The first thing I read when I started this novel was the disclaimer:
“This is a work of fiction. Characters, corporations, institutions, and the organizations in this novel are the product of the author’s imagination, or if real, are used fictionally without any intent to describe their actual conduct.”
I was excited to read farther because one of my favorite guilty pleasures is to read my extensive collection of novels by another controversial author, Dan Brown. His books contain a similar warning. After digging into the plot of “State of Fear” I saw many similarities in the writing styles of Michael Crichton and Dan Brown. Both authors create an unlikely protagonist; in Crichton’s case a junior associate at a law firm named Evans. This main character is relatable to the reader because like the reader he is surprised at what he learns from the NERF and the ELF about global warming and eco-terrorists. Evans may accept new ideas and concepts, but like the reader sometimes questions the validity of what he is learning. A simple example of this is a conversation Evans has with Jennifer over lunch early on in the book (p.123). Evans expresses to Jennifer that he agrees with Balder that the sea-level data will be key in the lawsuit. She disagrees,
“Nobody’s seen all the data. But even if it’s high quality, it needs to show a substantial sea-level rise to impress a jury. It may not.” [Jennifer]
“How could it not?” Evans said. “With glaciers melting, and breaking off Antarctica-“
Evan’s knowledge of melting glaciers in Antarctica is part of the discourse of global warming. It is likely that the reader would have said the same thing in response to Jennifer.
“Even so, it may not,” she said. “You know that Maldive Islands in the Indian Ocean? They were concerned about flooding…the scientists found no rise in several centuries-and a fall in the last twenty years.” [Jennifer]
“A fall? Was that published?” [Evans]
Although Jennifer offers a convincing explanation Evans still questions her facts. However, the conversation ends and Evans accepts her explanation when she simply confirms that is was published last year. In this example we see a way in which Crichton is able to contradict common knowledge about global warming by presenting facts and by choosing to have the main character not question the facts too far.
First of all I am also a guilty Dan Brown like-er. Besides that the part of your post that I liked the most was the simple act of accepting facts of science even if they are contradictory to all that you know. I don't know much about science, but a lot of what I hear contradicts other things that I have heard, so what I believe is situational. When Evans believes that sea levels actually receded in part of the Indian Ocean, despite all he has heard about rising sea levels, he accepts it as a black box. Learning facts from scientists who do studies that you have never heard of and never seen is an act of faith that the human race heavily relies on.
ReplyDeleteThe Church went nuts over Dan Brown--set up seminars, published fact sheets. His history is a mess (like Dr. C's science), but the story is so compelling.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Allie in seeing Evans as key: he's like us. He's skeptical. As he's won over, so am I. And books like this can change the world.
I think everybody now believes the Jesuits are a bunch of CIA Ninjas.