Out of Egypt:

Michael Crichton = ass

The best thing about being a fiction writer is never having to say you're sorry. And demonizing your ideological opponents with no repercussions, apparently.

And I used to love the guy's work too. People like him make him me ashamed of the Right.

...and how is Crichton any different than Dante? Do you hate Dante's work, too, because some of his contemporaries ended up in various circles of hell?

Posted by: funke at December 17, 2006 5:36 AM

...I mean, not to say this legitimizes Crichton in any way, but it's not the first time demonizing opponents in fiction has happened..

Posted by: funke at December 17, 2006 5:39 AM

Did you read the article?

Dante's characterizations of his opponents were at least accurate to how they acted in real life, as far as I know. And sometimes he put friends in Hell too - like his one mentor who was a homosexual.

Crichton, on the other hand, simply made up a ludicrous (and disgusting) story about someone. It's just like what Anne Lamott says about working off aggression in your fiction, except he took the advice seriously.

Posted by: Evan Donovan at December 17, 2006 11:23 AM

Yes, I read the article.

Posted by: funke at December 17, 2006 4:30 PM

I just don't see how what Dante did can be compared. For one thing, it was pretty much accurate. For another, it was artfully done.

Crichton couldn't even be creative about his hatred.

Posted by: Evan Donovan at December 17, 2006 7:28 PM

Okay. I see.

Posted by: funke at December 17, 2006 7:36 PM