spring books and arts Life, the movie Fifty years after revealing the structure of DNA, James Watson looks back.

DNA: The Secret of Life were made by several investigators at Stan- Curiously, while calling for strict regula- by James D. Watson with Andrew Berry ford University in California, albeit by incon- tion to avoid the dangers of gene therapy, Alfred A. Knopf: 2003. 416 pp. $29.95. venient methods, well before Stanley Cohen Watson still defends his waffling over the William Heinemann: 2003. £20 and Herbert Boyer devised a convenient way scientific community’s actions regarding Maxine Singer to produce recombinant DNA molecules. recombinant-DNA experiments. Although a The modern form of the method for import- signatory of the 1974 moratorium letter, he In an age when celebrities matter, biology has ing plasmids into Escherichia coli bacteria misleadingly describes its contents as calling produced two: the DNA double helix and was described by Mandel and Higa in 1970, on scientists worldwide to suspend “all James D. Watson. Both emerged 50 years ago, rather than by Cohen in 1971. In addition, recombinant studies”. The letter said no such and celebrations of that anniversary, includ- the definition of ‘autosomal’ is inexplicably thing: it asked for a voluntary deferring of ing this book, abound. Lest he be forgotten, confused with that of ‘dominant’, and the only several specific types of recombinant the book is dedicated to Francis Crick, who, definition of ‘cloning’ is incomplete. experiment that could “prove biologically since discovering with Watson the structure Genetics has been a lightning rod for hazardous”. At the Asilomar Conference of DNA, has eschewed iconic status while public concern for almost a century. Watson in early 1975, six months after the letter contributing important, insightful ideas to and his co-authors recount the issues from was published, Watson joined those who biology. In the fashion of movie stars and the destructive influence of eugenics, believed that “the moratorium be damned, sports heroes, this book was written ‘with’ through Trofim Lysenko and the controver- let’s get on with the science”. Since then, Andrew Berry, who was initially recruited to sies over genetically modified plants, to the and again in this book, he has claimed that work on the associated five-part television forensic analysis of DNA. A chapter called the scientists’ responsible effort yielded series, already shown on Channel 4 in Britain “Defying Disease” superbly parses the com- “nothing more than five sad years of delay and to be aired on the Public Broadcasting plex questions surrounding genetic testing in important research”. But the avoidance of System in the United States in April. Accord- and diagnosis in a manner that is informa- restrictive federal legislation in the United ing to the authors’ note, three additional tive for biomedical scientists and patients States, and this book’s description of the people wrote substantial parts of the alike. The authors’ note acknowledges Jan rapid scientific progress during the late book. Perhaps that’s why, despite the first- Witkowski for “pulling together” this and 1970s, belies his intimidating person-singular pretence, I missed Watson’s two other chapters; if that means he wrote evaluation. provocative and sometimes maddeningly them, he has provided some of the book’s Although it avoids idiosyncratic style. most engaging narratives. Watson’s occasional All of the people and stories associated Watson is rightfully proud of his deci- propensity for with the landmark discoveries in genetics are sion, as the first director of the Human inflammatory NEWTON BY DAVID ILLUSTRATIONS here, from Gregor Mendel to the latest fail- Genome Project, to devote 3% of the funds public state- ures of gene therapy. They include the story to questions of social concern. This book ments, the of Thomas Hunt Morgan and the chromo- reveals that he has thought deeply and with- book is somal theory of heredity; George Beadle and out judgemental bias on such matters as the ‘one gene–one enzyme’ concept; Oswald the importance of public access to DNA Avery, Alfred Hershey and Martha Chase and sequence data, and the discouraging effects the identification of DNA as the hereditary on scientific research and medical appli- molecule; François Jacob and Jacques Monod cations of overly restrictive patents. The and the regulation of gene expression; troubling conundrums posed by the Marshall Nirenberg and Gobind Khorana present ‘intermediate’ stage of genetic and the genetic code; and Mary-Claire King research, in which we possess “in and the identification of genes associated general the power to diagnose with breast cancer. Research is realistically but not to cure” genetic dis- portrayed as a human endeavour that is eases, are illustrated with subject to the quirks of personalities. wrenching real-life situ- Unfortunately, however, for all its marvel- ations and put in lous and comprehensive sweep, this book the context of the is flawed by some distressing errors. For analogous his- example, in The Path to the Double Helix, tory of earlier Robert Olby carefully documents that Crick medical proposed the antiparallel configuration of advances. the two DNA chains before Watson got the This point base pairing correct, but here the two insights is welcome are reversed. The technique used to produce but it could have Affymetrix DNA chips is described as “pre- been acknowledged cise micropipetting” rather than an inspired that too often the rou- marriage of computerized photolithography tine hype of the academic and photochemistry. The history of the and corporate biomedical development of recombinant-DNA concepts communities, including Watson, is garbled: combinations of eukaryote and has itself made the public impatient bacterial plasmid or bacteriophage DNA for cures.

NATURE | VOL 422 | 24 APRIL 2003 | www.nature.com/nature © 2003 Nature Publishing Group 809 spring books and arts straightforward in decrying the political own enterprise”. The path of science does took it as one of their tasks to define science. influence in the United States of fundamen- not run smoothly — at times it is indeed Quite a few philosophers of science today talist religious tenets on the teaching of quirky. But is science really subjective, even think that attempting to draw a line between evolution and the pursuit and application richly subjective? Gould spends a lot of science and everything else is not very help- of research on embryos. Watson passionately time debunking the myth of objectivity as ful. There is no ‘essence’ to science, no set of objects to the current situation, in which US a psychological characteristic of scientists. attributes that characterizes all scientists and “politicians continue to pander to the out- As anyone who studies science soon begins only scientists throughout all time. Science spoken religious minority”. And he speaks to realize, scientists are not very objective has evolved and continues to evolve. For for many scientists when he says: “I do not when it comes to their own work, but some reason, Gould thinks that our concepts dispute the right of individuals to look to group objectivity is what matters. Individual must be absolutely sharp to be of any use at religion for a private moral compass, but scientists may lack objectivity when it all. Despite having a history, Gould argues, I do object to the assumption of too many comes to their own pet hypotheses, but they have and must have an essence as well. religious people that atheists live in a moral others will happily take up the slack. Science A second weakness of this book is that it vacuum.” These statements would be even is organized so that subjectivity can be is largely a collection of essays and parts of more powerful if the chapter on recombinant reduced, resulting in as much objectivity as essays that have been welded into a single DNA was not entitled “Playing God”, thereby scientists need. narrative. The seams show. Readers might perpetuating a tool used by those who would Gould warns of the great harm done in wonder about the quirky, although arresting, inhibit modern genetics research. science and elsewhere by caricaturing title. The contrast between the hedgehog The unfortunate errors aside, this book one’s opponents. The contrast between the and the fox is initially meant to distinguish is more inclusive and is better reading traditional ‘positivistic’ views of science and between being very good at one thing (the than similar attempts by science journalists. more recent ‘postmodernist’ views is ripe hedgehog curling up in a ball when attacked) Although aimed at a general audience, the for caricature. Supposedly, positivists think and reasonably good at many things (the ignorance among many biomedical scien- that scientists are infallible and provide fox). He refers to this metaphor frequently tists of the history of their science suggests absolute truth, whereas postmodernists in his book, but for me it doesn’t add much to that they too can learn a great deal from the insist that scientists are driven to come up his exposition, and the Magister’s pox hardly book, and enjoy doing so. I with the views that they do primarily by such merits a mention except to rhyme with fox. Maxine Singer is president emeritus of the social forces as sexism, racism and homo- Gould expends much effort arguing that Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1530 P Street phobia. Gould tries to skate between these science, once it is properly understood, is Northwest, Washington, DC, 20005, USA. two extremes. Science is socially embedded, not in conflict with the humanities. But he but the recognition of this fact can only aid says little about the help, if any, that science scientists in their goal of recording and can give to the humanities. explaining the natural world. Another reason why Gould introduces A second contribution that the humani- the notion of magisteria is to help usher in A final call for peace ties can make to science is to help scientists the Age of Aquarius, when peace will guide The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the improve their communication skills. Gould not only the planets but also academic disci- Magister’s Pox: Mending the Gap thinks that academics in general do not write plines. He himself has been badly burned, Between Science and the well, with scientists especially deficient in especially in connection with the controversy Humanities this respect. One of the things that made over E. O. Wilson’s ‘sociobiology’. Wouldn’t by Stephen Jay Gould Gould stand out from his contemporaries everyone benefit if we all worked together and Harmony: 2003. 288 pp. $25.95 was that in general he wrote as well as any the lamb were to lie down with the lion? Published in the UK on 29 May by Jonathan humanist ever has. Young academics in I too like peace and quiet, Cape, £18.99 departments of English are stuck teaching cooperation David Hull courses in remedial writing, just as those of us in departments of philosophy are Stephen Jay Gould’s Rocks of Ages investi- stuck teaching courses in remedial gated the relationship between science and thinking, but neither group is religion. In The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the likely to take much satisfaction Magister’s Pox, published posthumously, from the goal that Gould has Gould turns his attention to the relationship assigned them. between science and the humanities. During Finally, Gould claims the Renaissance, what we now term ‘scien- that those of us in the tists’ were at odds with humanists, whose humanities are charged goal was to recover the wisdom of antiquity, with setting out the proper not to generate new ideas by means of boundaries of all magis- empirical investigation. An appropriate teria, including science. mantra for Renaissance humanist scholars One of the weaknesses of was ‘been there, done that’. When the sciences this book is that Gould cast off the heavy hand of the humanities in does not say enough the Renaissance, a new adversarial attitude about his central notion — took its place. In this book, Gould strives to magisteria — and turning outline a more peaceful, mutually support- to a dictionary does not help. ive view of the relationship between the As far as I can tell, magisteria sciences and the humanities. are something akin to areas of Gould sees three ways in which the expertise shared by groups of humanities can contribute to science. First, experts. About the only characteristic “science needs the humanities to teach us that Gould attributes to magisteria is the quirky and richly subjective side of our that they are non-overlapping. Positivists

810 © 2003 Nature Publishing Group NATURE | VOL 422 | 24 APRIL 2003 | www.nature.com/nature