Skip to main content

The Genetic Book of the Dead: Richard Dawkins ****

When someone came up with the title for this book they were probably thinking deep cultural echoes - I suspect I'm not the only Robert Rankin fan in whom it raised a smile instead, thinking of The Suburban Book of the Dead. That aside, this is a glossy and engaging book showing how physical makeup (phenotype), behaviour and more tell us about the past, with the messenger being (inevitably, this being Richard Dawkins) the genes.

Worthy of comment straight away are the illustrations - this is one of the best illustrated science books I've ever come across. Generally illustrations are either an afterthought, or the book is heavily illustrated and the text is really just an accompaniment to the pictures. Here the full colour images tie in directly to the text. They are not asides, but are 'read' with the text by placing them strategically so the picture is directly with the text that refers to it. Many are photographs, though some are effective paintings by Jana Lenzová.

The first half of the book particularly captivated me. Dawkins starts by showing, for example, how the skin patterns of animals from tigers to insects reflect the history of their ancestors in terms of location, with some stunning examples of concealment. He goes on to take us through, for example, the tortuous evolutionary route that led to the tortoise and to the songs of birds. Perhaps my favourite part of all is the chapter on cuckoos and how members the same species can lay totally different looking eggs to fit with the host the specific female line tends to parasitise - and why the host birds can end up feeding a chick far larger than itself without hesitation.

Some of the later parts of the book are less immediately attractive because they are more about genetic history that does not have the same visual impact, so it becomes less of an illustrated book - and what comes through is more technical and less on the clear impact we can directly experience.

This is a book that continues Dawkins' long time assertion that organisms are vehicles for genes to replicate, hence his original bestseller The Selfish Gene. No one working in the field doubts the importance of genes, but there is now a considerable backlash against the intense focus on the genome, as typified by the 'new biology' described in Philip Ball's How Life Works. Given that Dawkins dedicates a whole chapter to attacking the idea that organisms use genes, rather genes using organisms, but doesn't really take on the idea that the genome is just one of many systems in the body that impact how life develops, and so will have an impact on where a particular animal 'comes from' (the focus of this book), it does make Dawkins look distinctly on the defensive.

To an outsider, it feels as if that Dawkins is in a similar position to that of many physicists at the end of the 19th and start of the 20th century. They struggled with discovering that the physical world is far more complex than had been assumed. Similarly, those for whom genetics is as central to their understanding of life, as is the case with Dawkins, may well be feeling that this 'new biology' is a challenge to fight against, despite it seeming likely to be the correct path forward.

This being the case, this book is interesting for two reasons. One is the fascinating illustration of the legacy current species have from their ancestors past environment and lives, driven certainly significantly by genetics. And the other is the philosophy (or possibly sociology) of science aspect of seeing how a potential Kuhnian paradigm shift impacts the old believers.

Hardback:   
Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee:
Review by Brian Clegg - See all Brian's online articles or subscribe to a weekly email free here
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...
Post a Comment
Read more