Alexa's Reviews > Replication: The Jason Experiment

Replication by Jill Williamson
Rate this book
Clear rating

's review
Apr 28, 2012

did not like it
bookshelves: fantasy-sci-fi
Read from April 28 to 29, 2012

Is this book serious? Really, it's not simply Christian fiction. It's laughably inaccurate anti-science propaganda. When one character says that stem cell research isn't unethical, Abby, a main character, dismisses him as an "extremist liberal."

Just to be certain that my Northeastern roots weren't responsible for my having a warped view, I looked it up. Sure enough, the majority of Americans (almost 75%) believe that "scientists should be able to use stem cells for biomedical research." click here for link to article

Meanwhile, the plot, which initially had me hooked, slides into an oversimplified and misleading anti-cloning/anti-stem cell research (it seems to regard the two as parts of the same process) diatribe that rests on the notion that, given the right technology, it would make perfect sense for one scientist to create, raise, educate, feed, house, control, and enslave over 55 clones for the purposes of doing pharmaceutical testing to cure his own personal case of lupus.

Which, given the huge overhead involved in such a secret project, makes perfect sense. Of course.

But it's not just this wildly implausible idea that bothers me. The book is, after all, fiction, and is perfectly within its rights to rest on an unlikely plot. What bothers me is the idea that this scientist, as well as the multiple doctors he hires, would be convinced that, given that they are clones, the 55 Jasons are less than human--so much so, in fact, that it is perfectly reasonable to kill them when they turn 18.

Given that identical twins are, genetically speaking, clones of each other, the idea that a medical doctor or scientist would casually dismiss a clone as being less than human is ludicrous. That such a doctor would only discover the error of his ways after his religious daughter begged him to see the light is equally nutty.

One could argue that, given that this book has a completely different worldview than my own, there is no reason for me to read or review it--just as I would say "live and let live" to people who would ban Harry Potter for promoting the occult. However, since Replication takes great pains to hide the fact that it is religious fiction, and then flagrantly misrepresents the science it is attempting to discredit, it seems fair to point it out.

Since no other reviewers have said it, I'm going to: This book is complete and utter nonsense. It is not simply "not my cup of tea." It is propaganda.
4 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Replication.
Sign In »

Comments (showing 1-3 of 3) (3 new)

dateDown arrow    newest »

Jenny I couldn't agree with you more. I read it and came here to look at the reviews and was shocked at how many people actually liked it. I felt like the whole book was a trick to shove religion down m throat.

message 2: by Perla (new)

Perla The IB Teen Book Blogger I was 1-click away from sending this book to my Kindle, but I happened to see it was published by Zonderkidz and I had to see what really saying about the book. I am forever grateful that you wrote your review. I was afraid that it would only be a vehicle to plant the seed that advanced science is unethical, or monstrous.

Deadlined I agree. I'm a Catholic and therefore a Christian, although many fundamentalist groups would like to disown us. This book is just bad--overbearing, overly simplistic, preachy, junk science, cliché riddled; flat characters. This could have been interesting, but it's just dreadful. A far better YA novel about a similar topic is Neal Shusterman's Unwind. His novel is far more thoughtful, and as a result, (IMO) far more chilling.

back to top