The Double Helix Sparknotes

1495 Words3 Pages

The Double Helix by James D. Watson is a prominent book in the history of science not only for its value as a documentation of an important scientific discovery, but as proof to the ago-old question as to whether or not scientists are, in fact, human. Indeed, caricatures of the lone scientist isolating himself from reality and obsessed with some form of “truth” were prominent in the 1900s. When the book was first published in 1968, it demonstrated that not only were scientists human beings, but they were human beings who understood science to be a group effort and yearned for recognition and glory. That being said, James Watson’s depiction of the world in which he lived is questionable at times, and led to the debate that has continued into …show more content…

He finds comfort away from the eccentricities of Francis Crick and “took great delight in soap bubble models,” illustrating a love of science transcending the need for recognition, which permeated the story. Despite being depicted as a man of with more old-fashioned ideologies, he is still given sufficient credit and pleasure at “the fact that the X-Ray method he had developed… was as the heart of a profound insight into the nature of life…” Maurice Wilkins was the mediator between the scientific genius and the unimpeded excitement and need for recognition which possessed Watson and Crick. Much to Watson’s surprise, upon hearing about their success, “there was not a hint of bitterness in [Wilkins’] voice.” His dedication to biology was untouched by the incessant need for recognition which plagued the minds of Francis Crick and James …show more content…

Watson attempts to make himself relatable to the average reader by claiming, “…not once die I have the faintest trace of a respectable idea” about the genes. His approachability is lost and he begins to alienate readers with his and Crick’s questionable moral standards as they seek answers. They resort to stealing, lying, and manipulating people in order in order to gain access to information. In every instance, some form of defense is provided, leading many to write such behavior off as justifiable in the noble pursuit of science. That being said, many of these injustices are directly related to finding information out first instead of for the purpose of utilizing for the greater good of science. Some see his retelling of his story as admirable as he is whole-heartedly “believing he sees the world true, and ‘telling it like it is.’” Others are not so kind to Honest Jim and feel he has created a “violently exaggerated picture” of the importance of recognition in scientific

Open Document