Review: Novel captures world of scientific research

“Intuition”
By Allegra Goodman
The Dial Press

Anyone who has ever worked in a research laboratory will
instantly identify with the post-doctoral researchers portrayed in
Allegra Goodman’s new novel, “Intuition.”

Goodman captures the world of research with astonishing accuracy
and detail, from the subtle jabs at mainstream science publications
such as “Scientific American” to the notes posted on
lab equipment (“Do NOT use my NaOH!! STOP!!!!”). Not a
small feat, considering that Goodman herself never set a foot in a
lab before she undertook the research for this novel.

But more impressively, Goodman manages to depict the obscure and
amorphous world of scientific research in an accessible and
compelling narrative that will likely appeal to students from both
North and South Campus, as well as readers of all intellectual
backgrounds.

In “Intuition,” Cliff Bannaker, an ambitious postdoc
at the Philpott Institute of Cambridge, Mass., stumbles upon a
virus that appears to cure breast cancer in mice. The directors of
Philpott, Sandy Glass and Marion Mendelssohn, disagree on whether
to publish these findings immediately in order to capitalize on new
grant funding, or to attempt to recreate Cliff’s findings to
ensure their accuracy.

They ultimately compromise, sending their results to be
published in the scientific journal “Nature” while
simultaneously reproducing the experiments as quickly as
possible.

But things become complicated when Cliff’s fellow postdoc
(and girlfriend) Robin Decker repeats the experiments with
unsuccessful results. She accuses him of cheating his results and
fibbing the data, which leads to a National Institute of Health
inquiry into the experiment.

What makes Goodman’s novel so satisfying, besides her
fluid writing style, is her original take on universal issues of
morality. A conventional novel would find Robin accusing Cliff of
cheating in their intimate relationship, not their professional
connection as fellow scientists.

Goodman captures the incredible pressure placed on finding
scientific data can reach an indisputable conclusion, and the
frustration that accompanies the far more common occurrence of
having to rework an entire hypothesis or start new experiments from
scratch.

As Cliff’s fellow postdoc Xiang Feng dryly observes, in
the lab a hypothesis could often be accurately defined as
“highly flawed thinking.”

Robin’s accusation engulfs everyone directly or indirectly
involved with Philpott, introducing doubt and skepticism into
relationships previously based on trust.

Characters who seemed invincible from the start of the novel
reveal realistic flaws, and conversely Goodman gives credible
motivation to individuals whose actions initially seemed
questionable.

This extensive character development keeps the reader guessing
and makes it difficult to take sides, but it never feels contrived
or improbable.

Goodman explores the complexity of these moral dilemmas,
offering her readers no neat and tidy solutions.

Even when Robin succeeds in procuring an NIH inquiry, she
dangerously falls into the role of sacrificial lamb and is
ostracized by fellow scientists for questioning the research
system, even as she stands up for what she believes is true.

Cliff must deal with the negative publicity of the inquiry and
strive to clear his name of questionable ethical practices. No
character is let off easy in “Intuition.”

And while Goodman’s conclusion may seem unsatisfying to
some readers, it aptly captures the ambiguity of scientific
research itself.

““Natalie Tate