"State Of Fear" - Not So Hot - NYT Review Of Books

[hatrack]

"There's a problem with Michael Crichton's new thriller, and it shows up before the narrative even begins. In a disclaimer that follows the copyright page, Crichton writes: ''This is a work of fiction. Characters, corporations, institutions and organizations in this novel are the product of the author's imagination, or, if real, are used fictitiously without any intent to describe their actual conduct. However, references to real people, institutions and organizations that are documented in footnotes are accurate. Footnotes are real.' Footnotes?

Yes, there will be footnotes. Although ''State of Fear'' comes dressed as an airport-bookstore thriller, Crichton's readers will discover halfway through their flight that the novel more closely resembles one of those Ann Coulter ''Liberals Are Stupid'' jobs. Liberals, environmentalists and many other straw men endure a stern thrashing in ''State of Fear,'' but Crichton's primary target is the theory of global warming, which he believes is a scientific delusion. In his zeal to expose the emperor's nudity the author cites, ad nauseam, actual studies that seem to contradict the conventional wisdom on global warming. Hence, footnotes.

Scholarly trappings aside, ''State of Fear'' does follow the basic conventions of the mass-market thriller. There are villains, there are heroes and there is an evil plot to be foiled. Chief among the baddies is Nicholas Drake, head of an environmental group called the National Environmental Resource Fund (NERF), who has conspired with radical eco-terrorists to trigger a series of climate-related catastrophes. Drake believes the disasters will convince the public that global warming is an imminent crisis that can be averted only by writing big fat checks to NERF. As Drake explains to a P.R. man, John Henley, global warming simply isn't scary enough. ''You can't raise a dime with it, especially in winter,'' he says. ''Every time it snows people forget all about global warming. Or else they decide some warming might be a good thing after all. They're trudging through the snow, hoping for a little global warming. It's not like pollution, John. Pollution worked. It still works. . . . You tell 'em they'll get cancer, and the money rolls in. But nobody is scared of a little warming.''

EDIT

This might all be good if not screamingly clever fun -- but for the footnotes. The annoying citations make it apparent that the author desperately wants to be taken seriously on the global warming stuff. That would be perfectly fine in a Weekly Standard cover story. In a thriller, it's a little like having the author interrupt the story to insist that Dr. Evil actually has a death ray. Crichton's proof is itself laughably rigged. Kenner cites study after study but Drake, the scheming NERF leader, is allowed no evidence. ''Just trust me, it's happening,'' Drake says of global warming. ''Count on it.'' There are, of course, thousands of scientific studies that raise disturbing questions about climate change and the human role in its cause. To claim that it's a hoax is every novelist's right. To criticize the assumptions and research gaps in global warming theory is any scientist's prerogative. Citing real studies to support the idea of a hoax is ludicrous."

EDIT

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/30/books/review/30BARCOTT.html?oref=login

[wtmusic]

1. There Crichton goes playing scientist again

Yes, Michael, you're very smart! Now go play with your chemistry set and STFU...

[Sugarbleus]

2. I'm very anxious to read it when it comes out in paperback

can't afford the hardcover. I like to look at both sides before deciding on an issue.

[TO Kid]

4. It's pretty good actually

Some of the characters are one-dimensional but it makes for a good yarn; I found it more readable than the typical spy novel. I bought the electronic version at ebooks- electronic books are about half the price of the paper edition.

[Dogmudgeon]

3. A stern thrashing

From what I hear, it's more like a stern monkey-spanking.

--p!