Rough plot synopsis: An IRA bomb kills the wife and children of a brilliant bio scientist. He suffers a psychological episode due to this and decides to design a plague. He decides to target this genetically engineered disease to affect only females. Then he unleashes the virus in three places: Ireland, Libya and the USA.
Once released, the plague kills most of the woman on the planet, spreading beyond the limits of the original scheme.
The book follows the decent of the protagonist ( John ) as he flicks between the personalities he has created.
All in all, it’s a strange book. There’s enough technical detail in the genetics to please fans of hard sci-fi (but what else would you expect from the man who wrote Dune). There’s a hint of horror too, almost reminiscent of his namesake James Herbert. And there’s a good slice of psychological thriller to it, with all the political shenanigans of the cold war era in which it was set played out in all its gory details.
So why, with all this going for it, does it leave me so dissatisfied?
Maybe it’s because its a little of all these things that it doesn’t hit the mark with any of them. Some of the technical stuff now comes across as a bit preposterous ( he uses a new fangled computer at one point, whatever that is). The horror of the plague never fully comes across (compare this with, for example some of James Herbert early works, The Rats or The Dark).
Its not a book I’ll go back and read, but I’m glad I gave it a shot. There’s some very good writing and the story has resonance with the present day.
