I read this book up to page 214, where I stopped. What was the point in continuing after learning that the 'hero', Gilrein's ideology is precisely the same as that of the bad guys? How can I believe in a hero who has no ethical stance at all? They said that WORD MADE FLESH was 'Blade runner as imagined by Kafka' - it makes me wonder whether that reviewer ever actually read Philip K. Dick. BLADE RUNNER has some fresh, imaginative and profound insights on the human condition and what it is to be human. WORD MADE FLESH has none, only the tired old sub-capitalist cliche that 'man is born evil': if that is the case, which it isn't, then the gangsters in WORD are right to do what they do, because they can't help it, and the hero has no case. For your information, Mr. O'Connell: there is absolutely no scientific proof that 'the ability to harm others is forever written into our DNA'. In fact, the Seville Statement, in 1986, signed by 20 top biologists, concluded that, though violent behaviour occurs, 'it is scientifically incorrect to say that man has an inherited tendency to make war or act violently. That behaviour is not genetically programmed into human nature'. As for there being multiple instances of destructive behaviour for every creative one,your timeline sample is a tad narrow: our ancestors were hunter-gatherers for 200,000 years and never, as far as we know, fought a war or committed an atrocity. Haven't you ever considered the possibility that it just might be our social and economic system that's up the creek, rather than our DNA? Imagination? Sorry - I personally need more than some pretentiously flowery prose to convince me, more than some battered old establishment doctrine, more than comic strip done up as a detective novel. Do we really need books like this? I read in one of O'Connell's bios that he considers himself 'the world's biggest square' . Well, need one say more?