People keep calling Douglas Richards a worthy successor to Crichton. Either I had a dodgy copy, or this isn't one of his best works.
The entire plot seemed to be expensive medical thing goes in guys head, guy gets worse due to medical thing. Like that wasn't predictable?

Am I missing something?

I love sci-fi based in reality.

I love the premise of this story, and would be thrilled to read an updated variation. That being said this story was very much a product of its time. Written in 1971, the science, characteristics and atmosphere of that time are very prevalent. It was also a very propelling read, the further the story got, the more urgent the writing. It was exciting, toward the end difficult to put down.

I have been making an effort to read as many Crichton books as possible, he's one of my favourite authors and I have loved every book of his I've read so far.

This book however is not an enjoyable book. The plot is pretty solid and the pacing is good however it just feels quite empty and I never felt that rush of adrenaline/tension I got when reading 'Jurassic Park', 'Timeline', 'The Andromeda Strain'. I know that Crichton is critical of this book himself and I have to say I agree that it could've been a lot better in it's execution

One of his earlier books and the tech in rhe book did not aged well but the idea is interesting. My feel is that the book ended abruptly and I would have loved to get a few more pages to close the story. 3 stars for me for those reasons

Esta novela fue escrita en 1971 y las cosas que cuenta eran ciencia ficción de la buena entonces, aunque hoy estén anticuadas muchas de ellas. El argumento es bueno (de nuevo, marca de la casa Crichton) y la conclusión es triste: máquinas y hombre están condenados a no habitar en simbiosis. La visión es bastante pesimista. El libro, que terminé un día después de "Acoso", me pareció mucho mejor.

3.5 stars rounded to 4.

I have always had a rocky relationship with the genre of cautionary science fiction. There tend to be two types of this, those that explicitly or implicitly anti-science or anti-technology (I might call it science fiction for Luddites), and those that are not. I find the later to be far more acceptable than the former. I find Micheal Crichton's work to be especially iffy, many of his works are described as "cautionary techno thrillers" and no book of his is more explicitly anti-tech than this one.

I am a person who is of the belief that science and technology, like many things in the universe is neither inherently good or evil, it just is. How it is used and for what intention determines it's moral value. I am also one who understands that real science is not nearly as arrogant as is depicted in your average cautionary sci-fi.

Some authors who make cautionary tales write in the later form I mentioned above, typically cautioning in how certain technologies are used. These authors often times make the habit of showing how a potential technology could be used both positively and negatively and cautioning against the negatives. I might point to a movie like "GATTACA" for an example of this. In that story, gene mapping is depicted as something that can quickly and easily detect congenital medical conditions before they manifest in a person later in life, potentially giving the person a head start on preparing for it or even counteracting it before it becomes a problem. It also depicts how such technology could be used in combination with genetic engineering as a form of discrimination and reinforcement of class structures and social stagnation.

In The Terminal Man, the very act of attempting to use science for the betterment of mankind is implicated as a fundamentally irresponsible thing. Scientist in this book do not attempt to use the science unethically, they use it to attempt to heal a man suffering from violent seizures that often lead him to attack others violently. Instead they fall into the annoying tired old trope of people "playing god" and "treading were man was not meant to go". Failure and disaster are depicted as inevitable consequences rather than as a consequence of unethical or irresponsible use of technology. If anything, I would place the blame on irresponsible research practices on the part of the scientist involved, though this is, as far as I remember, not something that is brought to light or even implied by the author.

One of my problem with this kind of work is how it reenforces general ignorance of how actual science is performed and perpetuates the fallacious idea that science is fundamentally and inherently arrogant. Proper scientist are far more cautious in their approach to research, because they are taught the value of the act of self-doubt, in fact self-doubt is the basis of science. Science is built upon questioning and testing our own preconceptions, intuitions and understanding of the universe around us and to remain open-minded to the possibility of re-questioning new conclusions in the future in light of new evidence. All for the goal of expanding the pool of human knowledge. This makes proper science fundamentally humble.

Which leads me to my next problem with this kind of work. It reenforces the ideas that "common sense" is something scientist lack and that "common sense" is fundamentally always correct. Common sense, as I see it, is the act of making quick conclusions based on learned rules of thumb assumed to be reliable, or conclusions based on only the most obvious of evidence. Common sense says the earth is flat and the sun revolves around the earth. Never questioning the truth value of common sense, is arrogance, making works written with that perspective hypocritical. These works serve to reenforce the egos of those who mistrust science out of their own ignorance of it.

And finally, my third biggest problem with these kinds of anti-science sci-fi's is not one that necessarily applies to the terminal man, but does apply to many of its type, including other works by Crichton. Many of them are written with the assumption of an immutable and fundamental evil of humankind. In these kinds of anti-science stories, the science itself is not inherently destructive or unethical, but depicted as inevitably becoming that introduced to humanity. Thus because humanity is perpetually evil, science can only be a bad thing for us. I find this the most offense. I reject any sort of misanthropic conception that humanity cannot improve itself, and I find it an irresponsible concession made by the author against any sort of social commentary.

In the end, the only reason I gave this 2 instead of one star is because it at least was able to hold my interest till the end instead of just annoying me halfway through. If their is one thing Crichton is fairly good at doing is writing engrossing thrillers, even if this is not really his best.

Great early Crichton book! Just needed some more action.

Ενδιαφέρον μυθιστόρημα απο τον Κράιτον, με αρκετές επιστημονικές πληροφορίες και απόψεις περί ιατρικής και ηθικής.

Το βιβλίο αφορά έναν άνθρωπο που πάσχει από ένα συγκεκριμένο είδος επιληψίας, πού προκαλεί βίαιες συμπεριφορές. Ένα νευροψυχιατρικό τμήμα νοσοκομείου μπαίνει στη διαδικασία να εμφυτεύσει ηλεκτρόδια στον εγκέφαλο προς αποφυγή μελλοντικών κρίσεων. Στο σύνολό της η ιστορία κράτα το ενδιαφέρον με τις επιστημονικές αναφορές, ενώ έχει ένταση και στρωτή ροή. Μου αρέσε το γεγονός ότι, παρόλο που οι αναφορές έχουν χροιά επιστημονικής φαντασίας, δικαιολογούνται ικανοποιητικά, χωρίς να νιώθεις οτι διαβάζεις συνεχώς φαντασία. Ακόμα, το συνεχόμενο παιχνίδι σχετικά με το πού είναι επιτρεπτό να επεμβαίνει η ιατρική στην άνθρωπο έχει εξίσου ενδιαφέρον.

Παρόλα αυτά, δεν παύει να είναι μία ιστορία χωρίς ιδιαίτερες εκπλήξεις ή αξιοσημείωτη πλοκή. Οι χαρακτήρες (πέρα απο την Ρος) χρειάζονταν κάπως παραπάνω ανάπτυξη, ενώ και η γραφή θα έλεγα οτι ήταν ενα κλικ πιο κάτω απο άλλα που εχω διαβάσει του ίδιου.

Ωραίο, κάπως διαφορετικό, αλλά δε νομίζω οτι ενθουσιάζει ιδιαίτερα εν τέλει σαν ανάγνωσμα. Οι φαν του είδους θα μείνουν ικανοποιημένοι, αλλά μέχρι εκεί (μάλλον).

3.5, the pacing felt a bit choppy and i found myself asking why certain details/lines we included, but overall i thought it was a really fascinating story

There’s a passage in this book about how we don’t consider the majority of the male population to be mentally ill because of how deeply violence is engrained into societal expectations and, as someone whose male neighbor is currently destroying the apartment below him with a chainsaw, I can confidently say that Michael Crichton cooked here.

I believe this is the second story I’ve read by Crichton. I think I can see why he’s a popular writer. He has a fairly easy to read writing style. He limits his named characters to a manageable number. His scientific descriptions and technobabble are convincing. The premise has an interesting angle, a mysterious element and a thrilling quality at the climax.

I guess for me it wasn’t weird or poetic enough to excite me, and I found myself absolutely gobsmacked by some of the decisions main characters make, or don’t make. I wasn’t bored and I generally thought it was fine, but it isn’t the kind of material I’d seek out more of or highly recommend. I wish David Cronenberg had made a film adaption of it back in the day; it might have gotten a bit weirder.