“Lessons in Chemistry”: A Critical Review

“Lessons in Chemistry” is a bad book and here are my reasons:

As a chemist, I was initially intrigued by the premise of the book, hoping for an engaging story authored by a fellow scientist. However, I found myself increasingly disappointed by the inaccurate portrayal of science and scientists throughout the narrative.

One of my major frustrations stemmed from the protagonist’s unrealistic expertise across various scientific disciplines. It seemed implausible that she could excel in areas like abiogenesis, and food science, and even teach herself complex skills like rowing solely through reading physics textbooks.

Moreover, the author’s handling of scientific concepts felt shallow and misleading. Instances where chemical formulas were spoken( she called table salt sodium chloride, what is even the point of that?) aloud. Additionally, the use of unnecessary jargon further exacerbated the book’s shortcomings. Instead of demystifying science for readers, it only served to alienate them and detract from the story’s potential to empower individuals interested in STEM subjects. the protagonist’s nonchalant attitude towards a misbalanced centrifuge, which could have catastrophic consequences, was particularly jarring.

The portrayal of canned foods as “poison” without any explanation or context was another point of contention for me. As someone familiar with the importance of canned foods in preserving nutrition, especially in areas with limited access to fresh produce (ask navy soldiers or people in deserted areas relying on UN food charities), this demonization felt irresponsible and ill-informed. The main problem was the reasoning behind it. she called it poison because it has chemicals in it. isn’t the whole of nature and foods made of chemicals? wtf?

Another issue is how the book handles serious topics like sexual assault and abuse. It’s like the book doesn’t take them seriously enough. Instead of helping women who have been hurt. the book just jumps from one SA to another. The protagonist is constantly under attack from sexist men and women. while these are the truths of that era, the book doesn’t go deep into the emotional toll they had on women back then. Elizabeth is unbreakable. You never see her in the book to doubt herself and her abilities.

The characters in the book also don’t feel real. Elizabeth is supposed to be super smart, but she doesn’t act like it. She never learns from her mistakes. She is completely tactless yet she achieves the head of a scientific research institute, just through being good at a cooking show! There is no character arch. You know she is different from other women but you don’t know why (who for some reason are all depicted as chatty and shallow in this book, neglecting the strong feminist movement in society back then). There is no explanation for why she had become who she is. What life experiences led her to decide to be the breaker of the barriers? ZERO EXPLANATION.

Overall, “Lessons in Chemistry” tries to be about important things like feminism and equality, but it doesn’t do a good job. It has a sanctimonious behavior. Instead of taking you on a journey, it stands in front of you and continues preaching its values on every page. As much as I appreciate the message, I hate bad writing. I give it 2/10 just for the message.

by Born_Scar_4052