I have already begun digging into things, but thought I should pause and try to establish some sort of a baseline on my knowledge with regard to Crichton. I do this because, as I learn more, I might develop different impressions and it is useful to know what I knew when and what I thought when.
I knew that Crichton's first major book was Andromeda Strain. I had read it many years ago. I also knew that he had written A Case of Need under a pseudonym but did not know that he had written detective stories under the pen name of John Lange. Nor did I know that he had written those to help pay for medical school. I attempted to get some of these from used book stores, but the price is outrageous. I will look into that later but for now I ordered a couple that had been reprinted by Hard Case Crime.
I knew that Crichton had written a fairly wide variety of books. I was vaguely aware of The Great Train Robbery. I had read Eaters of the Dead years ago. I was aware of Travels but had not read it. I knew he had written something called Electronic Life but did not know it was about Basic Programming. I suspect that early on in his career he was attracted to 'cool ideas' of things to write about whereas later he fell into a more predictable pattern.
I knew that he was involved in movies and tv and knew he had a large role in the TV series E/R. I did not know that he had written the screen play for Westworld and Twister.
On a more personal level, I knew he had attended Harvard Medical School and that he was very tall (6'9"). I knew he was extraordinarily intelligent. I did not know that his height and IQ made him feel separated from other people.
In short, I know what most people know and maybe just a tad more. But, I am far, far from an expert and am looking forward to developing some expertise. This is a fascinating, talented, highly intelligent person who leaves behind a fascinating trail.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
First, A Personal Note
Michael Crichton, author, screenwriter, director and so much more died unexpectedly in Los Angeles Tuesday, November 4, 2008 leaving a legacy of literature, film and commentary that will be explore, explained, interpreted, analyzed and admired for years, possibly decades, possibly even centuries to come. William Shakespeare and Charles Dickens were both very popular in their times much like Michael Crichton. And it was only much later that people began to realize the artistic value of their achievements beyond capturing the popular imagination. Shakespeare used drama to explore what it means to be human. Dickens used literature to explore social policies and their implications. Crichton used literature, and to a lesser extent film, to explore the ethics of technology.
I first encountered Crichton’s work as an undergraduate when I read Andromeda Strain. After reading several more of his novels, I became a fan. And, by the time Jurassic Park came out, Crichton was one of only two authors whose books I would buy as soon as they came out without waiting to hear what anybody else had to say about them. But, Jurassic Park took on a special role.
In the early 1990’s I became an academic, and one of my research interests was computer ethics. I began working on an idea using stories to explore the ethics of technology. Jurassic Park was a perfect example. Much later, when I turned the idea into a class, I used Jurassic Park not only as an example of the basic theme, but as an example of effective writing techniques that could be used to teach creative writing. I will explain more about that research and the class later.
However, in the meantime, I should confess that for years my opinion of Crichton was that his writing peaked with Jurassic Park. He became famous and wealthy and his writing went downhill from there. I could not have been more wrong. It was not Crichton’s writing that was amiss. It was my understanding of what he was doing. Often times when an author takes literature in a new direction, we do not fully understand until we have ample perspective and the benefits of hindsight. Just recently, I began to take a second look. And the more I looked, the more I understood and the more I appreciated it. So, I thought, in the sadness of his passing, it may be a good time to revisit what he has done from a more serious, more scholarly perspective. And that is what this blog is about.
This is not a daily blog, or a weekly blog. It is a public research notebook. As I read or reread his works, watch or re-watch his movies, discover new things or gain new insights, I will record them here. My goal is to look for common themes and common techniques in his work and present them in a coherent framework so other can appreciate his works more deeply.
I first encountered Crichton’s work as an undergraduate when I read Andromeda Strain. After reading several more of his novels, I became a fan. And, by the time Jurassic Park came out, Crichton was one of only two authors whose books I would buy as soon as they came out without waiting to hear what anybody else had to say about them. But, Jurassic Park took on a special role.
In the early 1990’s I became an academic, and one of my research interests was computer ethics. I began working on an idea using stories to explore the ethics of technology. Jurassic Park was a perfect example. Much later, when I turned the idea into a class, I used Jurassic Park not only as an example of the basic theme, but as an example of effective writing techniques that could be used to teach creative writing. I will explain more about that research and the class later.
However, in the meantime, I should confess that for years my opinion of Crichton was that his writing peaked with Jurassic Park. He became famous and wealthy and his writing went downhill from there. I could not have been more wrong. It was not Crichton’s writing that was amiss. It was my understanding of what he was doing. Often times when an author takes literature in a new direction, we do not fully understand until we have ample perspective and the benefits of hindsight. Just recently, I began to take a second look. And the more I looked, the more I understood and the more I appreciated it. So, I thought, in the sadness of his passing, it may be a good time to revisit what he has done from a more serious, more scholarly perspective. And that is what this blog is about.
This is not a daily blog, or a weekly blog. It is a public research notebook. As I read or reread his works, watch or re-watch his movies, discover new things or gain new insights, I will record them here. My goal is to look for common themes and common techniques in his work and present them in a coherent framework so other can appreciate his works more deeply.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
