Final draft/ comparison paper

Ethan Parrish

Sharon Aiken

English 1101

November 5, 2009
Is the Glass Half Full or Half Empty?
Concerning Next and Jurassic Park
Few names are more known for science fiction writing than Michael Crichton’s. Two of his novels are at the forefront of all others, Next and Jurassic Park. They are very different novels that have a similar base. Both have major centralized conflicts and conclusions, but in many ways they diverge. Two of the most influential science fiction novels of our time, written by the same author, that have few, very large similarities and many small differences.
Next was written for entertainment, but it has major value as a warning to humanity. In essence the novel warns against meddling with our own genetics. Jurassic Park carries a similar warning, but it warns against meddling with the genetic material left behind by the earliest masters of the continent, the dinosaurs. Next hits closer to home because of the research pertaining to stem cells. Scientists are coming ever closer to being able to grow human organs and the ability to change genetics is not as far away as people might imagine. Jurassic Park brings a conceivable problem to light, but it will be close to impossible for scientists to bring this fiction into reality because viable genetic material from dinosaurs is about as hard to find as it was to actually map the human genome. Both of these novels present situations that are nigh from impossible and closer to being a reality than many people would like to consider.
There are many conflicts that are central to the storylines of both novels. In Jurassic Park there is the obvious man v. nature conflict, but there are several man v. man conflicts as well as the inherent man v. God struggle. Next differs only because there is no man v. nature conflict. Jurassic Park exemplifies the struggle with God because it shows men that are trying to do God’s work by creating and altering life, Next also has this struggle, but instead of creating life man is simply altering people which is supposed to be an ability allowed only God. Michael Crichton in his novel Next portrays many negative relationships between people. The characters tend to be all antagonists in Next as opposed to Jurassic Park where there is a clear division between good and evil. Each novel displays Michael Crichton’s masterful use of inner struggles and the outward struggles that always tend to be present in everyone’s life.
As an author Michael Crichton isn’t known for being an optimist in the normal sense of the word. In both novels the stories end with people dying, being arrested, or just being broken. In Next the large corporations are indicted for misuse of science and the heads of the companies are broken men. In this story God wins and it portrays the majority of the population as inherently good while it still ends badly for a minority of the characters which tend to be the puppet masters. It could be viewed as optimistic or pessimistic; the glass is half full or half empty. Jurassic Park comes to a close with the creator of the rogue fossils being eaten by said fossils, it is the ultimate irony. The protagonists escape unscathed and humanity is saved, but it still shows that some people are inherently bad and will stop at nothing to upset the normal order of the day. Either way you see the world as either inherently evil or inherently good, both novels can come to terms with all of your opinions and views.
Most importantly these novels both come to terms with all facets of humanity. Neither novel takes a single side in the argument of transcendentalists and anti-transcendentalists; the debate that has been carried on for many decades by authors, poets, and great thinkers alike. Both can be picked up and read and be viewed from many different perspectives. Michael Crichton created two very intuitive crowd pleasers that will continue to draw audiences into the fold of science fiction writing for many years to come.