On my January 7th post about Michael Crichton's latest fictional outing, there was a follow up comment regarding his book prior to "Next." More has just been published regarding Crichton's work so I thought I'd post this new link to keep the string alive.
Check this out. A writer up in Canada, Robert J. Sawyer, differs from the previous post on the appropriateness of the message conveyed by "Next." He makes meaningful statements about fiction, in my opinion, and makes deft comparisons to some of the earliest science fiction writers in the process.
However, he stays consistent with Peter Dingus (author of Proteus Rising commenting on the Jan. 7th post) on the horrible fallacy of "State of Fear." it seems that no matter where I turn, a recurring message is omnipresent: no one appreciates this book. It's routinely considered a grand disservice to the informed scientific community that is globally certain on the subject of our warming earth. Crichton should be ashamed for jumping aboard the anti-movement and for writing what appears to be his worst and most damaging opus in "State of Fear."
With any luck, he'll be a bit vindicated by other reviewers now and again for "Next." I've enjoyed reading earlier books of his and it would be a shame if his horrible misstep on global warming ended a meaningful career.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Follow up on Crichton
Posted by Mark Salow at 10:02 AM
Labels: Michael Crichton, Next, Peter Dingus, Proteus Rising, State of Fear
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment