Michael Crichton's work should be considered the epitome of geek literature (AKA science fiction, genre fiction, or speculative fiction), but was somehow embraced by the mainstream -- so much so that even if the academic crowd doesn't take him very seriously, Crichton still addressed Congress. Genre fiction is such a dismissive term, so Crichton was given his own genre: it's not geek; it's a "techno thriller."Congo, published in 1980, has all of Crichton's geekiest motifs, including a heroine whose tragic flaw is revealed on -- get this -- a computer printout. It's a pretty obvious way of characterizing one's hero, but it works. And give him credit, unlike in The Andromeda Strain, Crichton actually has characters with personalities and internal conflicts in Congo. Clearly, this is an author on the rise.Congo works in the same way that Sphere (1987) and Jurassic Park (1990) -- my favorite Crichton titles -- work. A team of scientists is sent on a dangerous mission that will require technical expertise, ingenuity, and a conflict between ambition and responsibility. I love that Crichton takes the ideal neutrality and benefits of science and juxtaposes them with the realities of funding, application, and career ambition. These three works also serve to map out what I believe is Crichton approaching and reaching the peak of his writing. My only wish is that I would have read Congo first, rather than third.Congo was not only published first in this thematic and structural trilogy, but it is clear that Crichton was consciously improving his writing in each of these novels. In Congo, he establishes the pattern by opening with a cool setting and a cool premise: jungle ruins and highly trained attack gorillas. Not bad.But he can do better.Sphere features the ocean floor and an alien technology that tests humanity's character. The characters are also more complex and engaging in Sphere, and I especially enjoyed Crichton's decision to make psychologist Norman Johnson the hero. Sphere is great, so everyone must have quite naturally expected that Crichton would begin the 1990s with his authorial decline.But then:In Jurassic Park, dinosaurs are brought back to life through cloning technology on a privately owned tropical island. Unbelievable! And let's not forget about Alan Grant and Ian Malcolm, arguably Crichton's most memorable academics, battling dinosaurs (don't gorillas just seem so "small potatoes" in comparison?) with nothing but their wits.So, for me, Congo is a very good work, but not a great one. However, perhaps this is only if we measure Crichton against himself.And it does not change the fact that Congo, Sphere, and Jurassic Park should be considered a required "trilogy" for all geeks -- sorry -- I meant "required reading for all 'techno thriller enthusiasts.'"
i'm having a little trouble with myself right now. i just gave this one 4 stars and Inner-Snob Mark is getting very twitchy, almost trigger-happy, ready to take control of my favorite hand and bump this one down to 3 stars. never fear, i have a tight rein on Inner-Snob Mark and have carefully compartmentalized him away tonight. but he does have a few good points. my God, i gave the timeless classic The Last Unicorn 3 stars. i gave Room - which wrecked me emotionally and had me crying like someone died - the same 4 stars. and Congo gets only 1 star less than either Picnic at Hanging Rock or The Thin Red Line - two books that i think are perfect from beginning to end. eh, so fucken what. stars are stupid, right?okay, so that's the disclaimer. it will probably be longer than the actual review.i LOVED this book. it was one of those immersive experiences, one that i dived into and stayed deep. Crichton is not known for having an interesting writing style, but his prose is clean & straightforward & dry without being off-puttingly clinical. ack, Inner-Snob Mark just had a spasm when i used the words "Crichton" and "prose" in the same sentence. no complaints whatsoever about the quality of writing. Congo is not corny and it is not emotionally manipulative and there aren't stupid lines where i start breathing loudly in frustration. what it does have is a superbly brisk narrative that does not falter despite the very dense level of information surrounding it. and that's another great thing: the very well-done infodumps. i'm going to sound a little schoolboy-ish here... but i learned so much! about the Congo, of course. but this being Crichton, i also learned a lot about apes and technology and corporate philosophies and tons of other interesting shite. the author makes sure all of his research is on the page and yet it didn't feel didactic and it didn't take away from the plot - if anything, it drew me in further.oh yeah, and it had one more awesome thing. in my GR friend Bill's words: The big star in this story is Amy, a gorilla with a 620 sign vocabulary. After reading this, you will want a gorilla for a best friend. ah, Amy... i know we would be fast friends!
What do You think about Congo (2003)?
I do not say this lightly: Michael Crichton is brilliant. This novel is brilliant. (For those who don’t know, Crichton is the author of Jurassic Park among other works).The beginning of this book is slow. So much so that I didn’t think I would like the rest of the book. Boy, was I wrong. Crichton’s prologue was so intense and ended in so much suspense that I believed it could get better. At times he packs in overly-technical writing. These were the times it got lengthy. Frankly, I don’t care much about the technical aspect. I don’t know if it’s true or not. Still, the technical part lessens around day 3 and the book got really good. This book was at times thrilling, and although it is fiction, there are a lot of interesting facts. For instance, did you know that some chimpanzees eat human infants in the wild? I personally did not. Of course I knew that you could teach apes to sign (cough Planet of the Apes cough) but this made me consider just how remarkable that is. I never would have considered just how brilliant primates are before reading this. The characters aren’t terrible. Not the most remarkable but that’s alright. Amy (the gorilla) was my favorite. Especially when she tears up a drawing that symbolizes her tearing up a woman (Crichton had me chuckling a few times, I admit). If you’re a fan of the Planet of the Apes franchise (new or old) or enjoyed Jurassic Park, I think this is definitely something you will enjoy. Also, if you recently saw the Monster Week documentary of Cannibal in the Jungle, this was similar in many ways. I’m still rather mind blown.
—Niah
Not bad in places...other times it's sort of a "puleez" book. Again Crichton has one that could have been better. The best I suppose I can say is..it wasn't as lame as the movie. So full of PC political rhetoric it seemed to me that any story got lost.********************** Spoilers below Line ****************************(view spoiler)[The "Amy" character is just too sweet for words...I had to take insulin. I love animals, really I do, not setting up a joke here about eating meat. (Though I do eat meat). But I love animals and I know that Gorillas are not actually predators (Chimpanzees are,but that's another discussion)... BUT, the sign language using Gorilla and of course the secret of the "bad things" as Amy calls the aggressive gorillas (that they were made evil by evil humans) and the whole technology and advancement and the companies who build it are ALWAYS EVIL theme was for me just to much of a head slapper. Personally I enjoy having a flush toilet, using my computer, living in a dwelling that has heat in the winter and cooling in the summer, watching TV, listening to music whenever I like, having light at my fingertips when I want to read a book at night and all the other evil advances that have gotten us out of the jungle expanded our life spans to more than 30 or 40 years and so on. AND I believe it's possible to have those things without destroying nature and don't think all technological groups are out to destroy nature.The book is in other words at times silly...though not as silly as the movie with Amy's "talking backpack"... Oh come on please. I wonder if by now there's an entire tribe of Gorillas who "speak" sign language. (hide spoiler)]
—Mike (the Paladin)
I hadn't been reading within my favorite genres for a while, and this was a welcome return.As always, Crichton leaves you hanging a every chapter, and I couldn't help but read Congo in just a few sittings (if i read it in one, would it count as a short story?). The threat of the gorillas breathing genuinely kept me on my guard from the beginning.My critique though, is that I thought the resolution of the killer gorilla mystery was a little unimpressive - i was getting my mind prepared for some real weird not-gorilla not-man predator, particularly with the emphasis they had put on that and the oddness of their manner of killing. similar was their escape thanks to nature (though it wasn't easy, fine). I had also expected some more development in Ross character...but Munro was entertaining enough (although I expected him to be more sinister...nonetheless he was pretty likeable, as were the porters). Nevertheless I was very happy with Congo. Fast-paced, intelligent fun, with a real warning to boot. I'll always be a fan of Crichton's style, and that was more than enough to reel me in on this adventure.3.25/5
—Ingrid Espinosa
