James Watson The Double Helix

The year of 1968 was an eventful period marked by the incredible and terrible happenings of Vietnam, Prague and Paris, by the rising Black Power within the United States and by the assassinations of two important men, Martin Luther King Jr. and Bobby Kennedy. Amidst this extremely action-packed year (even decade), a publication following fifteen years after the discovery of our human genetic makeup brought an autobiographical account on the event that changed the world. The Double Helix written by molecular biologist and geneticist James D. Watson provides a personal account on the discovery of DNA and its shape as a double helix. A heavily fetishized object within modern society, the findings made by Watson and his colleagues was something

Included in this team of scientists was a man who became one of Watson’s closest friends. Francis Crick was in opposition of the piece and vocalized it plenty of times. The British molecular biologist, neuroscientist and biophysicist helped discover the helical shape but was the most angered by Watson’s approach to sharing the information and how they came to their scientific conclusions concerning DNA. He also believed its portrayal of fellow scientists, would degrade their professionalism. Along with Crick, physicist and molecular biologist Maurice Wilkins, had a firm argument against the book’s publication for similar reasons. Wilkins in a letter to Watson carries on to state that, “The DNA story is not typical of scientific discovery; for one thing it was unusually involved with personal difficulties…[It] would give many people an impression of Francis as a feather-brained hyperthyroid, me an overgentlemanly mug and you an immature exhibitionist!” (Wilkins 1966). This still remains fairly true even after a few revisions were made as Watson likes to focus on the gossip, as if it’s a story even though he claims it as an autobiography. In another letter to Watson on a different revised version, Crick defends Rosalind’s efforts and Wilkins’ disapproval of his depictions by stating, “…The tone used to describe Rosalind’s work in the Epilogue is perfectly reasonable, but contrasts ludicrously with the descriptions of her in the text itself” (Crick 1967). This further illuminates the controversial aspect of Watson’s intention with The Double Helix. Is it really a retelling of the discovery of DNA? Or his made up and 15-year-old