posted
Anyone else read this book? I just finished it a few minutes ago. Deals heavily with academic and industrial use of genes of all sorts, primarily human and primate.
Pretty alarming story, but it's fiction after all. Like many of his stories, the biggest single theme running through it seems, to me anyway, to be more of a message: the media does not know what it's talking about when it comes to science. Another message closely related appears to be: as the line between academia and business grows more and more blurred, scientists should not necessarily be trusted to be without bias, on all sides of an issue.
I don't really know enough (really, much of anything at all) about the history or the science involved to judge the accuracy of scientific claims in the book, but those two messages seem to me, at least, to be worth considering very carefully.
posted
I've enjoyed a lot of Crichton's books, but after reading Rising Sun I realized how far off the mark he can get. (Rising Sun was all about how insidious Japanese corporations are and how much danger they pose to the US...)
Posts: 2911 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmmm, it's been a long time since I've read that one...years. I'll have to give that one another look, just to see if I agree with your vibe on it, plaid.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't read Crichton since middle school, but my brother gave me this book for Christmas so I read it. I thought it was fairly mediocre.
I agree with you about the messages, and the subject itself is interesting. In my opinion, Crichton fell short on the execution. I found the whole thing rather disconnected yet predictable, and I could feel myself rushing to get it over with.
Posts: 866 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't really read Crichton for stories. I sort of read him for a fun dramatization of the essay at the end of the book (which I usually like).
So in that context, I really enjoyed Next Can't for the life of me remember what happened, but it was fun.
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll second not reading Crichton for the stories...at least, not for the stories in and of themselves anyway.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh... I only ever read Crichton for the stories. His grasp of science is above-average versus most thriller writers (although that really isn't saying much), but he doesn't know nearly as much as he thinks he does, and he is guilty of blind ideological bias at least as often as the people he criticizes. He's the Dan Brown of the technogeek suspense novel.
Also, one passage in "Next," in which a journalist is described as a baby-rapist, is apparently a thinly veiled attack on a real-life journalist who posted a negative review of Crichton's previous book. That was asshat-ish (and pathetically childish) enough to make me swear off Crichton's work for good.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:...he is guilty of blind ideological bias at least as often as the people he criticizes.
Where, and what ideology? The only strain of ideology I've noticed present in all his stories is distrust of the media, and science and technology change. Hardly an ideology.
I read about the naming controversy. Seems unusually vindictive and hateful to me, too...I'd have to see the history between the two men first, before I made some sort of judgement on it.
------
Hmmm. Well, while the 'journalist' does read like he's a prick (a quick look at the 'controversies' section of wiki's New Republic section makes me hesitant to apply that label to anyone working there), and he does a lot of armchair psychology, he doesn't read like he deserves to be maligned in this way...as it appears very, very likely he has been.
Unfortunately, I can't read his review since it requires subscription...and I don't patronize such one-way magazines. He does seem to rather humorously identify a pro-Bush stance in Crichton's writing and opinions, which having actually read State of Fear is amusing to me.
Has anyone heard anything about Crichton's response on this issue? I mean, I enjoy his work and respect his general themes of skepticism and mistrusting mass-media, but I don't really think I'll be buying anything of his if he either has no explanation of this, or one that seems implausible.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really didn't like State of Fear, so I'm not sure whether I'll bother to look at this one. I used to be a big fan of his books, but not so much at the moment.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
He's crawling up from the stupidity of State of Fear, but Next has been described as a total 'meh' from all the erstwhile Chrichton fans near me.
Like, literally. Verbatim 'meh.' So I skipped it.
Also the whole "you posted a negative review of my last so I am making you a baby rapist in this one so NYAH." incident really makes him seem like a hilariously petulant child! Go Chrichton! Woo!
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: Also the whole "you posted a negative review of my last so I am making you a baby rapist in this one so NYAH." incident really makes him seem like a hilariously petulant child! Go Chrichton! Woo!
Wow. I thought that some of his earlier books were really anti media. Sounds like he is trying to stoop even lower for this one.
Posts: 2437 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you're going to do it, you have to do it large and grandiloquent, like how Dante put a bunch of public figures in the fiery pits of hell to rot for all eternity for crimes against God and His Creation. Reserving it for book reviewers who got under your skin? Plebeian.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it was really what he did. All we have so far is this sensationalist journalist claiming that he thinks he might be the basis for that character....
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:In his 2006 novel Next, Crichton introduces a character named "Mick Crowley" who is a Yale graduate and a Washington D.C.-based political columnist. "Crowley" is portrayed by Crichton as a child molester who is on trial for the anal rape of his two-year-old nephew. "Crowley" is also said to have a small penis. The character is not important to the plot and appears only incidentally.
A real person named Michael Crowley is also a Yale graduate, and a senior editor of The New Republic, a Washington D.C.-based political magazine. In March 2006, the real Crowley wrote an article strongly critical of Crichton for his stance on global warming in State of Fear.
posted
I don't care about the petty fights that Crichton gets into or the flaws in his characterization or story telling. I'm just glad that things like gene patenting and some of the probable causes of genetic engineering are mainstream.
Many who read it will probably have scimmed through most of the genetic details, and may not get all that much out of the book, but the mere fact that this book is in the Barnes and Noble Top 10 gives me comfort.
It reminds me of when Brokeback Mountain came out and someone called it shocking that a movie like that could win awards. I heard someone say that it is not shocking, for the very fact that it did win awards means that the concepts have now entered mainstream thought.
The mere fact that Next is selling so well means that these concepts are at least beginning to be thought about by many people, and whether they agree, disagree, or just plain don't understand doesn't matter.
Posts: 1711 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wonder how often authors get in trouble for putting their critics in their works?... Steve Gerber (Howard the Duck creator) got in trouble for basing a villain (Dr. Bong) off one of HIS critics...
Posts: 2911 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have enjoyed Crichton's work for a good decade now. Nobody writes quite like he does and I am glad for it. I'm surprised to hear some complain that he writes as if his readers are dumb when that is one of the reasons I enjoy his writing. He is trying to take us somewhere and I would much rather here an explanation for a term I already knew then to see Crichton just drop words I do not understand. Crichton's a doctor and the science heavy speek of his books could have turned me off but I feel like he wants me to come with him on his stories BECAUSE he explains so much. I love reading the appendices to his books, and his after thought. I enjoyed the foot notes from State of Fear, and I will likely pick up Next soon and give it a whirl.
People might disagree with his ideas but you can't really disagree with, "Learn to think objectively." and, "Don't think scientists are the paragons of pure analysis, they have their biases too." I feel like he is a VERY balanced thinker. His books have sold well because most people like to hear what he has to say. Love him or hate him, I think he is still unique in the genre.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Can't for the life of me remember what happened, but it was fun.
