Brainstorm

by Richard Dooling

¿Somos verdaderamente libres o estamos determinados por las características fisiológicas de nuestro cerebro? La respuesta a este difícil interrogante será la clave para que Joe Watson, un joven abogado designado de oficio para defender a un delincuente de poca monta, llegue a esclarecer la verdad. El caso es difícil: el presunto homicida pertenece a una organización racista de extrema derecha, la víctima era un hombre negro y sordo, y el fiscal pretende aplicar una nueva legislación que castiga con la pena capital los crímenes motivados por el odio racial. Resistiendo a la presión de jueces y fiscales, y a riesgo de ser expulsado del prestigioso bufete donde trabaja y de que su mujer le abandone, Watson cuenta con sólo dos aliados para llevar a cabo la investigación: una hermosa neuróloga con un claro interés por el cerebro del acusado, además de un interés no tan profesional por el propio Watson, y una abogada criminalista con muchas agallas y muy pocos escrúpulos.

Genres: Fiction, Thriller, Mystery, American

405 pages, Paperback

First published March 24, 1998

About the author

Richard Dooling's first novel, Critical Care, became a film directed by Sidney Lumet, starring James Spader and Helen Mirren. His second novel, White Man's Grave, was a finalist for the 1994 National Book Award. Brain Storm and Bet Your Life were both New York Times Notable Books of the Year.

His nonfiction includes Blue Streak, on swearing and free speech, and Rapture for the Geeks: When AI Outsmarts IQ.

His writing has appeared in The New Yorker, Esquire, The Wall Street Journal, and The New York Times. In 2003–2004, he helped write and produce Stephen King's Kingdom Hospital for ABC.

His latest books are Send the Dead, a novella and four stories, and The Acolyte, a novel (June 2026).

After college, Dooling worked as a respiratory therapist in intensive care units and spent a year traveling in West Africa — experiences that informed his first two novels. He practiced law in St. Louis and now lives in Montana with his wife, Kristy.

Subscribe to "I Would Prefer Not To," a quarterly newsletter by Richard Dooling, with links to his recent published essays, news about upcoming books, and new Kindle Unlimited editions of his old books. Sign up at dooling.com or at https://newsletter.dooling.com.

Reviews

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Brain Storm is rated a measly 3.23 on goodreads, perhaps one of the worst ratings I've ever seen. I mean, given the narrow range of the bell-shaped curve of typical ratings, that's the goodreads equivalent of a D minus. I find it astonishing, as in my opinion it's a truly brilliant book. The legal thriller plot revolves around the concept of hate crime statutes that add multiples of punishments to a given crime, in this case a murder of a black man by a white racist. But there isn't a hint of SJW sympathy from the author; his premise is that the crime itself should provide sufficient cause for punishment regardless of any difficult-to-prove hateful motivations against protected groups. The book was published in 1998 but could have been written last year. The writing is crisp, intelligent, and brimming with dark humor. I think a big part of the animus against the book is that it presents large sections of neuroscientific discussions dealing with the seats of consciousness, aggression, passion, and even racial animus. The discussions are very technical but clearly explained to those with the patience and curiosity to follow them, and I suspect readers without a background in the biological sciences just get lost. Perhaps they were expecting feather-weight, beach-ready legal thrillers like Grisham and Martini (both of whom I have read and enjoyed). Pity. I like a book that offers an intelligent challenge. But once again the reception of this book calls into question the reliability of goodreads ratings.

[Chris Merola · Rating 3 out of 5]

An uneven, wild ride. Dooling tackles neuroscientific determinism, hate crime law, and fidelity in this sprawling legal thriller(?). The story is hard to classify, as things go off the rails after a major reversal of fortune just past the midpoint. This is where Dooling starts to really love the smell of his own farts - Digressions abound, and once-satirical, sharp characters morph into caricatures. But worst of all, Dooling decides to dump maple syrup all over his ending.

Brain Storm is at its best when Dooling taps into his legal background to deliver nuanced, humorous, passionately-written takes on law and the people who practice it. The book is a legal drama of sorts, so these sections feel appropriate while remaining thrilling to the reader and authentic to the life of the author. It's all the more disappointing, then, that Dooling robs our protagonist of a strong climax in the form of the trial. This central conflict is solved in a deus ex machina that's unsatisfying dramatically and thematically - I'm left underwhelmed as someone who cared about the characters, and as someone who wanted the themes of the story to be supported by its conclusion.

Dooling cares about a variety of fascinating topics. He writes with passion, and his prose is engaging (if positively OVERCOOKED). I'm very happy I read this, even though it didn't quite come together.

[Justin · Rating 2 out of 5]

I first read this book maybe seven years ago after encountering a reference to it in Stephen King's excellent On Writing. I just read it again in light of my recent attempts at reentry into the acting world: I remembered there being a passage that might make for a good comedic audition monologue.

I found the passage, a sarcastic rant about Medicare delivered by a hick living in St. Louis, and it's as funny and biting as I remember. The rest of Brain Storm didn't quite live up to my fond memories. A practicing lawyer, Richard Dooling is a very intelligent, almost visionary thinker with a pretty good sense of humor and decent, if not extraordinary, writing chops. His White Man's Grave, about a Peace Corp volunteer gone missing in Africa, was a rather brilliant juxtaposition of two wildly different cultures. Brain Storm is no less chock full of great ideas, but here, Dooling does a poorer job of balancing them. It feels like, after Grave got nominated for a National Book Award in 1994, Dooling was given pretty much free reign from his editors on the next project. The result is an overstuffed meditation on everything from the potential hypocrisies of hate crime allegations to internet research and the information age to the debate over neuroscience and the existence of the human soul. Gluing it all together is an incredibly complicated plot about an upstart lawyer with no trial experience who gets appointed with the impossible task of representing a troubled hillbilly charged with the murder of a deaf black man.

What I've just written barely scratches the surface of all the stuff Dooling has crammed in here. I have no idea who read this book when it came out. I think it was marketed as a legal thriller in the vein of Grisham, but its chapters-long theoretical tangents frequently read more like a textbook than The Firm, and it's interspersed not with taut courtroom drama, but rambling dialog between protagonist Joe Watson and characters like a sexy neuroscientist who wants to conduct cutting-edge brain research with his client; and the cantankerous Judge Stang who hates lawyers and does everything he can to keep his cases from even GETTING to the trial stage. There is not one trial scene in the whole book; in fact, now that I think about it, Brain Storm's main action is intentionally ANTI-courtroom, one of its main points seeming to be that the real action of the American legal system happens behind the scenes, in a nightmarish web of negotiating, plea-bargaining, research, and general buearacracy. This is all well and good and even intermittently interesting, but it makes for a convoluted haul of a novel, especially one that clocks in at 400 pages.

Once again: Who read this book?

[Ron · Rating 5 out of 5]

It is about how neuroscience interacts the law, especially in terms of determining criminal responsibility for acts committed while the brain is compromised. It is about the whole issue of brain vs. mind (or mind vs. brain)--are we more than the sum of our billions of brain cells? It is about the (perhaps) illusion of free will. It is about the battle between the law and justice, and how the question of justice is related to the neuroscientific understanding of the brain. It is about the conflict between big law firms' desire to make their associates rack up billable hours, and the responsibility of lawyers in law firms to consider the possibility of working for justice, rather than just for fees. It is about the humiliations judges can inflict on lawyers in and out of the courtroom.
It was a hoot, all the way through. The criminal is a horrible racist asshole, clever enough to be involved in a counterfeit money scheme, but not clever enough to see how his wife sets him up in order to abscond with the money. But asshole or not, he deserves to be defended, and that defense turns on whether he could be termed neurologically responsible. The horny neuroscientist hilariously traps the hero, Joe, into a multisensory brain scan while she masturbates him while explaining how his responses to erotic stimuli are perceived in scans of various parts of his brain. And the scenes in the judge's chambers are priceless as he browbeats the federal attorneys.
I will remember the jerk-off scene in the lab, and the beautiful horny scientist's running commentary. I will remember Judge Stang's low opinion of and subsequent harsh treatment of lawyers. I will remember Joe's interior monologues, trying to work through all the conflicting feelings and values and moral quandaries suddenly thrown upon him by Judge Stang's choice of him as the pro bono defense lawyer.

[Marguerite Hargreaves · Rating 3 out of 5]

Brain Storm is a good courtroom drama by someone not named Grisham. The plot is interesting and even parallels some of the non-fiction I'm reading about how the human brain works. Maybe it's better described as a medical-legal thriller. The characters are interesting, though the females tend to be caricatures. I particularly like the character of Judge Stang, who never met a lawyer he could tolerate. The pacing is pretty good, and tension holds up almost to the end. But Richard Dooling needs an editor. He seems to be in love with his voice, and the more polysyllabic he can make his writing, the better. I'm all for expanding vocabularies and self-expression, but I find his writing, particularly the inner life of main character Joe Watson, painfully gassy at times. You may choose to poot, Mr. Dooling, but I choose to leave the room.

[Michael Flick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Legal/neuroscience thriller doing what the novel does best: reveal the underbelly of the so-called criminal justice system, entertaining theater.

[Wendy Johnson · Rating 2 out of 5]

This may have seemed cutting edge re use of computers when written but too much emphasis on technology of the time makes the book feel dated and tiresome now.

Main protagonist also weakly drawn and insubstantial. Continued reading because reviews on cover gave high praise for humour in story and writing . I found none. I don’t think this book can have taken the author long to write.

The legal bits around hate crimes were interesting to an extent but not enough to carry book.

I feel that humour may have been lost in translation between continents and legal systems.

Disappointing - not that I could have done any better. May try to read one of the books with higher ratings if I come across it as perhaps this is not the best of the author’s work.

[Mark Richardson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Last year I was diagnosed with Parkinson’s. At first, I didn’t believe the diagnosis was accurate, but now I have accepted it. This book provided a great overview of the history of the illness and how it impacts people. What I’d like to know is what my future holds, but no one can predict the future. Eat well, sleep, and most importantly, exercise.

[art pajak · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very original

At first I thought all the medical terms would be bothersome. I was wrong. The writing is superb and the plot tight. Great characters. As I read I grew to enjoy following the jargon.

[Maxiel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Emocionante y atrapante de principio a fin, un libro genial e increíble que combina leyes, informática y neurociencia de una forma increíble. Ha sido una grata lectura, el libro no tiene perdida

[Janet · Rating 5 out of 5]

I first read this in 2012 when it came out and loved it. Still laughed out loud, love Myrna, Judge Stang, and the protagonist and the way he thinks!

[Sharon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not a winner in my book. The court case surrounding the murder of an African-American artist who has been hired to teach a deaf child sign language. The husband determined the artist a threat to his marriage and dispatched him. He's been charged with murder.

The court appointed lawyer has never been in a courtroom before, he's conflicted as his law firm want him on something that has billing potential and this has none. The presiding judge is focussed but very odd.

In fact, there are lots of odd things. I finished the book but just barely.

[Kaylie Longley · Rating 4 out of 5]

Though Brain Storm’s plot involves the darker, grayer side of the law, the book is really a love letter to the social sciences. Brain Storm is not only fun to read, it’s enlightening, dynamically reviewing the individual differences and subtleties that afflict humans to create biases, commit crimes based on perceived difference, and grapple with the concept of the self and soul, all while examining social organizations that enforce maladaptive behaviors and legal associations that reprimand them. In short, there’s a lot going on here, and understandably so, as author Dooling is a practicing lawyer himself and well acquainted with the curiosities of human nature. The brains, or rather characters, in question include Joe Watson, a young lawyer who is considering infidelity, along with a career switch to anthropology, world literature, or king of the Internet, Rachel Palmquist, a neurologist who is the target of the lawyer’s quasi-adultery (Watson’s words, not mine), and the defendant himself, Jimmy Whitlow who may either be the smartest or dumbest bigot this side of St. Louis. Sure, Dooling discusses everything from the pervasive nature of the Internet and hate crimes to shady government practices, but these hot topics are balanced by its underlining themes, provocative characters, and boisterous humor.

[martin · Rating 2 out of 5]

I know we should never rely on the heavily truncated quotes from news reviews publishers put on their books, but I really did expect more from this one. I found it pretentious, excessively technical and definitely over-obsessed with using "clever" polysyllabic words when simple ones would do.
The hero is a pathetically inexperienced wimp with minimal self control and yet wins a case on hate laws without even trying hard. Get real!

That said, the Judge Strang and Myrna Schweich characters are fun and remind me of real people. The villain of the peace and especially his supposed post-operative highly ironic rebirth were suitably nasty and hateful to get over the message that even the nastiest scum needs a defence lawyer.

[Mark]

This was a legal thriller/humorous satire, but even when I read the plot summary, it fired nary a synapse.

[David · Rating 1 out of 5]

So far this is a slow moving book. But I am only a few pages into it

[Catherine · Rating 4 out of 5]

Asks the right questions about hate crime legislation. Timely, as we're getting ready to expand our hate crime statutes.

[Ria]

Brainstorm by Richard Dooling (2001)

[Daisy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Too cerebral (in a medical sense) for my tastes.

[Michael · Rating 3 out of 5]

Decent lawyer book with a new twist - brain science.

[Kelly · Rating 2 out of 5]

An interesting idea but the story gets lost in too much computer lingo that doesn't add to anything meaningful. And if the story was supposed to be humorous or satirical, it just didn't work for me.

[Joshua · Rating 2 out of 5]

Aangenaam om lezen, maar daarmee is ook alles gezegd. De humor die beloofd was, heb ik niet gevonden ...