The Third Twin

We find Follett's medieval stories to be great, and his wartime spy novels fairly good; and so looked forward to a modern-day storyline in "Twin". It's difficult to summarize the plot without spoiling it, although the book's title helps us figure out what's going on about 150 pages before the key players do! A researcher, Jeannie Ferrami, is doing clever studies on twins raised apart, where one is a criminal and the other a good guy - working on the old nature versus nurture argument. When her best friend is raped and the good guy is blamed (but we know no way), we all presume the bad twin did it, but he's in jail. You can almost guess the rest.

While the plot was somewhat clever and the contemporary setting a twist from the author's other work, the action here was just so far-fetched we could barely wait to get to the end - but not from suspense but rather that feeling of "oh, come on, this could never happen". When a few romantic elements are the most memorable takeaway from a Follett novel, something is definitely wrong.

While we suppose the author was trying to illuminate issues surrounding genetic research, and to a lesser degree, computer-based searches through massive databases, we cannot in good faith recommend this totally implausible tale.

I’ve enjoyed other Follett books, but this one was barely good enough to hold my interest. It feels as though it was carefully plotted and then written in a hurry. Some of the plot seems overly contrived. Maybe halfway along, I started skimming through it. I could have used the time more fruitfully.

- Submitted by Barbara’s husband

Ken has done much better but at this point in his career I think he understands how to write a popular book as opposed to one of his very good books i.e. "Eye of the Needle" and many other extremely good ones since. That is understandable but does not improve his oeuvre.

Most will race through this one since little thought is involved and most readers will figure out what's happening before much reading is done. Character development is weak for this good a writer but as previously mentioned, I think he just wanted to get this on the shelf. If I'm wrong, please forgive me as I have respect for this writer's special accomplishments so can forgive the commercial quick reads.

To sum up, if you've read Follett, you'll only get half his skills in this one but if you like Stuart Woods then this will be a tome.

This is a real page turner. It takes place in the mid-1990s during one week. You follow a young academic at a major university as she starts to unravel a crime amid half truths & deception.

Follett uses brief, tight speaking parts that pull the reader in very quickly. Spoiler Alert: the title is the key to what she doesn't see until very late in the week in Baltimore; the campus is Johns Hopkins University.

It's inconceivable to me that the author of Pillars of the Earth could come up with something so bad. Had the political characterizations been written by Nancy Pelosi, they would have been more balanced. The plot was entirely predictable, the dialogue juvenile, and the brilliant characters incredibly stupid at times.

The research was atrocious. For example, one of the Pentagon employees was an overweight 50 something female lieutenant. In the first place, the military doesn't have junior officers in their 50's. In the second place, junior officers with weight problems are disciplined, not given plum jobs in the Pentagon. Soldiers don't fire warning shots, especially not inside the Pentagon. The black WWII veteran had an antique pistol that he took off a German because black soldiers weren't allowed weapons, even in a war zone. The Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps are proper nouns and should be capitalized. Police officers don't carry their weapons into interrogation rooms and jail. The list goes on and on. Follett is usually a much better researcher.

In short, had Ken Follett's name not been on the cover, no one outside the author's family would pay to read tripe like this. Follett is a great author. I don't know what happened to convince him to publish this train wreck.

As usually, Ken Follett uses its magnificent narrative to keep letting the reader wanting to turn page after page until the end. As a reader one immerses oneself into the world of the plot and, at least for a while, the reader feels that the author really knows about the subject treated. In "The third Twin", Follett tells us about a Genetic Engineering company "Genetica", that around 23 years ago cloned a fertilized egg, into more than two twins.
The sperm that fertilized the ovule, was that of a High IQ, clever, strong, problem solving, aggressive and athletic man, and, the ovule from a perfectly formed, intelligent, strong and high IQ woman. Each one part of the cloned egg or "individuals" was implanted into a different woman, 23 years ago, being told that they were receiving some hormone injection therapy. Each one of the cloned eggs had a different mother and father (to raise them). Some of the youngsters turn out their character traits into very violent individuals, and other use the character traits de used as the will it into achieving other things.(such as being great managers or atlethes,etc).
In the present, there is this Dr. Jeannie that elaborates a computerized program to find identical twins, but the program also searches into dental, cardiovascular, medical, insurance and secret information of data banks that could intimidate the privacy right of citizens. The program works, but at the same time it discovers the hidden secret of the "Genetica Company", when Dr. Jeannie investigates a rape case, and so on... The interesting point is that this book raises questions that are so in top off news as: 1. - Are personality traits only based on one person's genetic code? All this would ban all the psychological literature of the late decades, which bases itself on the great importance of psychological environment. Is it true that genetics are stronger than "well bringing"?
2. - How far should Genetic go on tampering with gene codes?. Such a controversial issue is in the top of news, such as in the article "Designer Babies": "But should we be allowed to create kids with made to the order traits? By Sharon Begley, Newsweek, Nov. 9, 1998.
I would say is a very good book, but it lacks that sexual episodes that Follet always lets the reader enjoy in the other Follett books I have read.
I rather spend my time reading "A place called Freedom",the book that made me fall in love with Follett.

My very favorite line is "You're saying I'm a clone", not to mention "the notion of doctors experimenting on patients without permission was just the kind of thing to make her mad". Duh! I have always been an avid reader of Ken Follett's works, but I think he has been cloned, using the Multiplicity concept of over cloning. This book is the thriller attempt of the final clone. Did Follett get major endorsements for this book? We were bombarded with commercials for cars, clothing and Doc Marten boots. Why would a writer use real places and then throw in ficticious landmarks like the Richmond-Williamsburg airport? This kind of constant movement from the real to the invented is very distracting from the plot. The main character, Jeannie Ferrami, is without a doubt one of the best arguments against feminism that I have ever read. She is completely unlikable and unsympathetic. Her life history is inconsistent and her arrogance is unbelievable in this day and age. I am greatly surprised that the flight attendants' union has not filed a class action suit against Follett for malice. He uses the term "stewardess" repeatedly and refers to that job as a waste of education and a classic case of failure. This happens not just once but many times. Jeannie thoroughly believes that anyone who does not go into the history books with a major scientific discovery is less than worthwhile.
This cannot be the Follett who wrote "Eye of the Needle", please God! I, like another of the reviewers, have a policy about finishing what I read. This book was a strong test, but I just couldn't stop believing that at the end, he would say "April Fool". I would rather be tricked than believe that one of my favorite writers is using a software program to put together a novel

As a suspense novel, this book is fairly entertaining. As a primer on genetics or anything scientific, it is fairly useless and inaccurate. I would give the book 3 stars for its entertainment value, but knock it down to 2 stars, for its many flaws and lapses in logic.
The many flaws in this book are pointed out by other reveiwers. But some of my "favorite" are:
-just what kind of scientist is the hero? Is she a geneticist, psychologist or a computer programmer?
-just how many times can the hero be fooled by the bad twin?
-would a police detective really hold off on arresting an arsonist and rapist, just because someone she didn't like asked her to?
-Follett's fixation on women's underwear is just creepy (and I am a guy)
-the whole plan to reveal the badguys at the end of the book is very contrived
-all the badguys are conversatives (opposite of Tom Clancy, whose badguys are all liberals)
This book has an interesting premise. But there is no suspense to it, since it is given away in the title. The idea of genetically bred, superhuman clones with a violent streak could have been explored a lot more than the superficial treatment given in this book. We could have seen more action in how they relate to society and each other.
But despite all the flaws, I did not hate this book. It had a pleasant storyline and flow. The story moved along fairly well. It was pretty good light summer reading.

Ken Follett is one of my favorite authors. He has a way of making situations which I could never imagine seem real. Sadly, that's not even close to the case here. Taking the outdated science out of the equation, everything about this premise was absurd. Throw in the fact that the dialogue was incredibly cheesey, the heroine was unlikable, and the antagonists were cliched as hell and you have a novel that I can't believe was written by the same guy. Overall, a disappointing journey into the absurd.

The book opens fast and stays there. You probably would be able to figure out what the "third twin" is and what was happening but the thrill of the book is being part of the process. This isn't a who-dun-it shocker where the bad guys are hidden. You pretty much know up front who they are. It is watching the process of uncovering the ugliness and bringing them to justice that is exciting. Ken Follett is fast becoming one of my favorite authors. This is the 10th book of his I have read and have not been disappointed an any of them. Great Author, great book!

This being the first book by Ken Follett that I've read, I was pleasantly entertained. From the beginning of the book, I had a very hard time putting it down at night. The mysteries just kept piling up and I had to know what happened. The cliffhanger endings at the end of each chapter didn't help much either.
The characterization for the protagonists of the book were pretty good. I actually cared about what happened to them. I wanted them to get out of the mess they were in and be able to live happy lives. My main problem with this book were the two dimensional antagonists. They seemed to have no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Don't get me wrong, I hated them with a passion and I suppose that was the reaction that Follett was trying to engender, but a villain is always so much better when he has something that the reader can identify with. Unless you're a white supremacist, you won't be able to identify with any part of these guys.
I have to say that this was a very entertaining read. Yes, there was a certain required amount of suspension of disbelief required, but that was also the case in Michael Crichton's JURASSIC PARK. Both books are very good, even though there are parts that aren't very realistic. It's the realism surrounding the unbelievable that makes it so good. I'd recommend this book to any one of my reading friends.

In light of the fact that some of his prior work is so good (in particular Pillars of the Earth and Eye of the Needle), I wonder why Mr. Follett chose to let this book go to print without doing more work to tighten up the characters, story line and dialogue. The story unfortunately is very weak. He has relied on some incredible and not really plausible coincidences to tie the plot together. I found myself thinking that many of the characters in this book were sorely lacking any real intelligence. They seemed to get themselves into problems which were readily avoidable. They also seemed to be incapable of solving some easily remedied problems that were presented to them. Unlikely coincidences and weak characters tells me that this book was somewhat thrown together. This is surprising since I found many of his other books to be carefully crafted and thoroughly enjoyable reads. The Third Twin unfortunately turned out to be a very unsatisfying read and my recommendation is that you pass on this book and go with either one of the spy novels he has done or the excellent Pillars of the Earth.

I've just finished reading a review where the phrases "hated it" and "awful" were repeatedly mentioned. I couldn't agree more. Giving this book even a one star rating is more than it deserves for the following reasons:
1) the very few scientific facts appearing in this book that I DID know prior to reading it were totally wrong in the book - you get a WHOLE chromosome from each parent, not 2 different strands that combine into 2 chromosomes with a strand of each parent in each - this is scientifically impossible from what I've learned in 9th or 10th grade level biology!
2) The book was so full of stereotypes you don't have to read more than a few pages to fill in the rest with guesswork. It seems Ken Follet has left wing opinions, so for him right wing = evil. Or the stereotypic jail description..
3) The EXTREME chauvinistic attitude of the book - in order for a woman to be strong, she has to be masculine - both physically and though her personality and attitude to life, while a "feminine" woman is portrayed as weak... Please compare Mish or Jeannie to Jeannie's friend Lisa or her sister Patty... The former two are more 'manly' and aggressive , and the later are feminine and soft. The first 2 don't have an harmonious family and are not the type to be raped, while the other 2 are... The former 2 get things accomplished and are exected to do the hard job and decisions, while the later 2 are more dependent on others to do the hard work and decide the tough decisions for them.
4) Too many twists and turns of the plot, especially towards the end!
5) Jeannie's academics are ALL MIXED UP - she did a master's degree in computers, and now is wsorking in the psychology department on genetics research (which is a field in biology?) Why would an assistant in the psychology department have a nurse's or doctor's skill of drawing blood?
6) I've saved the 'best' for last. As a woman reading what I persume is a thriller, I RESENT having to read all about what different underwear the women wore or how they're built. Let's take Jeanie for example. Whoever suffered through this book probably knows that she's tall and that she has an athletic body build with long, flowing dark curly hair, smooth back, smooth and flat tummy, long muscly legs, and small breasts with dark nipples which she thinks are too small, but all the men she'd been with like them just fine. Oh, and she also likes tp have her nipples sucked, and thinks that going without any underwear is sexy just in case 'her man' comes along and wants a quickie. I hope this pasage does not upset anyone, but my point is that all this info has NOTHING to do with the plot, weak as the later might be. So do Lisa's red lace underwear or large bra size. This is not a porn story, so being able to envision Jeannie naked does not enhance the story. I normally don't mind a little sexual stuff in books I read, but this is simply too much and too specific in this context!

What started as a government project has become double trouble for the
researchers continuing the work and for the person mistakenly blamed for
violence. But, through the first part of the book, only the title
indicates that two twins are not the whole story.

-- Another strong female
Follett-character stumbles into the middle of everything, but the male
protagonists don't have the strength of Eye of the Needle or Key to
Rebecca types. Unlike other Follet-females, this one
uncharacteristically takes the burden of fault upon herself, has
numerous resourceful helpers, and nearly misses her moment of triumph.
Some of the other characters are unnecessarily skin-deep.

--Genetically,
the story's basis is plausible, and Follett adds some interesting
helical twists that make you turn the next page for more. The tension
builds convincingly and enjoyably. A nice return to fast-moving action
after that long, long Night Over Water.

The premise of the story is quite interesting, and it could have
made for a very enjoyable novel. Unfortunately, Follett's execution
is mediocre at best. Much of the dialog between characters is painfully
contrived, and the proliferation of clones becomes laughable
after a while (thus reducing their dramatic impact). It's quite
apparent that Follett knows very little about the Internet, given
the awkward, outdated way in which it's used throughout the book.
It's equally apparent that Follett doesn't know much about the real
American universities that are mentioned in the book. These errors,
while not central to the plot, become very distracting. The lack
of research is in stark contrast to other authors in the same genre.

Bottom line: Wait for the paperback. Better yet, borrow it from
the library, if you must read it at all. It's hard to believe the
same author who wrote Eye of the Needle penned this uninspired
piece.

I was pretty disappointed in THE THIRD TWIN. This novel could have been very good, and deals with a lot of interesting issues related to genetics and the whole "nature versus nurture" debate. Unfortunately, Follett takes a black-and-white view of most of these issues, and this book taught me very little about them.

The heavy handed political commentary in THE THIRD TWIN was also disappointing. Follett pretty much makes all the villains out to be right-wing Republicans, implying that conservative views on welfare and gun control are somehow evil. I'm certainly not against thoughtful political commentary, but Follett makes no effort to do that here. Instead, he presents all his conservative characters as right-wing caricatures who are hateful, greedy and venal in almost every scene in which they appear.

But even if you're a die-hard liberal, I doubt you'll enjoy this novel. All the twists are fully predictable, and most of the dialog is stilted and expository. The love affair in this novel is completely unbelievable, and the heroine isn't exactly a sympathetic character in many scenes. The plotline involving twins is initially interesting, but eventually devolves into a sensationalistic mess.

Ken Follett is a good writer, but THE THIRD TWIN is not one of his better efforts. My advice is to try some of his earlier work, such as EYE OF THE NEEDLE and PILLARS OF THE EARTH.

This was my first Follet novel. I read lots of genetic thrillers and my mother had given me this book a year or two ago. So, let me try and come up with a fair description: Michael Crichton meets Robin Cook with a flair of Dean Koontz. Well written? Well, it's fast paced, but unfortunately, the title gives away 3/4 of the book. I wanted to kick myself for realizing it so fast. Still, Ken Follet has an enjoyable tale-telling style. The book had two loveable characters and some heart pounding drama.
The last 1/4 of "The Third Twin" was not as predictable as I expected. There were plenty of last moment dramas to keep me satisfied to the end. In all, I would say...read it for a fast two-night read, or read it if you are a fan of genetic scandal.
If you find this review helpful and are a fan of genetic suspense, please feel free to email me with other suggestions.
I always write back. :)

this was the first follett book i ever read, and i had never even heard of the guy until i saw a commercial for the genetic-suspense-thriller movie "the third twin" a few years ago. i happened to have missed the movie (and i never heard about it again), but i went out and got the book right away. after reading it, i was hopelessly hooked on follett.
i know others reviewers here have said that follett's other books are better, but if you are into science and genetic research, then this book is for you! i personally have not read nor have an interest in reading the follett novels that are set during WWII or some other war. i HATE war stories (and war movies too). i find it the most boring topic on earth. other than a mild interest in the civil war and revolutionary war, i couldnt care less. WWII...ho hum.
follett books NOT about war that I have read and thoroughly enjoyed:
1. a dangerous fortune
2. the third twin
3. paper money
4. the modigliani scandal (ok, i just bought it today)
The Third Twin is a must-read!! Who knows, now that they have already begun cloning, ya never know...

That don't impress me much !!
He could have done a better job of researching before writing this book. Jeannie is likable.
The triumvirate Berrington Jones, Jim Proust and Preston Barck are hysterical and whine throughout the book about their 'ugly secret' getting discovered.
And - there are lots and lots of flaws. To name just a few -
Jeannie writes a computer program which has a footprint small enough to be loaded into a floppy (yeah !!) & has the ability to search any database regardless of the OS or the hardware which it is residing on !!! Just plug-and-play. GREAT !!. If she was that capable, she could have taken up that as her main vocation and made millions. Oh no ! she has to be a geneticist, a psychologist and a kick-ass programmer at the same time. I saw in the acknowledgements section, Follett thanking some computer experts. Well, either they are all dumb or he chose the wrong 'experts'.
Steve & his dad just walks into the Pentagon on some stupid pretext, plugs into their database and steal information. Then Steve pushes away the guards and escapes from there in a bus ??!! Your local Walmart would have more security !
Follett doesn't show any solid reason why Jeannie & Steve is so hell-bent in ruining Berrington's company's merger. They could have just arrested the rapist and be done with it.
And The climax was lame and overdone.
Now what I liked about this was the storyline. This was a nice subject which with a little effort, would have been pretty slick. There are some characters who were likable - Jeannie is ok and Dennis Pinker was nicely drawn. He sents a chill down your spine.
Not worthy of precious time and effort ..I am a slow reader,so I know..:(

A young scientist studying links in genes to the potential for criminality comes across two men, identical down to their DNA, raised separately and born on different days. As she investigates, becoming more involved with the law abiding twin, Steve, she discovers that there may be a third twin still at large, who may be guilty of raping one of her friends.
This starts off well, as an interesting yarn, but rapidly goes downhill, especially when the words 'perfect soldier' leapt out at you. Right after that the story falls flat. Clones and killing machines have been done before, and combining them doesn't make any difference. The text is bogged down in unnecessary details, such as obsessive details about how the female lead dresses, and the ending is decidedly flat.
Follett can do amazing thrillers and fascinating historical fiction, but this isn't one of them. Aeroplane reading, but not much more. (It gets three stars for being interesting at the start.)

The Third Twin is the fourth Follett book I've read and it ranks a distant last. In Dangerous Fortune, Night over Water and Pillars of the Earth, Follett takes the reader on a journey into the past with different cultures and different customs. His characterization makes each period come alive.
The Third Twin is different in that it is set in the present day. It is a traditional, sub-par thriller that is made worse by Follett's political bias or ignorance. I'll mention more on that later. Jeannie Ferrami studies identical twins and her studies leads her to some facts that some certain bad guys don't want to be discovered. Ferrami and one of her subjects race against the three bad guys to expose the bad guys for the evil people that they are.
It is true that they were evil, but Follett does a horrible job of making me fear this people or making me think they are worthy bad guys. In the beginning of the book, Follett says Senator Proust has photos of himself with Rush Limbaugh, Geraldo Riveria and Newt Gingrich. Later a reference is made to Barry Goldwater as a hero to one of the bad guys. The bad guys are also mentioned to be in favor of gun control. Now, to a liberal, these aren't ideal beliefs, but they hardly make a person evil. Yet, Follett fails to do anything else to characterize the bad guys as evil.
So we are supposed to believe they are bad because they are Republican.
Also, the three bad guys are involved in cloning and genetic engineering. To me, Follett implies that this is a right-wing issue and that only conservatives would use genetics to create the type of humans they want. This book was several years old, but as far as I can tell, this is a political neutral issue. There are wackos on both sides willing to use genetics to engineer humans.
I don't know if Follett is a bigot against conservatives or just naïve to think that throwing in some liberal buzzwords would be all he would need to do to create the sense that the bad guys truly are bad in this novel.
Politics aside, this story was interesting yet I found much of the dialogue between characters both childish and stating the obvious. I never felt like Ferrami those helping her were fighting to stop something truly evil. Maybe that is because the main plan they were trying to stop was the sale of a genetics firm in which Senator Proust would get $60 million to run for president. Follett himself makes this implausible by making Proust such an unlikeable character. Also, selling a firm for money doesn't just lead to being president. So I never really feel like the unlikeable Proust will get the power that he wants.
I plan on reading more Follett but will stick to the period pieces and WWII stuff.

"The Third Twin" is the fourth Follet novel I have read and it is similar in plot structure and characterization with the other novels I have read - "Eye of the Needle," "Hornet's Flight" and "Code to Zero." I enjoy Follett's historical story telling perspective, especially his WWII era storys. With "The Third Twin," we are thrust into the hot science topic of the mid to late 1990's - bioengineering and genetics research.

Overall, I enjoyed the novel. It is fast paced, readable in the face of considerable distraction, and satisfying in it's outcome. However, I was disappointed that there was no "science" - real or imaginary in the book. The secret government experiments that produced the eight clones is described as resulting from "test tube babies," which in 1974, was way ahead of any other research , academic or private. In the hands of a writer such as Michael Crichton, this acet of the story would have been fleshed out, but alas, the reader must suspend disbelief to make this story work.

The main protagonist - researcher Dr. Jeannie Ferammi is a bit of a superwoman, beautiful in the Follett althetic style, champion tennis player, accomplished computer programmer and a pHD in psychology researching genetics. She makes a likable character, however, unidentifiable to this reader.

Her partner in the mystery, Steve Logan, is supposed to be a strait arrow, upstanding, Boy scout type to play off the "evil" twins and comes across as a servicable partner to the protagonist. He does more than rescue our damsel in distress.

The main villian, Berrington Jones, Ferammi's academic mentor is protrayed mostly as a academic who is past-his-prime, waiting to cash in the buyout of the shady company that rose out of the ashes of the secret government project.

Overall, the plot moves quickly and there are lots of twists and turns. Recommended to readers fans of action and suspense.

I haven't read a lot of Ken Follet (did read "Eye of the Needle" and the "Key to Rebecca") and enjoyed them both. And I remember hearing that he is from Baltimore, so he can't be all bad! I think his subject matter is a little too fantastic for my taste to read him faithfully. But "The Third Twin" caught my eye in an airport bookstore and away I want. I liked it a lot. For one thing, it takes place at a VERY thinly disguised Johns Hopkins University, my alma mater. And for another, it does some very nice messing with the mind of the reader - always a good sign. I'm not well-schooled in genetics, especially the state of the art during the flashback eras in this book, but even if Follet did take some scientific license, it is still a very chilling story about the misuse of the fertility process and trait selection by greedy and corrupt individuals.

Why is Ken Follett popular? I've never read any of his other novels, but he seems to be an author with a loyal following, both commercially and critically.
But THE THIRD TWIN is awful. Horrid. Detestable. I kept screaming at it to get better, but it didn't listen.
I hate this novel. Hate it. Hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it. I hate its characters, of which it has none. I hate its style, of which it has none. And I hate how it assumes that a reader will not know the difference between a tightly wound thriller and a hack job.
I hate the indifference with which this book was written. I hate its condescending attitude towards the reader. I hate how miserable it made me. I hate how I will never get the hours I spent reading it back.
I hate the fact that I cannot do a decent critical evaluation of its innumerable flaws. I hate how its astonishing ineptitude overwhelms my senses.
I am heartened, however, that I survived. I have visited the depths of literary hell, that circle where trashy autobiographies, books based on gameshows, novelizations of bad films, and anonymous porn are consigned to linger. I have dwelled in the nadir of English fiction, and have emerged unscathed. A little sadder, perhaps, but a little wiser, too. And with the firm promise to myself never to believe anything a book jacket blurb says ever again.

Having read many of Mr. Follett's books (Eye of the Needle, Key to Rebecca), I expected great things. What a disappointment! He must have phoned this one in--or maybe someone else wrote this book. It would make a great beach read if you can stand the improbable female characters, wooden dialogue, stupid mistakes by smart people. The premise is given away by the title so there is little intrigue. And the characters remain inconsistent throughout. Also, the academic atmosphere is bogus and stereotypical. And to add insult to injury, the salary quoted for the protagonist, given her degrees and reputation, is way out of line--no decent university would be able to attract her for a mere $30,000. I had to check the publication date on this book when I read that!
An OK read if you aren't too particular. It moved quickly, thank God, and I am on to other titles in my extensive To Be Read pile!

I like Ken Follett, and I note that this novel was written in 1996 which explains the low-tech.
Although the story was not totally predictable it was easy to see where it was going.
Even with all of this I enjoyed the novel a lot.

Now I'm no professional book critic, just a guy that spends too much time on airplanes, and I thought that this book was great. It is the first Ken Follett book that I've ever read (I can hear the Follet purists gagging based on the other reviews that I read) and I look forward to reading more by him.

The plot was a good one if you weren't looking for anything too deep and there were a couple of great scenes that had my still reading while other passengers were already leaving the plane.

Basically, if you're looking for a quick book to read that doesn't force you to reread several chapters if you put it down for days at a time, this is a good one for you.

Clearly fiction, because only in make believe do evil racist conservatives run biotech companies and hatch plans to rid the world of poor people, blacks, and Jews. Remember folks, Margaret Sanger founded Planned Parenthood to rid the world of black people (only she used a term that I won't repeat), and she was a liberal progressive. So once you get past the obvious bias, the book still sucks.

The Third Twin is the first and last Ken Follett book I will read. The idea for the plot was clever, but it was not carried off well, and the characters were one-dimensional and unbelievable. What annoys me most is that throughout the book Follett reveals himself again and again to be an ill-informed liberal fool, and I do not suffer fools gladly.

Follett's villains in the novel are conservative Republicans, and Follett shows woeful ignorance about politics and history. Follett's Republicans are ardent racists, a foolish assertion.

The Democrat Party viewed slavery as a positive good. While Republicans were ending slavery, Democrats worked actively against the Union effort. Democrats defeated Reconstruction and on its ruins created Jim Crow. Democrats fought against the 15th Amendment, which gave voting rights to all races. Republican Theodore Roosevelt was the first president to invite a black to the White House for dinner. Democrat Woodrow Wilson in the same era was the quintessential racist. In the 1920's the Republican Party called for anti-lynching legislation, while Democrats blocked it. Even the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed by Republicans over the protests of many Democrats. Throughout history Republicans have worked for racial equality, Democrats have not.

Follett says that the Watergate scandal "discredited conservatism," another ignorant contention. In the first place Richard Nixon was not a conservative. Furthermore, the Watergate break-in was not a dictate of conservatism, but of paranoia. Conservatism stands for law and order.

One of Follett's evil Republicans plans to run for President. Listen to this: "his campaign promise: ten percent income tax, paid for by the abolition of welfare." Can Follett name ANY Republican president who has cut welfare, let alone abolished it? How silly! Only liberal loonies think you have to "pay for" a tax cut. Every tax cut in history has increased revenue. Good examples are the tax reductions by Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush II. By cutting the income tax 30%, Reagan DOUBLED revenue to the federal government.

The atheistic Follett naturally has his evil conservatives be God-fearing Christians, yet he mentions one of them belonging to the Episcopalian Church. Follett is so ignorant that he thinks a church is a church is a church, little realizing that this is an ultra-liberal church which a conservative Republican would not likely choose. At one point Follett uses the simile "as dull as a sermon," which leads me to believe that HE may have at some time attended an Episcopalian Church, as the only boring sermons I have heard were in liberal churches.

Follett's ignorance overwhelms me. One character is making meatloaf by browning chopped hamburger and onions in a skillet. Another character is handcuffed to the pee-trap pipe under a bathroom basin. Follett does not realize that a 10-year-old couch potato could easily knock this pipe loose. One character convicted of rape and arson receives a five-year sentence--impossibly lenient.

There are many more examples of Follett's ignorance, foolishness, and personal bias, but I think this is sufficient to demonstrate why I will never ready another book that he has written.

ughh - since I wasted two weeks of my pre-sleep bedtime reading time,
the least I could do was waste another five minutes writing this short
review. I can't believe I didn't put this book down after the first
50 pages! ughh. This was my first (and last) foray into Ken Follett's works.
I thought this was written by a fifteen year old.
Characters acted stupid, reacted stupidly, and the cliches throughout
this book are laughable. Again, I can't believe I read this or that
this book was even published.
I read 15 minutes of a new Steven King novel to "wash" all the
memories of this one away.

Ken Follett's The Third Twin . Is it your upbringing or your genes that decide if you become a criminal or a law-abiding citizen? This was the study that Jeannie Ferrami was conducting and for this she uses identical twins grown apart, one a criminal and other a law-abiding citizen. Sounds difficult to find. But Jeannie designed a program to find them, that analyzes parameters like dental records, brain waves, fingerprints.Now all the trouble for Jeannie starts when she finds Steve Logan, a would-be lawyer and Dennis Pinker, a criminal. On the other side of town, Berrigton Jones and his friends are getting ready to make a 180 Million Dollars from the takeover of their Research/Hospital Genetico, a secret and closed down Military Operation. And they have a very big secret to hide and Jeannie is just about to reveal it. So Berrigton and his friends need to stop Jeannie, which means Jeannie's program suddenly becomes unethical, her research program is cancelled, she is fired, molested.... How she gets through each of these and finally finds the secret Genetico was desperately trying to hide ... all in the span of a week. It is a fast paced page turner... a very very interesting read. I loved it... have read it atleast 3 times!!.

I loved Ken Follett's "Pillars of the Earth", "World without End", and "Eye of the Needle- all were masterfully written and enjoyable to read. I started "The Third Twin" expecting the same caliber of writing and was quickly disappointed. It almost seems like someone else wrote the book. First of all, it takes place in America and none of the characters introduced in the first 50 pages are believable. They are cardboard cutouts of how an outsider might picture Americans. The dialogue is maybe at a high school level of expertise. The book was so awful I stopped reading it. I wonder if Ken Follett has been lured by his publisher to crank out books with the help of a ghostwriter just to make a buck. I hope not, but the alternative is that he is either losing interest in writing, or losing his edge as a writer.

I notice that there are two distinct groups of reviewers for this book. One group feels that it is excellent and the other feels that it is very poor in quality. However, I have found the book to be an excellent read and so have other book lovers among my acquaintances.
The story is gripping, full of suspense and with a lot of twists. I liked the strong determined character of the heroine. The characters of Steve Logan, Berrington Jones etc. are also well drawn sketches. The plot is intriguing and deals with cutting edge BioTechnology.It has been thoroughly researched as any Ken Follett novel generally is (I know Follett has a good research team to help him out while writing ) The tension is taut throughout. It is well written as any Ken Follett novel is. It has all the ingredients of a top class thriller.
The only drawback that I have noticed was the computer program that Jeannie Ferrami wrote to retrieve matches from databases. That seems a bit far fetched since the program seems to run on any platform, search any database of any type. I have not come across any program like that.
However, apart from this minor flaw, there is hardly any blemish in the book. It made me a Follett fan at once and though the other books he has written are different, I have enjoyed most of them.

Many here have complained about Follett's decline since PILLARS OF THE EARTH, and I agree. I bought this book because of Follett's name, and regretted it. Follett has also taken up the Michael Crichton-chic penchant for left-wing commentary (my favorite is when one of the leads says: 'These guys are really bad. They're against gun control.' Never mind that gun control hasn't been an issue in the book...a pure cheap shot). As well, the characters and situations in this book are simplistic and unconvincing. I did enjoy one sequence at the end involving clone substitution and impersonation, but that was the high point of an otherwise bad book.

There was a professor, a politician and a businessman. They were evil old Republicans, and back in Nixon's time they worked out how to clone people. Being Republicans they wanted to perfect the white American race. I think the idea was to create a WASP master-race and abolish welfare, possibly replacing it with slavery. They were even against gun control.

Fast-forward twenty years. Here comes a six-foot young woman with big hair - a world-class tennis player as well as brilliant scientist, expert in psychology, genetics, computer science, you name it. Wow, this has to be Jolie McGillis. Her taste in underwear is lovingly described. Surprisingly she isn't a clone but she takes up with one, who happens to be nicely brought up. The rest are degenerate sadists, rapists and murderers. I told you they were WASPs.

Now our girl finds out about the other clones, partly through being such a brilliant scientist but mostly by nearly getting laid by them. Naturally the evil GOP-men can't let any of this get out, especially as the aforesaid politician is about to run for the White House and has plans to rename Washington Berchtesgaden-on-the-Potomac. (I exaggerate - a little.) So we have toing and froing and cliff-hanging, 500 pages of it, until at last the bad guys get their comeuppance and the heroine fades into the sunset with her favorite clone.

This is not exactly trash. Follett is a fluent writer and capable of better than that. He makes the pages turn as well as anyone and one or two of his characters are fairly memorable. (Aside: some reviewers seem to think he's American. He's British and a buddy of Tony Blair, which makes him a buddy-at-one-remove of ... ahem.) I suppose he intends us to take this story somewhat seriously, but I can't do it. I've seen more plausible scenarios on the back of cereal packets. Whether you think the pages are worth turning is up to you.

I recently read this book and was convinced that I will never read another "best seller" without researching a few reviews. I had enjoyed this author's previous work "Pillars of the Earth" but I can hardly believe he put his name to this title.

The plot is nearly comatose and the characters totally unbelievable. The author tries to write from a woman's point of view but seems to demonstrate his fixation with womens garments and sex fantasies.

The author I think was trying to cash in on the science-thriller genre but his novel displays little serious research into the subject of cloning.

Save your money and rent a B-movie and you will bet more satisfaction

I did not enjoy this one as much as I did main of his other books. I guess I did not think it grabbed me at the start like many of his works. He always produces a decent book, and for someone who wants a book that is somewhat interesting, easy and simple, this will fit the bill. If you are looking for something more he just did not get to that next level. The story is an inventive one and he just about pulls it off. I don't know why I didn't think this a real gripping boo, maybe it was just that all the work that went into it, the character development, plot, etc was just a little average and blah. I would read this one over a Grisham or Turow, but there are also much better out there.

Contrived, trite, and predictable. Ken Follett was one of the first "adult" writers I read as an adolescent. His Pillars of the Earth was an amazing epic and Night Over Water and The Eye of the Needle were wonderfully crafted stories that I highly recommend. However, this most recent book is terrible. Mr. Follett's book, while an intriguin on the outset, unravels and becomes completely unbelievable. What is most frustrating is that the "old" Ken Follett is there, but the unfolding of the action and some of the character dialogue is completely offensive because it makes the reader feel like Mr. Follett has idiots for an audience. The few things saving this book is a great "heroine," who like many of Mr. Follett's past main characters are flawed, but endearing, and a wonderful romance subtext that surprisingly works.
Despite all this the book simply falls to draw you in to the suspense that Mr. Follett has tried to create, but just simply is not there. This is definately a book to pass over or to read during the summer for light no brainer beach reading. However if you want a good summer book that interests you read any of Mr. Follett's earlier works (Pillars of the Earth, Night Over Water, or The Eye of the Needle-- to name a couple) and skip this one and his last two... I'm hoping Mr.Follett will offer better books in the future for he is an author who can deliver a great book.... BUT THIS ONE IS NOT IT!!!

His earlier books are much better. Read "Man from St. Petersburg" or the "Key to Rebecca". This book was a departure from Follett's other espionage books in that he went into all the modern biotechnology. This book was decent, but a lot of it was definitely spoiled for me by the fact that I had seen the X-Files episode "Eve", which predated this book. Concept didn't really didn't seem that ingenious to me then.
I have yet to read any of Follett's epics yet, such as "A Place Called Freedom" or "Dangerous Fortunes" but I am willing to give them a try. Hope he tackles those well.

Cassette Version
I enjoyed Night over Water and the Key to Rebecca and was really disappointed by this. Perhaps Follett should stick to WWII. I listened to the audio version and when I had to switch it to side two I wondered why I was wasting my time and stopped.
Two things really irritated me. The first was the stereotypical insensitive doctor collecting rape evidence. The second was the reader's abrasive accent.
I found I wasn't enjoying it and popped another cassette in the tape player. The 2 stars are giving it the benefit of the doubt as I only listened to one side of one tape. Otherwise it would have received 1.

Ken Follett has been one of my favorite authors for a good reason: whatever subject and period he chooses for his novel, he always succeeds. That's because he really knows how to flesh out his characters and make you care about them.

The Third Twin introduces likeable protagonists who uncover a sinister military experiment involving human cloning. Although the technology is fascinating, the focus, as always, is on the people and their personalities.

This books offers enjoyable reading and a well-researched plot. If you like Follett, you won't regret reading this one.

I was sad to see the negative reviews aimed at this book because of the right-wing politics of the bad guys. The actual aims and accomplishments of the trio go far beyond currently accepted politics. For instance, the bad guys protect and encourage a person given to multiple rapes and assaults, and the presidential candidate supports forced sterilization of welfare recipients.

If you can deal with that then you can enjoy a good Follett thriller. The bad guys are hoping that a takeover of the gene manipulation company that they own will make them $60 million each. For one, that will finance his run for president and for the others, riches far beyond anything they're used to. Unfortunately, the company has a well-hidden secret in its past that could torpedo the deal.

Against the partners there is only Jeannie, who is unaware of the secret and is a junior lecturer studying identical twins raised apart. The announcement of the takeover is due in a week, and one of the bad guys at the beginning of the book wonders if the secret will ever be discovered in time to stop the takeover. Like him, I felt that there simply wasn't time for this to happen - the odds seemed too great.

Add to this that one of the bad guys runs the department that Jeannie works in, and that another important person is wrongly arrested, and things look hopeless.

However, this is where Follett's skill in plotting comes in. I find that his best thrillers (like Jackdaws) work with a short time period, like a week or a day. This book is no different and plot twists affect the book every few pages, it seems.

It's pretty much impossible to go on without revealing some of the plot, so I'll stop here and recommend that you read this book. As someone who holds views similar to Ken Follett's (supporting the British Labour Party when I lived there) I had to look up his personal details on his web site to discover what his political views were. They're certainly not obvious from this book, which has a cast of many highly-believable characters, both good and bad.

I would like to congratulate Ken Follet to introducing me to the Thriller style books. It was the first adult/thriller book I read and since have read other Ken Follet books and books by James Patterson, Sidney Sheldon and Tom Clancy. Origionally it was the cover which led me to the book and then the Librarian Recomended it. I started reading it and didn't stop until 2 O'Clock in the morning. Only Three books have done that (Harry Potter and the Philosphers Stone, Kiss The Girls and Notes on a big country) There were lots of unexpected twists in the book.

Well..Ken Follet is sure knowledgable about building cathedrals, and he shows his stuff about genetic engineering in The Third Twin. The two books are set in totally different times about totally different things,and the manner with which he portrays his characters is so different too. They are not as cut and dry.The main plot is the search of human behaviour and its causility.But we are offered some reality in this sci-fi when we see the heroine's father,(his age catches up with his mean streak). Also, because of the confusion created by twins..no triplets..no 8 clones, the characters' real behaviour are vague. We are vague about this beacuse Steve Logan is in such a state of confusion and he is bewildered about where he comes from. But in the end when he finds himself, when he realises what makes Steve 'Steve', we also see the clarity of one point i.e. the way one was raised does make a difference..not only genes. Steve Logan is proof. This book is an easy read..you can finish it in a couple of days!

On one level I enjoyed this book. It was a fun read as a mystery-thriller. But I agree with a number of the criticisms voiced already. I didn't like the main character Jeannie & I didn't like the gratuitous political moralizing where all the bad guys were conservatives. If you want to make your bad guys evil for their attempts at genetic manipulation & white supremacist rantings, fine, but don't throw in that they're against gun control & against welfare! And, Jeannie, I just couldn't warm up to. I know Follett likes his heroines feisty, which is fine, but Jeannie was just too counter-cultural for me. The swearing, the free & easy sex life, the "smoking a little weed," and, ugh, the nose ring. Is that really necessary? I also agree that Follett's presentation of academic life is unrealistic. (I am an academic.) Follett's books with a World War II theme are much better.

Another good read from the master.

Ken Follett weaves in alot of twists and turns with good action and a really great plot. You love to love the protagonists and love to hate the villains.

What I liked about this book, and with most of Follett's books is that there's never an absolute good and bad. Everyone has their motivations for doing what they do and it makes everyone more beleivable. I like that his characters are fallible just like real people and try to do the best they can.

Scandals, mergers, genetic engineering, action...great book. couldn't turn the pages fast enough.

KEN FOLLETT IS WITHOUT A DOUBT ONE OF THE BEST AUTHORS AROUND. BOOKS LIKE "THE PILLARS OF THE EARTH, EYE OR THE NEEDLE, ETC..." ARE CLASSIC, BUT HIS RECENT STUFF, THE LAST 3 BOOKS ARE CERTAINLY MORE HOLLYWOODISH.
THE PLOTS ARE LIGHTER, BUT THE BOOKS ARE FUN AND ENJOYABLE. IT ALMOST SEEMS THAT FOLLETT HAS TOTALLY CHANGED HIS WRITING STYLE IN THE PAST FEW YEARS.
ALL IN ALL, I ALWAYS ENJOY HIS BOOKS, MAINLY BECAUSE I LOVE THE WAY HE WRITES. THE THIRD TWIN, WAS SOMEWHAT PREDICTABLE, FAST MOVING, AND A GOOD READ

This has been my third Ken Follett book, and, in my opinion, the worst. Follett seems to have a knack for historical novels, like The Pillars of the Earth and a Place Called Freedom. But still, something irks me.
Why is it that in all of those books, the main characters are all identical phisically, and to some extent, mentally? Maybe Folleit just has a thing for dark, curly-haired women (Jeannie, Aliena, and Lizzie Hallim). It seems that for women to be considered successful they have to be logical, ruthless, and ravenously sensual. Men, with their fair hair and greenish eyes (Tom/Alfred Builder, Malachai McAsh, and Steve Logan) have to fall for the woman first, and somehow save them from a traumatic experience... Does anyoe else see a pattern in this?
Getting back to The Third Twin, this would make a reasonable movie, but somehow it was lacking in personable warmth. I agree with one of the previous reveiwers, it was good, it seems, up to the point of the "perfect soldier", and the whole Pentagon thing I just skipped entirely.
I'm not saying this was a bad book, but then again, is any book truly bad?

This was the first time , I read a novel by Ken Follett and I must say that it was hard to put down. I'm now reading "Eye of The Needle" which is supposed to be even better..wait for that review soon ! Its interesting to read about the potential dangers of human cloning; though it seems far fetched to believe its impact now, this will be a major ISSUE in the next decade or so. Ken Follett may have opened our eyes sooner rather than later ..let's hope that his forthcoming works are just as good.

The plot is predictable and the characters stereotypes, but it moves fast and keeps you turning the page. If you need something to read on a long flight that won't strain your brain too much, this is it.

However, if you're a Ken Follett fan you'll find that this book is not one of his best. And if you haven't read a lot of Ken Follett try "The Man from St. Petersburg" or "Pillars of the Earth" (if you're up for 1000+ pages) rather than this one.

I usually enjoy Follett. His writing is generally intelligent and absorbing. I rented the audio version of this book and was BIG TIME disappointed. Did Ken Follett really write this thing? It was predictable, corny, contained shallow characters, shallow character interactions, and was just a bad read (or listen). I rarely do not finish a novel but I got just plain tired of this. I endured about 85% of the audio but just figured, with as predictable as everything was, I could probably guess out how it ended. Don't judge Ken Follett by this book (or, better yet, don't read).

Ken Follet is one of my favourite writers..... It's my first book whom Ken follet written have i read.In this book,there are many interseting scene and has a very important means for humanity. It seems teach us in order to receive what had GOD given and don't ever change anything in this world. The clonning system may be makes us get a better generation than present, but it would be a very difficult problem for humanity, as we know, there are so many,many nations in this world, so we have'nt a power to control a live at all. This book tells us how a secret experiment had done during the war that wants to create a perfect human for military 0nly without notices effects what could be happened in the future. So, eight new human species had born, each others have many different characteristics although their face were nearly amazing same. The twins of them,really was used by someone of them to do a criminal with a smart alibi.I say that it is a high-tech science in humanity, but it is a way to make a war with GOD, you know,......isn't it? However, this book is very good and special for us to open our visions to apreciate our live.

My book club picked this based on Ken Follett's other books. I think there must be 2 Ken Follett's clones, one who can write and one who can't. This book is by the latter. Very juvenile and poorly written.

I felt there was one, and only one slightly redeeming part of this book which was Follett's eventual answer to the "environment vs genes" debate that he weakly attempts to have through this book (and only because I actually agreed with the answer). Outside of that, I feel sad for the time I lost reading it. My biggest problem with this book (and the only other Follett book I had the misfortune of reading) is the horrific plot flaws. Mainly the ones where the author takes characters, and then has them act completely out of character (typically they go from semi-smart to downright idiotic) purely to advance his plot. It takes any believability away from the story, and makes me lose all care for the remainder. I don't want to post any potential spoilers, but there are times when I just sat there wondering how a character who did so many intelligent things earlier could act so ridiculously stupid.

Ignoring the major plot flaws, the rest of the book is still quite bad. The characters themselves are basically all the same with artificial details (I think this would be called "one-dimensional"). I'm not political (not a fan of donkeys or elephants), but I found the author's ridiculous stereotyping to be annoying. At one point he even says something like "the other 6 board members were white males, so they would support him". Another he says something like "this man helped to support murderers, rapers, and is against gun control". I'm totally in favor of gun control, but what's the point in that statement? To take a shot at conservatives? To show that the author himself is not intelligent enough to distinguish between anti-gun control people and murderers?

I have not looked, but this must have been one of his early works. it just wasn't his usual polished writing. There were also misspellings and even sentences that didn't make sense due to type-os or misspelled words. The story itself was pretty engaging however.

I usually enjoy Follett. His writing is generally intelligent and absorbing. I rented the audio version of this book and was BIG TIME disappointed. Did Ken Follett really write this thing? It was predictable, corny, contained shallow characters, shallow character interactions, and was just a bad read (or listen). I rarely do not finish a novel but I got just plain tired of this. I endured about 85% of the audio but just figured, with as predictable as everything was, I could probably guess out how it ended. Don't judge Ken Follett by this book (or, better yet, don't read).

Ken Follet is one of my favourite writers..... It's my first book whom Ken follet written have i read.In this book,there are many interseting scene and has a very important means for humanity. It seems teach us in order to receive what had GOD given and don't ever change anything in this world. The clonning system may be makes us get a better generation than present, but it would be a very difficult problem for humanity, as we know, there are so many,many nations in this world, so we have'nt a power to control a live at all. This book tells us how a secret experiment had done during the war that wants to create a perfect human for military 0nly without notices effects what could be happened in the future. So, eight new human species had born, each others have many different characteristics although their face were nearly amazing same. The twins of them,really was used by someone of them to do a criminal with a smart alibi.I say that it is a high-tech science in humanity, but it is a way to make a war with GOD, you know,......isn't it? However, this book is very good and special for us to open our visions to apreciate our live.

My book club picked this based on Ken Follett's other books. I think there must be 2 Ken Follett's clones, one who can write and one who can't. This book is by the latter. Very juvenile and poorly written.

I felt there was one, and only one slightly redeeming part of this book which was Follett's eventual answer to the "environment vs genes" debate that he weakly attempts to have through this book (and only because I actually agreed with the answer). Outside of that, I feel sad for the time I lost reading it. My biggest problem with this book (and the only other Follett book I had the misfortune of reading) is the horrific plot flaws. Mainly the ones where the author takes characters, and then has them act completely out of character (typically they go from semi-smart to downright idiotic) purely to advance his plot. It takes any believability away from the story, and makes me lose all care for the remainder. I don't want to post any potential spoilers, but there are times when I just sat there wondering how a character who did so many intelligent things earlier could act so ridiculously stupid.

Ignoring the major plot flaws, the rest of the book is still quite bad. The characters themselves are basically all the same with artificial details (I think this would be called "one-dimensional"). I'm not political (not a fan of donkeys or elephants), but I found the author's ridiculous stereotyping to be annoying. At one point he even says something like "the other 6 board members were white males, so they would support him". Another he says something like "this man helped to support murderers, rapers, and is against gun control". I'm totally in favor of gun control, but what's the point in that statement? To take a shot at conservatives? To show that the author himself is not intelligent enough to distinguish between anti-gun control people and murderers?

I have not looked, but this must have been one of his early works. it just wasn't his usual polished writing. There were also misspellings and even sentences that didn't make sense due to type-os or misspelled words. The story itself was pretty engaging however.

I discovered Follett late in the game and have been working my way through his books for that past few months. Here is what I have learned: Follett historical novels are consistently engrossing and entertaining. Follett's present-day thrillers/technothrillers? Not so much. Whiteout, Hammer of Eden, and especially The Third Twin are chock full of wooden characters, implausible plot twists, cornball dialogue, and clumsily inserted political jabs (leftist.) Skip this one and stick to his historical titles which are terrific.

My friend brought along the audio tape of Ken Follett's "The Third Twin" on our road trip from Boston to Baltimore (6.5 hours). I was a bit skeptical about the book; it sounded too sci-fi for my tastes. Was I wrong! This book kept us engrossed. Even in gridlock on the New Jersey Turnpike. The book was set in Baltimore (our final destination. We knew from the first 5 minutes of the tape that this was going to be a winner!

On a recent trip to Florida I stopped in at the airport book shop and purchased a book for the return flight to Italy. I had read Ken Follet's excellent "Pillars of the Earth" a few years ago and decided to try another of his books. This book did not even approach the level of the first Follet novel I read. Unlike "Pillars", in "The Third Twin" Follet does not appear to have done any research on his subject matter. In one section he has a character reminiscing about his father who was a SECOND LIEUTENANT in the US NAVY. The US Navy has never had second lieutenants; junior officers of that pay grade are called Ensigns. But this is only the beginning of technical errors that destroy an otherwise compelling story line. One of the main weapons of the protagonist is a computer program that she wrote to compare elements in database to develop genetic comparisons. Unfortunately, the way the thing is supposed to work is closer to something that Gandalf or Harry Potter would whip up rather than something out of computer science class. The poorly researched and unbelievable stuff goes on and worsens throughout the book. More examples - people out on bail without a security clearance wandering the halls of the Pentagon and putting magic floppy disks into the Pentagon computers - you guessed it - so they could search the databases on those computers. All in all, I was very, very glad when the book drew to its predictable close.
Follet is a good writer, but he really needs to research his subjects better before writing a book.

One of the things I have always loved about Ken Follett's writings is that he experiments with subject, tone, and genre. And why the heck shouldn't he play around with a buzz issue like cloning? I thought The Third Twin was a lot of fun and enjoyed the characters and plot. Lighten up folks! The English language is so robust it challenges writers over a lifetime to come up with new and different ways of saying things.

This was my first experience with a Ken Follett novel and I was very impressed. The controversial topics that he explored were gripping. although parts of the story were a bit racy, such as the molestation and sex scenes, it was made obvious that it is not a children's book. I enjoyed the suspense and was literally unable to put it down. One night i was up until about 2 am so that i could get to a some what acceptable stopping point. Even then I had dreams about the upcoming events in the story. I am personally very interseted in forensic science and the theories behind crimes hoping to persue a career in that field, therfore this book was a perfect fit for me. The clonig secrets and genetic engineering that was way before its time in this story send a chill down your spine and really make you think about whether it has already happened or not. Maybe it has!? I would suggest this book to all forensic and suspense mystery enthusiasts. Great book with tons of twists and turns that will trick you and make you cringe!

This is my second Ken Follett (my first was "paper money" which was very good). It is a bit like seeing a slick Holywood action movie, the time passes and it is good entertainment and there is ever some insight of some of the characters but on the whole it is pritty empty and manipulative. I enjoyed paper money so much I am not going to give up but if this was the first KF novel I read I am not sure I would want to try another.

KEN FOLLETT IS WITHOUT A DOUBT ONE OF THE BEST AUTHORS AROUND. BOOKS LIKE "THE PILLARS OF THE EARTH, EYE OR THE NEEDLE, ETC..." ARE CLASSIC, BUT HIS RECENT STUFF, THE LAST 3 BOOKS ARE CERTAINLY MORE HOLLYWOODISH. THE PLOTS ARE LIGHTER, BUT THE BOOKS ARE FUN AND ENJOYABLE. IT ALMOST SEEMS THAT FOLLETT HAS TOTALLY CHANGED HIS WRITING STYLE IN THE PAST FEW YEARS. ALL IN ALL, I ALWAYS ENJOY HIS BOOKS, MAINLY BECAUSE I LOVE THE WAY HE WRITES. THE THIRD TWIN, WAS SOMEWHAT PREDICTABLE, FAST MOVING, AND A GOOD READ

What happened to Ken Follett? His earlier works, such as "The Key to Rebecca" and "Eye of the Needle," were well-crafted thrillers. "The Third Twin" is sophomorically episodic with every character as stereotypically painted as imaginable. The novel has little suspense, no interesting characterizations, with foolish plot devices and juvenile twists abound. Ken must be simply churning out the pulp to make a few bucks. Save your money.

I thought the idea of genetic experimentation on humans by corporations and/or government made a great central idea for a thriller. I also liked the idea of a strong female protagonist who stumbles upon the experimentaion and deals with the greedy, arrogant businessmen who want to cover it all up at all cost. I also liked having an evil clone as a secondary antagonist. But the characters weren't particularly well rounded, and instead on focusing on the central idea - genetic experimentation on humans by unethical and immoral people or even the monster clone and his miserable evil ways, the story veered off into an unlikely and very weak romance between one of the good clones and the protagonist. The scenes where the bad clone(s) act bad are the best and most exciting parts.

As both an author and reader of fiction, I was impressed with "The Third Twin". Maybe it is because I have always enjoyed a book that could hold my attention and make me think at the same time. In a nutshell, the characters are believable and yet a little out of the ordinary and the story line unique. Give this book a try.
The fiction book that I have written main story theme is about ten years in the life of a little girl who was "chosen by God" to be the next Madonna in the second coming of Christ. Yes, it has cloning in it.
Tommy Taylor
Author - The Second Virgin Birth

Although the protagonist, Dr. Jean Ferrami, seemed too spotless and perfect, The book was a great example of escape literature. The plot was very involved with much coincidence, but the coincidences were realistic because of the "realistic- science- fiction" situations in the book

Follett uses an interesting technique in the first chapter when he refrains from mentioning the rapist's name; it grabs the reader's attention and holds it through the end of the book. The reader is so interested in the plot because he is appalled at the unfortunate events that occurr in the beginning of the book. He (the reader) becomes even more engrossed in the plot when he discovers the possibility of the "good guy's" innocence.

Follett does a good job of retaining the modern day feeling of the novel. Modern technology plays a major role in the development of the plot. In fact, except for the faultlessness of the protagonist, Follett has written a truly great novel that will still be just as intriguing twenty years from now.

The concept of this novel is an interesting one, and involves cloning of embryos and misuse of IV fertilization. The plot is intriguing and captivating in the first half of the book, but Follett loses steam (and probably interest) there onwards. Not one of his better novels, but it may do well as a made-for-TV movie. I should have waited for it to come out in paperback, and read it on a plane

Recently, a friend of mine lent me her copy of Follett's "Pillars of the Earth." It was basically a good read, although I had to struggle to keep my attention focused through much of the political/religious stuff. When "Third Twin" came out, I decided to check it out. I couldn't believe it was written by the same author! "Twin" was so much faster, more enjoyable, and less bogged down than "Pillars". While I will admit that the characters and the plot were not quite as fully developed, I believe that adds to the charm of the book. I don't know about the rest of you, but after a long day at school and work, the last thing I want to do is read twenty pages about the ongoing angst between a priest and a monk. I read for entertainment, and "Third Twin" was pure entertainment. I liked it so much that I am lending it back to the friend who first tuned me in to Follett.

This was the first book I have ever read by him. I was a little wary of it...but my dad suggested it and our likes in books is genetic, i think. So I read it and WOW. It was great and was a fast read because it had so many twists and turns in it. I thought I had predicted the ending,but nothing I had come up with was even close to the real ending. It was so good that my next book by him was Hammer of Eden. another great one.

I have read a few other of Follett's works, and have generally been satisfied with his writing. This book, however, is a major exception. The characters had no depth, the story was completely convoluted, and the writing was cliched. Further, as a psychology researcher, I was outraged at Mr. Follett's description of the research process in the book, as there is absolutely no way that a psychology researcher would ever be allowed to engage in the protocols that he created for this work. Please, do yourself a favor, and don't waste your time with this book.

Disappointing because the author has written some great books. The characters are caricatures, not the nuance of which Mr. Follett is capable. The conclusion is overwrought and pretty much unbelievable.

This is a book about twins. The subject matter is based on sociology and biomedical science about twins and the nurture vs. nature. Are people conditioned by their environment to behave the way they act or are they born with certain genes that cause them to act a certain way as a response to their environment?

So, my main complaint is this-I hate it when characters have ESP and are suddenly able to jump to the right conclusion. that is annoying. Unfortunately, that sums up every "plot twist" in this sophomoric book. Also, there is no purpose whatsoever for Jeannie's mother in this book-in the beginning she is introduced as having alzheimers and jeannie is just sooo concerned about her and her welfare that she IGNORES her for weeks and runs around with an octuplet. nice. That was just plain bad writing. None of this book was written in any convincing way. At one point, when the clones are brought up, one character suddenly is hit out of the blue by the revelation that the cloning is to breed the perfect soldier...wha??? ugh. I can't stand the main character, Jeannie, either. She is a whiner...and a dumb one to boot (even though it seems she has a degree in computers...no, i mean psychology...no, I mean genetics..again, I say wha??). Give me Patricia Cornwall and her good research any day over this novel.

Ken Follett has developed a plot wrapped around modern issues of test tube children and computer data bases. The characters bumble around a little too much to give the book a five star rating, but it is a well written novel of modern times. A secondary theme is the issue of academic freedom and the manipulations within a major research university. Well worth reading.

I wish Mr. Folliet has done better research before writing the book. The computer searches the whole FBI database in like about an hour or so!! And, all the computer program are carried around in disks!! Besides you don't divide the embryo seven times to get eight clones, you do it three times. I wonder why there wouldn't be radioactive viral genes? And, the clones were different because of nurture? It's almost like saying I acclerated my car till it was faster than light!! If so, why then the talk about human genetic diversity in the end? I read Pillars of the Earth, and I though it was great? I was very dissapointed with this book even though I read it all in a day. Mr. Folliet is gifted storyteller but this looked badly researched, and far from what one would expect.

This was my first Ken Follett book. He was recommended by my father in law. I have a degree in biology so the scientific and genetic aspects of the book were really interesting and the mystery and suspense kept me reading. I'm going to look for another Follett book!

Not the best I've read lately, but not the worst. It's good in-transit reading... holds your attention while on the train or a plane, but you can put it down between trips. Reads like it's on it's way to becoming a screenplay, which is now is: look for it later this television seaso

What a nice surprise! I just read this one because a friend of mine recommended it. I read Follett books before (The Needle and "Lion") but wasn't convinced terribly (I think the settings of the books were too historic for me (WW2, Afghanistan War). But this one has all the elements of a good contemporary thriller: believeable characters, tempo and a nice plot with enough twists to keep you reading for a while. Without putting Ken Follett down: it's the perfect beach read.

Ken Follett allowed his hatred of conservatism to show through. This could have been a very interesting and insightful story, but he allowed this story to become very uninteresting and boring. I will not waste my time in the future on a Ken Follett book. (I have read several in the past).

This book, though it might be a tad predictable, still managed to keep me at the edge of my seat while I was reading it. It's very well written and has a gripping plotline.

My only gripe would be the book has a lot of disturbing molestation scenes in it that are very graphic. The author might have gone a little bit overboard in his descriptions of them.

Other than that the book was great.

I have read this book 6 times, that's how great I think it is. This book is on the bookshelf with all my other favorite books. It's a page turner, it's well written, I couldn't put it down. I won't give away the secret of the book in my review; I'll let you find out yourself. One thing I would like to know--does anyone know of any other good books about twins/clones? Specifically, identical twins.

I think this book as a great plot and many unespected twists and I really loved it. But sometimes is too focused of unimportant particulars like descriptions that are not interesting for the reader, transforming some of its parts in a kind of boring lecture.

...and you can get a pretty good idea of the awfulness of this book. There's a place for simple, entertaining literature out there, and I recognize it. One can be economical with words, and there's not necessarily any need for stylistic flair, polish, or ornamentation in popular books.

Still, this is insulting. Follett is a published novelist, for goodness' sake; there's no reason for grammatical or punctuation errors to show up. If poor proofreading were the extent of the problems, of course, that would be forgivable, but to call the dialogue and exposition "stilted" or "cliched" would be generous. How could anyone wade through this tripe? The bad guys are broad-brushed Nixons with daddy issues, and the good guys are "brilliant" Barbie-and-Ken types who speak like high-schoolers reading from a play script. Is it too much to ask for exposition to be kept out of the mouths of characters? How about a prepositional phrase to begin a sentence?

I'd love to like this book, and have nothing against techno-thrillers, but the poor quality of the writing is just distracting.

this is the book that got me hooked on Ken Follett. after this book i went out and bought 'a place called freedom'. personally, i don't think it was as good as 'the third twin', but i was not disapointed, as no book could ever compare to this one.

If you're into genetic engineering/cloning, Follett's book is alright, but there's a much better one - - "the genesis code" will nail you to your chair and hold your interest much more than Follett's latest offering..

A young female scientist investigating some bizzarre goings on. Two twins, one good one evil, and more twists than a Chubby Checker appreciation dance. (I don't think that's how you spell Chubby Checker, ne'er mind, I didn't care for him much anyway!)

Well researched, very well researched, an absolute must Read.

Once, I finished my first Ken Follett, I was eager to read all he wrote. His works are well researched, and his style is breath-taking. I hope, that he writes more in the future, as he matures like good old wine! Gerborg

Reading Ken Follet is always a pleasure, and The Third Twin is no exception. It is fast-paced, well researched and innovative, making a far-fetched story seem very credible. As all his novels, this includes a bright female hero and a romance with the lead male character, in this case one of several VERY similar young men. So similar, in fact, that she is mistaken, and her confusion leads her to explore a mystery so secret, so controversial that only Ken Follet could have dreamed it up. Enjoy!

There are books that I read straight through for one of two reasons. First, the telling of the story is well turned and interesting, and second, the story itself is interesting. This is definitely just for the story. Goes fast. Good pool/beach side story.

though this was the first book i read by this author and on this subject but this book failed to spring out any surprises...it seemed it be nothing but a hackyneed banal trite thin plot abt a perfect woman and a perfect man....who turns out to be a testtubt baby having 8 identical twins...and in the end they good wins over the evil and so the plot ends...was like reading a fairy tail with genitic modifications....hardly one's idea of a thriller...i guess this hat to be put in the childrens category not in the mysteries group.

again, this great creative idea for a story but the depth is lacking!!!! enjoyable but light - nice for the plane, beach, but sorry, its not as good as some others: man from st. peters; key to rebecca etc.

Excellent book! You won't be able to put this one down! The genetic and scientific detail is enough to make it sound, but not so much that the average reader gets lost in the mumbo-jumbo.
It's a great read, but make sure that you don't have to do anything else, because you won't want to put this book down until you are done!

The plot was interesting, in theory. However, the flat, even silly characters spoiled the book. After hearing of the popularity of this author, I finally tried one of his books. Extremely doubtful that I shall do so again.

its always an enormous disappointment to be let down badly by one of one's favorite authors...and let down i was ..to the point of incredulity..as pages turned i kept looking for the excellence i had come to expect from mr. follet..no luck..no such luck..and when all the cliches had been fully exploited, the so called 'plot' resolved..i was thrilled ...only in that i'd arrived at the final page..i hate to say it ,but i will be hesitant to buy his next work of fiction.

This was not one of Follett's best books. But still, I'm glad I had it on my last trip. It moved pretty fast, like all his books and it was sure better than the movie and made the time pass more quickly.

In my opinion, this was one of Ken Follet's best books. Unfortunately, the title of the book gives away the whole story. Why, oh why, would you put a spoiler in the title. Strange things are happening. The lead character can't figure out why this guy is friendly and interested in her romantically one minute and then the next time he comes over he acts psycho. Oh wait, the third twin...

I am a late bloomer where Ken Follett is concerned. Started with his first, the Modigliani Scandal, wasn't too impressed, and then read this one. I couldn't put it down. Maybe it is because my background is in science and medicine, but I think this is an absolute must read for anyone who loves to have the supense reach out and grab you by the throat and not let you go until the last page. Then again, I always love it when the big BAD gets done in by the plucky underdog! I guess I will be plowing through Mr. Follett's other suspense novels now.

This book is filled with suspense,rape and crime and finishes with an extrordinary and suprising ending. This was the seventh Ken Follett book I had read and I definitly compared it to The Key to Rebecca, Lie Down with Lions and Code to Zero.
... The Third Twin has great characters a deep plot and interesting facts about genetics and test-tube babies. A Follett must-read!

I loved his early and middle books, but I've been growing increasingly disenchanted. I picked this one up with misgivings which turned out well justified. The only reason I finished it was that I was away for the weekend with only this book, and I felt soiled afterwards. Ugly, manipulative, predictable, Follet is now off my list of authors.

This is the first book I have read written by Ken Follett. I was vacationing in Norway, and it was number one on the list there so I thought I would try it! I could not put it down. It kept my attention throughout! It is a novel of numerous twists, turns and surprises. One that I could not put down--and one that I have recommended to others. They enjoyed it just as much as I did! Superb!

Not quite 'Pillars of the Earth' or 'A Dangerous Fortune', but it was an entertaining read. The book had some surprising twists and the characters were quite believable. It did get a bit descriptive at times, but overall it kept pretty focused on the adventure at hand. It does get you to think about what has and is being done in genetics research....creepy! It's a quick and easy read!

This book is very thrilling, with good main characters, and particularly good villains. There are a few notable plotholes, but the fast pace, good writing, and notable characters make up for it. All in all I think this is a great book, with a few minor flaws.

Maybe somebody will find te first 100-200 pages too slow. Well I think they are a very clever and light-to-bear outline of life in the Middle Ages. Edulcorated: maybe. Used inside a fiction, so impossible to be completely faithful and to span the life of a man from every point of view, yet close enough to grasp the challenges and the habits of life at that time. After that, the plot is mastered as probably only this great writer can do.

I haven't read anything else by Ken Follett, and based on this book, I don't plan to. The story line was unbelievable, the plot full of holes, and I didn't care about the characters. Don't waste your money buying this book.

I have loved almost everything that Ken Follett wrote but "The Third Twin" is impossibly bad. It is as unbelievably bad as Robert Ludlum's "Osterman Weekend" Let's hope it was an attempt to see if he could write like Ludlum at his worst.

Ken Follett definately gets ahold of the American legal system in this one - I was quite suprised. Not one of my favorite Follett books, but interesting and informative. Liked learning about DNA and unique research techniques.

I've read a lot of books, good and bad, and this is one of them. Mr. Follett should take his money and run. Because I hate to leave a book unfinished once started, I won't burden myself with starting any new efforts by him

Probably not the best of Follet, however it managed to keep me awake on a Korsika beach while the sun was heating ! The basic idea is quite interesting but the characters are not very deep ones...A good synopsis for a film

This was my first Kellerman read and I really liked it. Since Genetics and the idea of cloning really interests me, this book caught my eye. The characters were very real and it was an easy read. Although it was not my favorite book on the subject of cloning, it was an interesting read.

Although the protagonist, Dr. Jean Ferrami, seemed too spotless and perfect, The book was a great example of escape literature. The plot was very involved with much coincidence, but the coincidences were realistic because of the "realistic- science- fiction" situations in the book

Follett uses an interesting technique in the first chapter when he refrains from mentioning the rapist's name; it grabs the reader's attention and holds it through the end of the book. The reader is so interested in the plot because he is appalled at the unfortunate events that occurr in the beginning of the book. He (the reader) becomes even more engrossed in the plot when he discovers the possibility of the "good guy's" innocence.

Follett does a good job of retaining the modern day feeling of the novel. Modern technology plays a major role in the development of the plot. In fact, except for the faultlessness of the protagonist, Follett has written a truly great novel that will still be just as intriguing twenty years from now.

The premise of this book is quite exciting, and the dust jacket blurbs will make you pick it up. Alas, Follett does not seem to do all that could have been done with the scenario he created. Much of the dialogue seems mechanical, and it's interesting that Follett frequently uses the odd construction: "Jeannie said: '....'" to have dialogue, which adds to the detached feel of the character interaction. While Follett's premise of a misuse of genetic engineering is interesting, he cops out on the answer to the "nature vs. nurture" argument that the lead charracter is trying to answer. This is worthwhile poolside reading, but wait for the paperback or tv movie

My time could have been better spent if I had watched Rikki Lake go on about "Get your hands off my man." I must admit it started out very interesting, but somewhere in the middle this thriller turned into a half baked sci-fi with no imagination. Became too preachy about the consequences of experimental bio-medical research without any scientific factual bases. I quess I couldn't blame the author too much. I am sure he had to meet the deadline given by his publisher

This book is not quite a page turner yet still quite a compelling and satisfying read. The characters are well-drawn and believable as is most of the plot (and the politics and science behind the plot). Although the story is just a bit dated, and there were a few typos in the Kindle version that I read (made me happy to see, as an Indie author and publisher who is tired of the beat-downs Indie authors get for imperfectly edited books--as legacy publishers also obviously have typos): "Jump in the ear." That typo was hilarious (it occurred in a flashback to childhood, for the main character Dr. Jeannie Ferrami). I liked the science, the strong male characters, the political and academic settings and situations. The females in peril scenarios were very realistically written. In certain moments there was an emotional quality lacking (in the experience of the female character's particularly. Not every male writer can capture what it's like to be a woman) yet the plot elements involving women were inherently fascinating, whether they occurred in lab/science scene, a detective/rape aftermath scene, or during an actual violent/sexual scene between main characters. Not sure why so many people hated or felt disappointed by this book. Yes, it did seem somewhat uneven yet the dialogue, characters, plot, scenes/setting and much of the prose felt right-on--it was a generally good read. If you like political thrillers and science gone awry/abused for greed, as well as strong female characters, then I think you would enjoy this book. It was a good enough read that I kept wanting to get back to it (even after using up my allotted reading time for the day :D). Happy reading~*

The book is interesting and suspenseful but I didn’t feel that it had the same level of character development that I’ve come to expect from Ken. There were also many punctuation and misspelling errors which I found distracting. Not a bad read but Ken has much better novels generally!