[darryl]

Du Maurier's real world is a real world with which we are familiar and has not been substantially affected by the drug. The wider setting requires no further explanation. Ishiguro sets his book in a "real" world substantially affected by his premise and then abandons that world in favour of a literary character study. It is not the lack of plausibility of the science so much as starting with a premise with enormous implications and then focusing narrowly on one minor aspect. For me, this didn't work, and I've tried to articulate why it didn't work for me and now why it didn't work for me whilst the Du Maurier did. I have no problems at all with the fact that some people loved Never Let Me Go.