauling (already a recognized scientist of the time) helped lend to an educational, insightful and entertaining few hours of reading about the basic structure of all of us. I felt like I took a little something with me when I was finished with this work.......and I do mean literally.