Reviews from Amazon

The Single Helix

The Single Helix is a compilation of Jones' weekly 'View from the lab' articles in the Daily Telegraph, which provide an amusing look at aspects of scientific life. There is plenty relating to biology in general and genetics in particular, such as the strange names given to new genes and indeed to new species of animals. However there are also essays on many other subjects such as the representation of shadows in art, and the best system for voting.

Now one is naturally tempted to measure this work against the essays of the other Steve J - Gould that is, (who, it has to be said, had a whole month to write each of his articles) and I would say that they don't really compare - but maybe they're not meant to.

Firstly the essays are short. Now 1000 word articles are OK in their place, but one of the advantages of a book is that arguments can be developed more fully. Secondly Jones is writing about a variety of subjects, which means that he won't have done much research for each article. Thus one is never quite sure about the accuracy of what is written and there are no references to follow up on things that take your interest. So I would say that this book is OK for a bit of light reading, but not if you want something which will really capture your interest.

Amazon.com info

Hardcover 336 pages
ISBN: 0316731935
Salesrank: 2307746
Weight:0.93 lbs

Published: 2005 Little, Brown Book Group

Amazon price $24.95

Marketplace:New from $15.73:Used from $12.88

Buy from Amazon.com

Amazon.co.uk info

Hardcover 336 pages
ISBN: 0316731935
Salesrank: 196407
Weight:0.93 lbs

Published: 2005 Little, Brown

Amazon price £9.09

Marketplace:New from £2.99:Used from £2.44

Buy from Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.ca info

Hardcover 336 pages
ISBN: 0316731935
Salesrank: 603697
Weight:0.93 lbs

Published: 2005 Little Brown

Amazon price CDN$ 18.90

Marketplace:New from CDN$ 16.40:Used from CDN$ 13.72

Buy from Amazon.ca

Product Description
Steve Jones’ barnstorming survey is science writing at its best, veering nimbly from the chemistry of gold to the failures of funding, the chaos in the heavens to the fight against creationism, the optical illusions of tartan plaid to the mathematics of elections. Witty and packed with human interest, it also features interviews with playwrights, poets, and film directors, along with plenty on the Double Helix and the author’s own specialty, the Snail Helix. In a hundred succinct pieces, he reveals the extraordinary breadth and the profound shallowness of scientific knowledge. Educational and entertaining, this is a brilliant meditation on modern science.

Product Description

Steve Jones’ barnstorming survey is science writing at its best, veering nimbly from the chemistry of gold to the failures of funding, the chaos in the heavens to the fight against creationism, the optical illusions of tartan plaid to the mathematics of elections. Witty and packed with human interest, it also features interviews with playwrights, poets, and film directors, along with plenty on the Double Helix and the author’s own specialty, the Snail Helix. In a hundred succinct pieces, he reveals the extraordinary breadth and the profound shallowness of scientific knowledge. Educational and entertaining, this is a brilliant meditation on modern science.

A disappointment **
This is a collection of short essays previously published in the Daily Telegraph. Jones is a biologist who has worked with snails. Being a snail biologist myself, I was excited when I first heard about this book. Alas, these essays are too superficial and too tied in with contemporary occasions to have much lasting value. Any scientific insight is almost non-existent. And despite the cover photo, only a few have anything to do with snails. In the preface Dr. Jones writes: "On looking back I am depressed to see how many of those columns [in the Daily Telegraph] were devoted to carping, the age-old prerogative of the academic, with complaints about cash mixed with generalised ill will. Such grumbles soon become dull and none has made it to this book." I think many made it to this book.

A disappointment **

This is a collection of short essays previously published in the Daily Telegraph. Jones is a biologist who has worked with snails. Being a snail biologist myself, I was excited when I first heard about this book. Alas, these essays are too superficial and too tied in with contemporary occasions to have much lasting value. Any scientific insight is almost non-existent. And despite the cover photo, only a few have anything to do with snails. In the preface Dr. Jones writes: "On looking back I am depressed to see how many of those columns [in the Daily Telegraph] were devoted to carping, the age-old prerogative of the academic, with complaints about cash mixed with generalised ill will. Such grumbles soon become dull and none has made it to this book." I think many made it to this book.

The bad news and the good news ****
The bad news is that this book deals with such a wide and varied set of topics, that it's impossible to categorise it. The good news is that Jones presents each subject so well and with such enthusiasm that it's a delightful read. You may read it front to back, the reverse, or purely at random. Such is the nature of a book of selected essays on the wonders of nature and the methods of studying them. Sifting through his columns in Britain's "Daily Telegraph" to select merely a hundred must have been a daunting task, but Jones managed it admirably. As the publisher's blurb declaims, it's "a hundred easy pieces about science". They fail to mention each one is a treat to encounter. Jones has a string of excellent books to his credit: "Almost Like A Whale" ["Darwin's Ghost" in the US] and "Y-The Descent of Men" being among the better known. He knows how to write to an informed and interested audience. He's so good at it that he's won a medal for "increasing public knowledge of science". The title derives from his work on snails and the notoriety gained by James Watson's account of the revelation of DNA's structure. Although Jones' own field is biology, he's able to venture into other disciplines in this collection. Even history is probed for unusual information - the "Telemobiloskop" is certain to gain your attention at the next cocktail party. For a biologist - and a malacologist at that, it might seem out of place for Jones to dabble in astrophysics or physics itself, yet he manages it with panache. In today's world, however, genetics plays too significant a role to be passed over lightly, and Jones provides several excellent items on the topic. Applying a sense of irony and humour throughout these pages, Jones easily dispels the image of the dour scientist. He's not above examining his own mistakes, even while depicting critics as "vultures drawn to carrion". Nobody "peer reviews" books on science aimed at the general public, and things slip by. His discussion of errors he made in "Almost Like a Whale" is accompanied by his views on evolutionary psychology. In the process, he reminds us that we're a social species, and must tread lightly in making generalisations about how that situation is manifested in science writing. It would have been nice if Jones had avoided the lure one scientist-essayist fell prey to. Instead of baseball, however, at one point Jones deals with the national sport of his own. The axes he has to grind are kept strictly associated with science. A highly readable, entertaining and useful book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

The bad news and the good news ****

The bad news is that this book deals with such a wide and varied set of topics, that it's impossible to categorise it. The good news is that Jones presents each subject so well and with such enthusiasm that it's a delightful read. You may read it front to back, the reverse, or purely at random. Such is the nature of a book of selected essays on the wonders of nature and the methods of studying them. Sifting through his columns in Britain's "Daily Telegraph" to select merely a hundred must have been a daunting task, but Jones managed it admirably. As the publisher's blurb declaims, it's "a hundred easy pieces about science". They fail to mention each one is a treat to encounter.

Jones has a string of excellent books to his credit: "Almost Like A Whale" ["Darwin's Ghost" in the US] and "Y-The Descent of Men" being among the better known. He knows how to write to an informed and interested audience. He's so good at it that he's won a medal for "increasing public knowledge of science". The title derives from his work on snails and the notoriety gained by James Watson's account of the revelation of DNA's structure. Although Jones' own field is biology, he's able to venture into other disciplines in this collection. Even history is probed for unusual information - the "Telemobiloskop" is certain to gain your attention at the next cocktail party. For a biologist - and a malacologist at that, it might seem out of place for Jones to dabble in astrophysics or physics itself, yet he manages it with panache. In today's world, however, genetics plays too significant a role to be passed over lightly, and Jones provides several excellent items on the topic.

Applying a sense of irony and humour throughout these pages, Jones easily dispels the image of the dour scientist. He's not above examining his own mistakes, even while depicting critics as "vultures drawn to carrion". Nobody "peer reviews" books on science aimed at the general public, and things slip by. His discussion of errors he made in "Almost Like a Whale" is accompanied by his views on evolutionary psychology. In the process, he reminds us that we're a social species, and must tread lightly in making generalisations about how that situation is manifested in science writing. It would have been nice if Jones had avoided the lure one scientist-essayist fell prey to. Instead of baseball, however, at one point Jones deals with the national sport of his own. The axes he has to grind are kept strictly associated with science. A highly readable, entertaining and useful book. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

So - so ***
The idea of simply collecting and transferring Steve Jones' newspaper column into a book doesn't work and is pretty lazy. Because of the space constraints placed on newspaper articles, most end just as they are getting interesting. The format could have been improved, I feel, by taking fewer articles and using the extra room afforded by a book to expand and investigate them in more detail.

So - so ***

The idea of simply collecting and transferring Steve Jones' newspaper column into a book doesn't work and is pretty lazy. Because of the space constraints placed on newspaper articles, most end just as they are getting interesting. The format could have been improved, I feel, by taking fewer articles and using the extra room afforded by a book to expand and investigate them in more detail.

could do better ***
I was disappointed with this collection of reprinted articles. One of the themes that runs through the book is that artists, writers, printers, TV shows etc regularly misinterpret science either through ignorance or to further their own purposes, much to the chagrin of the good professor. I don't know very much about science but I do know that the author of Frankenstein was Shelley's wife, not his sister (page 41). On page 213 we are told that "Peter the Great detested facial hair so much he shaved his nobles himself". Here a historical fact is taken and distorted to such an extent that its real meaning is lost, merely to serve the journalistic interests of the author. On the same page you find the ancient Egyptian Queen Matshrpdont. Try putting her into Google and see how many results you get. The problem for me was that I spotted enough inaccuracies about the things I knew, to start to doubt the things that I was being told of which I didn't know. He is an easy read though, and just needs a better editor

could do better ***

I was disappointed with this collection of reprinted articles. One of the themes that runs through the book is that artists, writers, printers, TV shows etc regularly misinterpret science either through ignorance or to further their own purposes, much to the chagrin of the good professor.

I don't know very much about science but I do know that the author of Frankenstein was Shelley's wife, not his sister (page 41). On page 213 we are told that "Peter the Great detested facial hair so much he shaved his nobles himself". Here a historical fact is taken and distorted to such an extent that its real meaning is lost, merely to serve the journalistic interests of the author. On the same page you find the ancient Egyptian Queen Matshrpdont. Try putting her into Google and see how many results you get.

The problem for me was that I spotted enough inaccuracies about the things I knew, to start to doubt the things that I was being told of which I didn't know.

He is an easy read though, and just needs a better editor

Interesting, but Marred by Inaccuracies ***
This book should be seen as opinions rather than facts. While it does present many concepts in digestible 3 page format for the layman, the author is tripped up by his own misunderstandings. The most glaring error is his presentation of an April Fool Hoax as fact (changing the value of pi to 3). More subtle, but equally inaccurate, was his analysis of cat genetics. For someone apparently trying to debunk false beliefs and demystify scientific ideas, Jones manages to propagate a few false beliefs himself. When scientists write outside of their usual field they should seek expert reviewers. While an interesting book, it's the mistakes and the laughable perpetuation of urban legend/hoax that spoil it for me.

Interesting, but Marred by Inaccuracies ***

This book should be seen as opinions rather than facts. While it does present many concepts in digestible 3 page format for the layman, the author is tripped up by his own misunderstandings. The most glaring error is his presentation of an April Fool Hoax as fact (changing the value of pi to 3). More subtle, but equally inaccurate, was his analysis of cat genetics. For someone apparently trying to debunk false beliefs and demystify scientific ideas, Jones manages to propagate a few false beliefs himself.

When scientists write outside of their usual field they should seek expert reviewers. While an interesting book, it's the mistakes and the laughable perpetuation of urban legend/hoax that spoil it for me.

Single helix ***
This is a strangely dissatisfying read, which is a real shame as Jones is an excellent author and i've enjoyed many of his other books. The problem with this book is that each essay is adapted from his newspaper column and therefore the topics are varied, but are not explored in any real depth. You find yourself just getting interested and the essay has finished. Also, each essay is very aimless, the facts that make it up are fascinating and leave you marveling at nature and the wonder of science, but they don't lead anywhere and very few essays seems to make a worthy/satisfactory point. All of this is a real shame, as this book is written in Jones usual clear and entertaining style, but I'd say this is a book for popular science beginners and not one for those who have read and enjoyed past Jones books, or other popular science books. A great premise, but it could've delivered so much more.

Single helix ***

This is a strangely dissatisfying read, which is a real shame as Jones is an excellent author and i've enjoyed many of his other books. The problem with this book is that each essay is adapted from his newspaper column and therefore the topics are varied, but are not explored in any real depth. You find yourself just getting interested and the essay has finished. Also, each essay is very aimless, the facts that make it up are fascinating and leave you marveling at nature and the wonder of science, but they don't lead anywhere and very few essays seems to make a worthy/satisfactory point. All of this is a real shame, as this book is written in Jones usual clear and entertaining style, but I'd say this is a book for popular science beginners and not one for those who have read and enjoyed past Jones books, or other popular science books. A great premise, but it could've delivered so much more.