Candid, provocative, and disarming, this is the widely-praised memoir of the co-discoverer of the double helix of DNA.
What Mad Pursuit
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more
 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Browse the best books of summer including blockbusters, beach reads, and editors' picks in our Summer Reading Store. |
Book Description
Frequently Bought Together
Editorial Reviews
From Publishers Weekly
Crick's co-discovery of the double-helix structure of DNA (for which he shared a Nobel Prize with James Watson and Maurice Wilkins) was a maddening pursuit beset with false ideas, sloppy models, inconclusive results and fiascos. This will not come as news to readers of Watson's 1968 bestseller The Double Helix. Part memoir, part scientific primer, Crick's gracefully written reminiscence is more concerned with elucidating the intuitive leaps, feats of intellectual courage and perceptual skills that underlie the act of scientific discovery. Writing about his own career with uncommon modesty, he describes his current research into human consciousness and neuroanatomy; brain science of the 1980s, he concludes, is much like molecular biology of the '30s: the major questions remain largely unanswered. One wishes Crick were less reticent about his personal life. His occasional technical forays here into natural selection, the deciphering of the genetic code and theories of perception illuminate how science works. Illustrations.
Copyright 1988 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Copyright 1988 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
From School Library Journal
YA Crick and Jim Watson received the 1962 Nobel Prize for their discovery of the double helix structure of the DNA molecule. Here, Crick details his early training as a physicist; explains how he came to be at Cambridge studying X-ray crystallography; and shows his great respect for other scientists such as Linus Pauling, Sir Lawrence Bragg, Max Perutz, and Sidney Brenner. The writing is clear and straightforward, even when the renderings become technical. The appendixes elaborate further on the detailed biochemistry of the subject. Crick relates both the problems and the successes that he and Watson incurred in their "mad pursuit" of the mysteries within the DNA molecule. He concludes this volume with a discussion of his work at the Salk Institute in California. A shorter version of Crick's life and work appears in Lewis Wolpert and Alison Richards' Passion for Science (Oxford, 1988), but the longer version will be of interest to more persistent students.Robyn Cook Schuster, Episcopal High School, Bellaire, Tex.
Copyright 1989 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Copyright 1989 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
More About the Author
Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.
Customer Reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
19 of 20 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
At first, I was reluctant about reading this book. What on earth could Francis Crick add to the story of the discovery of the double helix, that had not yet been told by his colleague, James Watson, in his famous book "The Double Helix"? A lot, as it turns out. In fact, the two books rarely overlap. Whereas Watson's book mainly relates his experiences as they worked their way towards discovery, Crick does what he does best: making comments. Also, Crick's book doesn't stop at the discovery of the double helix structure of DNA, as Watson's book does, but continues with the cracking of the genetic code.
Crick's book was written twenty years after Watson's book, and it shows. Watson's book contains a fresh story, the raw material out of which history is shaped. Crick's tale is a digested one: written after all the confusion of the moment had cleared up.
13 of 15 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
+++++
THIS book, by Dr. Francis Crick (June 1916 to July 2004), is partly an autobiography and partly a science book. As for the science part, Crick elaborates:
"I have written [this book] both for my fellow scientists and for the general public [and] believe a [non-scientist] can easily understand most of what I discuss...My advice to the reader, should he or she become stuck in...a [difficult, scientific] passage, is either to persevere or to skip to the next chapter. Most of the book is fairly easy. Don't give up hope just because a few paragraphs seem a little hard to follow."
What, then, is the purpose of this book? Crick tells the reader:
"The main purpose of this book is to set out some of my experiences before and during the classical period of molecular biology, which stretched from the discovery of the DNA double helix in 1953 till about 1966 when the genetic code...was finally elucidated."
(Molecular biology is a branch of biology that studies the chemical and physical principles associated with the composition, properties, and activities of molecules in living cells. The genetic code is the dictionary relating the nucleic acid {such as DNA and RNA} language to the protein language.)
Crick achieves his purpose admirably! He gives us an overview of his main, personal experiences and reveals his thoughts at each period in his life. I especially enjoyed his chapter entitled "The Gossip Test" and his memories about the "RNA Tie Club."
I found the science part especially well done. He explains the science that led up to the discovery of DNA's structure but goes beyond this, explaining such things as the different types of RNA, protein structure, the genetic code, and theory in molecular biology. Everything is well explained and there are many helpful diagrams.
Be aware that Crick decided not to give character sketches of his friends and colleagues especially James Watson (born: 1928), Maurice Wilkins (1916 to 2004), Rosalind Franklin (1920 to 1958) and Linus Pauling (1901 to 1994). In other words, he chose not to include "juicy" gossip in his book. I found this refreshing since I found that in reading other books similar to this one that such character sketches can be distracting to the main essence of the book.
This book does not conclude in the year 1966 since Crick includes a final, long epilogue chapter entitled "My Later Years." This chapter is especially interesting as we are told how he moved on to the field of embryology or developmental biology to become involved generally in human brain science and more specifically in human consciousness. I found his theory of "panspermia" (that "is the idea that microorganisms drifted to the Earth through space and seeded all life on Earth") most interesting.
This book has two excellent appendices that resemble a small course in basic genetics. I found these to be well written.
Included near the middle of the book are over twenty black and white photographs. My favorite is Crick with Wilkins and Watson (as well as famous others like John Steinbeck) at the 1962 Nobel Prize Ceremony.
Finally, my only problem occurs on the inside back flap of the book's dust cover. It says the Crick "shared a Nobel Prize with...Watson and...Wilkins in 1962 for the discovery of the double helix of DNA." Not true! According to the official Nobel Prize internet site, they shared the prize "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structures of nucleic acid and its significance for information transfer in living material."
In conclusion, if you want to know about the life and brilliant intellect of a "genius of modern science," then you have to read this book!!
(first published 1988; acknowledgements; introduction; 14 chapters; photo inserts; main narrative 165 pages; 2 appendices; index)
+++++
THIS book, by Dr. Francis Crick (June 1916 to July 2004), is partly an autobiography and partly a science book. As for the science part, Crick elaborates:
"I have written [this book] both for my fellow scientists and for the general public [and] believe a [non-scientist] can easily understand most of what I discuss...My advice to the reader, should he or she become stuck in...a [difficult, scientific] passage, is either to persevere or to skip to the next chapter. Most of the book is fairly easy. Don't give up hope just because a few paragraphs seem a little hard to follow."
What, then, is the purpose of this book? Crick tells the reader:
"The main purpose of this book is to set out some of my experiences before and during the classical period of molecular biology, which stretched from the discovery of the DNA double helix in 1953 till about 1966 when the genetic code...was finally elucidated."
(Molecular biology is a branch of biology that studies the chemical and physical principles associated with the composition, properties, and activities of molecules in living cells. The genetic code is the dictionary relating the nucleic acid {such as DNA and RNA} language to the protein language.)
Crick achieves his purpose admirably! He gives us an overview of his main, personal experiences and reveals his thoughts at each period in his life. I especially enjoyed his chapter entitled "The Gossip Test" and his memories about the "RNA Tie Club."
I found the science part especially well done. He explains the science that led up to the discovery of DNA's structure but goes beyond this, explaining such things as the different types of RNA, protein structure, the genetic code, and theory in molecular biology. Everything is well explained and there are many helpful diagrams.
Be aware that Crick decided not to give character sketches of his friends and colleagues especially James Watson (born: 1928), Maurice Wilkins (1916 to 2004), Rosalind Franklin (1920 to 1958) and Linus Pauling (1901 to 1994). In other words, he chose not to include "juicy" gossip in his book. I found this refreshing since I found that in reading other books similar to this one that such character sketches can be distracting to the main essence of the book.
This book does not conclude in the year 1966 since Crick includes a final, long epilogue chapter entitled "My Later Years." This chapter is especially interesting as we are told how he moved on to the field of embryology or developmental biology to become involved generally in human brain science and more specifically in human consciousness. I found his theory of "panspermia" (that "is the idea that microorganisms drifted to the Earth through space and seeded all life on Earth") most interesting.
This book has two excellent appendices that resemble a small course in basic genetics. I found these to be well written.
Included near the middle of the book are over twenty black and white photographs. My favorite is Crick with Wilkins and Watson (as well as famous others like John Steinbeck) at the 1962 Nobel Prize Ceremony.
Finally, my only problem occurs on the inside back flap of the book's dust cover. It says the Crick "shared a Nobel Prize with...Watson and...Wilkins in 1962 for the discovery of the double helix of DNA." Not true! According to the official Nobel Prize internet site, they shared the prize "for their discoveries concerning the molecular structures of nucleic acid and its significance for information transfer in living material."
In conclusion, if you want to know about the life and brilliant intellect of a "genius of modern science," then you have to read this book!!
(first published 1988; acknowledgements; introduction; 14 chapters; photo inserts; main narrative 165 pages; 2 appendices; index)
+++++
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
As much as I enjoyed the recap of Francis Crick's and James Watson's unravelling of the structure of DNA I focussed on the wisdom of his musings about the attempted avoidance of error. Excerpts are quoted below:
Page 16 "I've known a lot of people more stupid than you who have made a success of it."
P 24 "Even a cursory look at the world of living things shows its immense variety."
"The second property of almost all living things is their complexity."
P59 "The failure on the part of my colleagues to discover the alpha helix made a deep impression on Jim Watson and me. Because of it I argued that it was important not to place too much reliance on any single piece of experimental evidence. It might turn out to be misleading".
"Jim was a little more brash, stating that no good model ever accounted for all the facts, since some data was bound to be misleading if not plain wrong. A theory that did fit all the data would have been 'carpentered' to do this and would thus be open to suspicion."
p65 "Our first attempt at a model was a fiasco".
P67 "What was important was not the way it was discovered but the object discovered - the structure of DNA itself. You can see this by comparing it with almost any other scientific discovery. Misleading data, false ideas, problems of personal relationships occur in much if not all scientific work."
P70 "In solving scientific problems of this type, it is almost impossible to avoid falling into error."
"Now, to obtain the correct solution to a problem, usually requires a sequence of logical steps. If one of these is a mistake, the answer is often hidden, since the error usually puts one completely on the wrong track. It is therefore extremely important not to be trapped by one's mistaken ideas. The advantage of intellectual cooperation is that it helps jolt one out of false assumptions."
P109 "The best a theorist can hope to do is to point an experimentalist in the right direction, and this is often best done by suggesting what directions to avoid. If one has little hope of arriving, unaided, at the correct theory, then it is more useful to suggest which class of theories are unlikely to be true, using some general argument about what is known of the nature of the system."
P113 "It is all too easy to make some plausible simplifying assumptions, do some elaborate mathematics that appear to give a rough fit with at least some experimental data, and think one has achieved something. The chance of such an approach doing anything useful, apart from soothing the theorist's ego, is rather small, and especially so in biology. Moreover I have found, to my surprise, that most theorists do not appreciate the difference between a model and a demonstration, often mistaking the latter for the former.
In my terminology, a 'demonstration' is a 'don't worry' theory. That is, it does not pretend to approximate to the right answer, but it shows at least a theory of that general type can be constructed."
P115 "I cannot help thinking that so many of the 'models' of the brain that are inflicted on us are mainly produced because their authors love playing with computers and writing computer programs and are simply carried away when a computer produces a pretty result. They hardly seem to care whether the brain actually uses the devices incorporated in their 'model'.
A good model in biology, then, not only should address the problem in hand but if at all possible should serve to unite evidence from several different approaches so that various sorts of tests can be made of it."
P139 "Physics is also different because its results can be expressed in powerful, deep, and often counterintuitive general laws. There is really nothing in biology that corresponds to special and general relativity, or quantum electrodynamics, or even such simple conservation laws as those of Newtonian mechanics: the conservation of energy, of momentum, and of angular momentum. Biology has its "laws," such as those of Mendelian genetics, but they are often only rather broad generalizations, with significant exceptions to them. The laws of physics, it is believed, are the same everywhere in the universe. This is unlikely to be true of biology. We have no idea how similar extra-terrestrial biology (if it exists) is to our own. We may certainly consider it likely that it too will be governed by natural selection, or something rather like it, but even this is only a plausible guess.
What are found in biology are mechanisms, mechanisms built with chemical components and that are often modified by other, later mechanisms added to the earlier ones. While Occam's razor is a useful tool in the physical sciences, it can be a very dangerous implement in biology. It is thus very rash to use simplicity and elegance as a guide in biological research. While DNA could be claimed to be both simple and elegant, it must be remembered that DNA almost certainly originated fairly close to the origin of life when things were necessarily simple or they could not have got going.
Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved. It might be thought, therefore, that evolutionary arguments would play a large part in guiding biological research, but this is far from the case. It is difficult enough to study what is happening now. To try to figure out what happened in evolution is even more difficult. Thus evolutionary arguments can usefully be used as hints to suggest possible lines of research, but it is highly dangerous to trust them too much."
P141 " The principal error I see in most current theoretical work is that of imagining that a theory is really a good model for a particular natural mechanism rather than being merely a demonstration - a "don't worry" theory. Theorists almost always become too fond of their own ideas, often simply by living with them for so long. It is difficult to believe that one's cherished theory, which really works rather nicely in some respects, may be completely false.
The basic trouble is that nature is so complex that many quite different theories can go some way to explaining the results. lf elegance and simplicity are, in biology, dangerous guides to the correct answer, what constraints can be used as a guide through the jungle of possible theories? It seems to me that the only really useful constraints are contained in the experimental evidence. Even this information is not without its hazards since, as we have seen, experimental facts are often misleading or even plain wrong. It is thus not sufficient to have a rough acquaintance with the experimental evidence. But rather a deep and critical knowledge of many different types of evidence is required, since one never knows what type of fact is likely to give the game away."
Page 16 "I've known a lot of people more stupid than you who have made a success of it."
P 24 "Even a cursory look at the world of living things shows its immense variety."
"The second property of almost all living things is their complexity."
P59 "The failure on the part of my colleagues to discover the alpha helix made a deep impression on Jim Watson and me. Because of it I argued that it was important not to place too much reliance on any single piece of experimental evidence. It might turn out to be misleading".
"Jim was a little more brash, stating that no good model ever accounted for all the facts, since some data was bound to be misleading if not plain wrong. A theory that did fit all the data would have been 'carpentered' to do this and would thus be open to suspicion."
p65 "Our first attempt at a model was a fiasco".
P67 "What was important was not the way it was discovered but the object discovered - the structure of DNA itself. You can see this by comparing it with almost any other scientific discovery. Misleading data, false ideas, problems of personal relationships occur in much if not all scientific work."
P70 "In solving scientific problems of this type, it is almost impossible to avoid falling into error."
"Now, to obtain the correct solution to a problem, usually requires a sequence of logical steps. If one of these is a mistake, the answer is often hidden, since the error usually puts one completely on the wrong track. It is therefore extremely important not to be trapped by one's mistaken ideas. The advantage of intellectual cooperation is that it helps jolt one out of false assumptions."
P109 "The best a theorist can hope to do is to point an experimentalist in the right direction, and this is often best done by suggesting what directions to avoid. If one has little hope of arriving, unaided, at the correct theory, then it is more useful to suggest which class of theories are unlikely to be true, using some general argument about what is known of the nature of the system."
P113 "It is all too easy to make some plausible simplifying assumptions, do some elaborate mathematics that appear to give a rough fit with at least some experimental data, and think one has achieved something. The chance of such an approach doing anything useful, apart from soothing the theorist's ego, is rather small, and especially so in biology. Moreover I have found, to my surprise, that most theorists do not appreciate the difference between a model and a demonstration, often mistaking the latter for the former.
In my terminology, a 'demonstration' is a 'don't worry' theory. That is, it does not pretend to approximate to the right answer, but it shows at least a theory of that general type can be constructed."
P115 "I cannot help thinking that so many of the 'models' of the brain that are inflicted on us are mainly produced because their authors love playing with computers and writing computer programs and are simply carried away when a computer produces a pretty result. They hardly seem to care whether the brain actually uses the devices incorporated in their 'model'.
A good model in biology, then, not only should address the problem in hand but if at all possible should serve to unite evidence from several different approaches so that various sorts of tests can be made of it."
P139 "Physics is also different because its results can be expressed in powerful, deep, and often counterintuitive general laws. There is really nothing in biology that corresponds to special and general relativity, or quantum electrodynamics, or even such simple conservation laws as those of Newtonian mechanics: the conservation of energy, of momentum, and of angular momentum. Biology has its "laws," such as those of Mendelian genetics, but they are often only rather broad generalizations, with significant exceptions to them. The laws of physics, it is believed, are the same everywhere in the universe. This is unlikely to be true of biology. We have no idea how similar extra-terrestrial biology (if it exists) is to our own. We may certainly consider it likely that it too will be governed by natural selection, or something rather like it, but even this is only a plausible guess.
What are found in biology are mechanisms, mechanisms built with chemical components and that are often modified by other, later mechanisms added to the earlier ones. While Occam's razor is a useful tool in the physical sciences, it can be a very dangerous implement in biology. It is thus very rash to use simplicity and elegance as a guide in biological research. While DNA could be claimed to be both simple and elegant, it must be remembered that DNA almost certainly originated fairly close to the origin of life when things were necessarily simple or they could not have got going.
Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved. It might be thought, therefore, that evolutionary arguments would play a large part in guiding biological research, but this is far from the case. It is difficult enough to study what is happening now. To try to figure out what happened in evolution is even more difficult. Thus evolutionary arguments can usefully be used as hints to suggest possible lines of research, but it is highly dangerous to trust them too much."
P141 " The principal error I see in most current theoretical work is that of imagining that a theory is really a good model for a particular natural mechanism rather than being merely a demonstration - a "don't worry" theory. Theorists almost always become too fond of their own ideas, often simply by living with them for so long. It is difficult to believe that one's cherished theory, which really works rather nicely in some respects, may be completely false.
The basic trouble is that nature is so complex that many quite different theories can go some way to explaining the results. lf elegance and simplicity are, in biology, dangerous guides to the correct answer, what constraints can be used as a guide through the jungle of possible theories? It seems to me that the only really useful constraints are contained in the experimental evidence. Even this information is not without its hazards since, as we have seen, experimental facts are often misleading or even plain wrong. It is thus not sufficient to have a rough acquaintance with the experimental evidence. But rather a deep and critical knowledge of many different types of evidence is required, since one never knows what type of fact is likely to give the game away."
Most Recent Customer Reviews
5.0 out of 5 stars
Good Read!
Easy to read book, with a great scientific story!
Parallels James Watson's The Double Helix almost perfectly with a new side of the discovery
Parallels James Watson's The Double Helix almost perfectly with a new side of the discovery
Published 3 days ago by Scottyknows
4.0 out of 5 stars
People behind the discovery
I've always been interested in the stories and scientists behind grand scientific discoveries. Everything seems so glamorous and magical on the news and in the textbooks. Read more
Published on January 9, 2003 by Audiaa
4.0 out of 5 stars
An amazing travel in science
I am a graduate student in neuroscience and a book by crick was not without any expectations for me. Read more
Published on July 25, 2000 by Kamal Sharma
4.0 out of 5 stars
Very good book.
This book is a very good background to Francis Crick's life. He led a very interesting life and he does a hell of a job describing it. Read more
Published on March 5, 1998
Citations (learn more)
This book cites 23
books:
See all 23 books this book cites
69
books
cite this book:
See all 69 books citing this book
- The Blind Watchmaker (Penguin science) by Richard Dawkins in Front Matter, and page 28
- The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA by James D. Watson on page 80, and page 116
- The Double Helix by James D. Watson on page 80, and page 116
- Probability of God by Hugh Montefiore on page 29
- On the Origin of Species (Penguin Classics) by Charles Darwin on page 25
See all 23 books this book cites
- The Road to Stockholm: Nobel Prizes, Science, and Scientists by István Hargittai on 4 pages
- Inside Story: DNA to RNA to Protein (History) by Jan A. Witkowski on page 251, page 354, and Back Matter
- Acid Tongues and Tranquil Dreamers: Eight Scientific Rivalries That Changed the World by Michael White in Back Matter (1), and Back Matter (2)
- Correcting the Blueprint of Life: An Historical Account of the Discovery of DNA Repair Mechanisms (History) by Errol C. Friedberg on page 49, and Back Matter
- Designs on Nature: Science and Democracy in Europe and the United States by Sheila Jasanoff in Back Matter (1), and Back Matter (2)
See all 69 books citing this book
