Friday, January 21, 2011


Just found Michel Crichton in the "classics" section on Goodreads.  Really, Goodreads?  Even if I were guessing which authors from the late 20th century would eventually be classics, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have chosen Michael Crichton.  Don't get me wrong, I love his books, and the hot docs on ER got me through many a lonely night, but in the classics section?  Next to Picture of Dorian Gray, Heart of Darkness, and To Kill a Mockingbird?  I don't think so!  Forgive my bluntness, but it takes more than for the author to be deceased to make their works classic.  If I wasn't addicted to your bookswap, we'd be on a break!  Damn you, almost-free books!


  1. I see your point. Neither you, I or the mighty Goodreads will decide what the future "classics" are. That being said, no-one writes a "classic" and many authors (Alexander Dumas for example) were simply writing weekly magazine adventure stories before they were collected and declared "classics".

    I agree with you though - for now LOL

  2. LOL. I've never read anything by Michael Crichton, but this post made me laugh. It does sound wrong that his books are considered classics on Goodreads, since I've always put him in the same category as John Grisham or James Patterson.

  3. I disagree with you. Crichton should be considered a contemporary classic. He's written some fairly complex novels who were turned into garbage by Hollywood (I.E. Timeline). Crichton is no language wizard, but his books show educated research and complex plotting. He's clearly ahead of the likes of Grisham and Patterson. The comparison is unfair.


Penny for your thoughts...