As I just said, I LOVED this book. Perhaps it's because I am a die-hard fiction reader, and to me this book read like a well-written novel. Actually, I think the flow of the narrative and its accessibility to a wide-range of readers was its greatest asset. The class discussion on this book, understandably, focused on the issues of privacy, autonomy, and ownership that surrounded Henrietta's cells and family. Although I realize these are obviously important issues, I simply can't become excited about them. Rather, what I found to be the most important and basic element of this book was its wide appeal to general readers.
The Immortal Life can be read on a variety of levels, and has several important themes or concentrations. The fact that all of these are brought together in an engaging narrative is its greatest asset, because it allows even a reader with little background knowledge to engage intellectually with issues as wide ranging as scientific cell research, ethical dilemmas of consent and autonomy, historical and modern racial disadvantage, and many others. Sure, Skloot could have written at a more intellectual level, or included more facts and less conversation between her and Deborah Lacks. But to do so would have removed the book from the ability or interest of less-educated readers. People who have higher education backgrounds in those issues have plenty of scholarly material available to them on the topics. But for many lay readers, this book may be the only exposure they've had to issues such as cell research and privacy issues. This book could be a baseline for those readers to find more in-depth information on topics they were previously unaware of. Especially from a librarian's standpoint, I think that the greatest strength of Skloot's book is bringing information and inspiring research in the general public.
No comments:
Post a Comment