logo Sign In

Out of Context Thread: New and Improved — Page 24

Author
Time

You seem to be stalking my posts from seven or eight years ago…

Author
Time

It’s an Italian stereotype in here all the sudden!

Author
Time

I don’t see anybody having heart attacks at a moderately young age due to poor diet

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

chyron8472 said:

Dek Rollins said:

I also tried reading Jurassic park before that but didn’t make it past 75 pages before I simply lost interest. Michael Crichton wrote that book as an impossibly boring slog. When something is actually happening and meaningful it’s super interesting and well written, and I’m excited for what’s going to happen next, but then that’s all bogged down by three pages of unnecessary technical explanations for things I don’t care about. It’s like he can’t just get to the point. It took all the fun out of what was otherwise an exremely fun read. I might pick it up again sometime and try to finish it, but I can’t see myself spending any time on it soon.

DuracellEnergizer said:

This mirrors my experience with Crichton. The Lost World and Timeline both had intriguing plots, but all the passages spent on technical details simply killed my enjoyment; I abandoned both books before I got halfway through either and haven’t picked up a Crichton novel since.

You know, I had a similar problem reading Daemon by Daniel Suarez. I loved Influx so I started reading Daemon, but the technical junk bogged down the plot too much and I quit reading it. Well, not complex technical explanations of things. […]

It just… ugh. People who are knowledgeable about a certain hobby or field don’t frequently extrapolate on the jargon. They use jargon when they’re around people who would understand, and they don’t around people who don’t. But they don’t explain the jargon if it’s not necessary to get the point across. The book Daemon kept using jargon and then explaining what it meant or a character’s opinion about it.

I ran into my old high school