State of Fear begins by telling its readers that it is a work of fiction but concludes by saying that the footnotes are real. From this preamble, I was confused: was this a work of fiction or non-fiction? From what I have read so far, it seems a hybrid of both genres. The reader is introduced to hypersonic cavitation technology and weather modification by changing "the electric potentials of the infra-cumulus strata (p. 313)." This sounds like what could be “word magic” that is used both in the reality of the science world or a catchy quote designed to reel in audiences. There seems to be a fair amount of seeing devices used in the form of nonfiction essays and statistics revealing the lies of environmentalism; however because it is inserted in the midst of a predictable good vs. evil fiction plot, I found it hard to take them seriously as facts from “real” sources. For me, these seeing devices lost their credibility due to a poor welcoming venue.
The novel's basic plot is simple and predictable. It involves a struggle between the bad guys of the "Environmental Liberation Front", who travel the globe causing catastrophes to blame on industry, and the good guys from the top-secret "National Security Intelligence Agency" whose mission is to destroy the ELF. The NSIA is headed up by know-it-all superhero, Kenner, and his trusty sidekick, Sanjong. The sinister Drake guides the nefarious actions of the ELF. The earnest young lawyer Peter Evans is the likable protagonist. The book’s purpose to debunk environmentalism occurs mainly through conversations between Kenner and Evans that serve to tie in the nonfiction “footnotes” into the plot.
The author’s desire to prove his point becomes too apparent, as many of these seem melodramatic and something straight out of an entertaining, yet fictitious, movie. Every environmentalist is revealed to be a mustache-twirling villain: Hollywood tree-huggers are unmasked as idiots, while their lifestyles are ridiculed. Other environmentalists are either bloodthirsty terrorists or greedy hustlers living large on donations to their movement. They gleefully kill people using esoteric means and plan global catastrophe for their own agendas.
The cover of the book proudly holds the USA Today quote: “Edge-of-your-seat storytelling.” And for me, it seems to be just that: a thriller piece of fiction. If his aim was to shift the paradigm of our current environmentalist movements, he has not yet been successful in the first half of his narratives.
I totally agree with you Jeehye. It is a "page-turner" for sure (I've read ~300 pages of it without realizing that 4-5 hours passed by), but reading back through my own post, I feel like I might have been trying to over-interpret something that was not there. Even if there actually wasn't much substance to the book, I'm still satisfied with it since I enjoyed the reading as an action movie-in-a-book sort of thing.
ReplyDeleteI think that you have a strong grip on this book and I generally agree with your perspective, but I was wondering if you had specific quotes, passages or even citations that jumped out at you? The problem that I am having with this book is that I feel like Crichton is shoving his views on global warming at the reader through a combination of the actual citations and graphs along with the fast-paced story that gives the characters their one dimensional perspectives. I definitely found the USA today quote on the cover along with the opening statement to be an indicator that this book is just a fictional thriller. So far it has been an entertaining book but I cannot take it seriously because it has a narrow perspective on global warming while never expanding or explaining any of the character's views or opinions. It was written in a very literal sense where you never have to contemplate or reflect on the words, structure, or style of the writing. The novel is just a stream of words and basic storyline that we as readers rapidly absorb.
ReplyDelete