Just finished reading Michael Crichton's Prey last night. It's an amazing thing about Crichton. Even when the plot isn't all that great (like here) and even when a willing suspension of disbelief is not enough to make you accept the premise (like here), he still can manage to keep you on the edge of your seat, so to speak. The characters are all interesting and you find yourself wanting to know how it ends, even after you've started to see the smoke and the mirrors and the strings that pull the puppets and how they work. He can milk a suspensful incident for every single word that it's worth, and then go on and think up a few more.
In short, even when you have not too much good to say about the book, you find you have to admit that the man can certainly write.
And, as susual with Chrichton's science-based thrillers, the introduction, notes and bibliography are at least as interesting (maybe more so) than the main fictional story.
Just finished reading Michael Crichton's Prey last night. It's an amazing thing about Crichton. Even when the plot isn't all that great (like here) and even when a willing suspension of disbelief is not enough to make you accept the premise (like here), he still can manage to keep you on the edge of your seat, so to speak. The characters are all interesting and you find yourself wanting to know how it ends, even after you've started to see the smoke and the mirrors and the strings that pull the puppets and how they work. He can milk a suspensful incident for every single word that it's worth, and then go on and think up a few more.
In short, even when you have not too much good to say about the book, you find you have to admit that the man can certainly write.
And, as usual with Chrichton's science-based thrillers, the introduction, notes and bibliography are at least as interesting (maybe more so) than the main fictional story.
If the factual apparatus to a Michael Crichton novel is as interesting or more so than the novel iteslf, the man certainly CANNOT write, Merry Andrew!
At a benefit I recently attended, I met Bob Mankoff. For those of you who don't know, as I didn't before this meeting, he's the chief cartoon editor for The New Yorker. (One of his most recent jokes, my favorite, is the one where the businessman is standing behind a big desk, talking on the phone. He's saying, "no, Thursday doesn't work for me, how about never, does that work for you?)
Anyway all that to say that I've been reading his most recent book, "The Naked Cartoonist." He gives a lot of advise about humor and specifically what makes a cartoon funny. It's easy reading, funny and informative. I recommend it highly.
It is funny, MA, I picked up "Prey" because I was interested in nano-technology stuff, and I was fascinated especially by ths stuff about the programs being borrowed from creatures like ants and bees, and their behaviour structures.
I agree with you that the book is a pot-boiler - well, you did not say that, but still.. Craven says his stuff befor e"JUrassic Park" is better - but I have not read any of that, I do not think.
Mond you - I would not sneeze at being able to write a pot-boiler that sold as well as his do!
Agreed, Deb. There's really nothing wrong with pot-boilers if they're well-done. Not every piece of writing by a professional writer who makes his living from the printed word is going to be great literature. (Read that sentence again; it does so make sense.) THe trick is to write a pot-boiler so that otherwise literate people will still want to read it. They may criticize it harshly afterwards, but they will read it.
Another Stephen Jay Gould "Dinosaur in the haystack" - he's very readable y'know!
Lola wrote:At a benefit I recently attended, I met Bob Mankoff. For those of you who don't know, as I didn't before this meeting, he's the chief cartoon editor for The New Yorker. (One of his most recent jokes, my favorite, is the one where the businessman is standing behind a big desk, talking on the phone. He's saying, "no, Thursday doesn't work for me, how about never, does that work for you?)
I cut out that cartoon and brought it to work. I thought it was a particularly apropo remark for some of my work situations. I don't remember the cartoon as being that recent, perhaps a year ago.
Cartoon choosing, now there is a job I might really like....
Phoenix, I don't understand your question. What does a "novel based on real world incidents" mean? As far ass bestselling authors who are better than Crichton, I can name a few...John Le Carre for one, he's one of the best novelists around in any genre and millions of people read him. You don't have to sacrifice literary quality the way Crichton does to be readable.
Anyone read "The Gangs of New York"?
Starting "Queen of the Damn" for a second time around!
Am reading lots from the internet lately, especially a2k and e-mail. Oh, and I'm just starting Happiness. Death. and the Remainer of Life by Johathan Lear.
I'm reading Norman Mailer's new book on writing (mostly old stuff rearranged) THE SPOOKY ART, an anthology from the now defunct magazine Lingua Franca called QUICK STUDIES, and to improve my mind I am wading through Schopenhauer's THE WORLD AS WILL AND IDEA.
I've just finished reading A Confederacy of Dunces.
John Reilly, the main character of the novel, reminds me of a member of this site.
fbaezer wrote:I've just finished reading A Confederacy of Dunces.
Set in New Orleans and the 'hero' lives in his family house with his mother? Yikes. Wasn't the hero's name Ignatius?
Yes, Ignatius P. Reilly, if memory serves...
I am reading 'Ki in everyday life' after taking a ki lesson a couple of weeks ago. Now I am trying to concentrate on 'the one point' in my belly and letting my ki flow. I went to sleep immediately last night doing that :-)
Yes, Ignatius.
Brain damage can be contagious.
Buffalo soldier by Chris Bohjalian. As much as I am liking it, I might pick sunnier days to read it.
