News

Cambridge Residents Slam Council Proposal to Delay Bike Lane Construction

News

‘Gender-Affirming Slay Fest’: Harvard College QSA Hosts Annual Queer Prom

News

‘Not Being Nerds’: Harvard Students Dance to Tinashe at Yardfest

News

Wrongful Death Trial Against CAMHS Employee Over 2015 Student Suicide To Begin Tuesday

News

Cornel West, Harvard Affiliates Call for University to Divest from ‘Israeli Apartheid’ at Rally

Integrity, Intrigue, and Infighting in the World of Science

By Kevin Zhou, Contributing Writer

Earlier this year, internationally-acclaimed South Korean scientist Hwang Woo Suk was found to have deliberately fabricated scientific data. Although he claimed to have made breakthroughs in stem cell research, an independent investigation discovered that his work was riddled with lies. In an instant, the national hero became a national disgrace.

Allegra S. Goodman ’89 writes about a similar deceit in her novel “Intuition,” which, coincidentally, was published around the same time the Hwang scandal broke out. Setting her story in a lab at the fictitious Philpot Institute in Cambridge, Goodman—whose first book of short stories, “Total Immersion,” was published the year she graduated from Harvard—chronicles the meteoric rise of a young scientist who falls victim to a poisonous cloud of suspicion over his research. While the novel can be engaging and will evoke a few chuckles, the storyline is often unclear and frustrating for the reader to follow.

The book is heavily shaped by the dialogue between and thoughts of each individual character. At the beginning, Cliff, one of the lab’s dashing young scientists, believes he has achieved a scientific breakthrough when a virus he injects into cancer-ridden mice surpisingly shrinks tumors. However, the entire lab soon falls under a cloud of suspicion when Robin, his girlfriend, begins to question the validity of his work. As the lab transitions from a period of jubilation to embarrassment, each character’s behavior is candidly relayed by Goodman, shedding light on a rarely-seen dimension of the scientific world.

The characters are often juxtaposed to reveal the dualities that exist within the scientific world, sometimes fueled by overwhelming outside pressure. Sandy Glass, one of the directors, brilliantly raises funds for the lab, but his “motives were not entirely pure.” Marion Mendelsohn, the other director, masterfully grooms the young incoming scientists, but is too conservative and very seldom takes any risks. Robin is an ambitious scientist derailed by her obsession with trying to dig up evidence against Cliff, and Cliff is an obsessed scientist derailed by his ambition.

Given the integral role that the characters play in the development of the novel, it is somewhat disappointing that they do not live up to the reader’s expectations. While the characters’ quirks are entertaining, it is often difficult to understand or even sympathize with them.

Cliff comes across as an attention-monger who appears more concerned about his image in newspapers than his own lab tests. And Robin comes across as a spoiled brat who only blows the whistle because she has an axe to grind with her ex. The characters’ antics sometimes go beyond the strange into the bizarre. While walking along the Charles River, the Stanford-educated Cliff comes up with a “profound idea” to “walk across the river.” He soon discovers that his idea isn’t so profound.

At times, it is hard to tell just where Goodman is going with the novel. The government opens a prolonged investigation into Cliff’s work after Robin provides them with compromising information. Congress is dragged into the fray as well, with members of the lab testifying before a subcommittee.

The result? Well, nothing really.

The Philpott Institute wins the appeal, and it is not reprimanded for its shoddy procedures.

All of the lab’s scientists emerge relatively unscathed. Sandy, who rushed to publish the results of Cliff’s study without independently verifying them, becomes an administrator at a private clinic. Robin, the whistle blower, goes on to work with one of the lab’s rivals. And Cliff, whose suspect research methods received such bad press throughout the entire ordeal, apparently has “a possibility in Utah.”

Too bad for Hwang that Goodman does not dictate what happens in the real world. The discredited researcher was dismissed from his university position and was indicted for embezzlement and violation of bioethical laws. Utah is sounding pretty good.

Intuition
By Allegra S. Goodman '89
The Dial Press
Out Now

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags