The dark faced, gaunt 'Social Studies miss' (the History teacher) of my seventh grade still haunts me. The vapid way in which she blurted out history from the frail State Government text book, and equalled history to memorising the important dates (still remember , 1602 - Establishment of the British East India Company, 1665 - Establishment of the French trading company ....see!!! Wasn't she a tyrant? ;-) )
Yes, there was a small mention of the Hundred Years war between the English and the French, in one of the earlier chapters, I guess. See??!!! I don't remember this part.
THAT IS WHY I HAVE BEEN CURSED WITH MICHAEL CRICHTON'S 'TIMELINE'.
The book flaunts the flashy quotes in inverted commas.... 'COMPULSIVE READING...BRILLIANTLY IMAGINED'... says the Los Angeles Times. They get a few grands extra than the other reviewers of the book, I suppose, for authorizing this LIE. This book is also heralded as the New York Times Bestseller. Aha! That is something that everything printed in the US gets to flaunt.
Check out my next book "Michael Crichton's TIMELINE, a Review by Thejas K R" .... THE NEW YORK TIMES BESTSELLER.
That would be a bigger version of the woes that I am presenting before you this day.
The book begins promisingly. A weird old man, is found in the middle of the Arizona desert, with no car nearby.
His fingers are blue, and looks mysterious. He speaks some strange words, which are dismissed as incoherent mumblings of a retard.
He is rescued by a family on a vacation, but he breathes his last on his way to the hospital.
The scene then, shifts to a group of Yale University students and professors, and other professionals, involved in studying the excavations of the an ancient fort in Dordogne, France.
Would you believe if I tell you that these scenes are linked to the enterpreneur who has sold his hi-tec company, and has been involved in coming up with low-hyped, development of a Time Machine , which employs quantum technology to take you to the past.
"There is no such thing as time travel," he insists, "Because past has not gone anywhere. It is all a perception. Past is right here, amidst us." An interesting theory, isn't it?
The theory is much more deeper than that. Because of my intense awe towards it, I beg you to allow me a few lines to explain the theory.
In simple terms, Quantum theory specifies the light to be made up of particles called Photons.
Remember the 'Theory of Interference of Light' in the twelfth grade. This experiment had us send light through two key holes, and when the light is obtained on a screen on the other side of the key hole, there are alternate black and white stripes found.
Quantum theory states it to be a resultant of interference of photons.
Now, if a beam of light with a single photon is sent through the key hole, we should not be getting any stripes, as there is only a single photon. But, the pattern appears!!! This shows that a single photon can cause interfernce too, but is not seen as a routine. Based on this, the explanation is arrived at, that every instant, the Universe is splitting, and this splitting of the Universe leads to different universes running at different times. Hence, past can be recreated if you are able to collect all the particles of that instant. Or better, if you are able to recreate yourself using the particles of that Universe, you could find yourself in that Universe. Simple, isn't it?
This is the theory of Multiverse.
Due to the turn of events, the protagonists are electronically transported into the past of fifteenth century, where the English and the French are battling the Hundred Years war.
The first hundred pages provide you with intermittent interesting scenes, between certain spiritless ones. Well, Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham???
The last interesting scene is when Crichton writes about a medieval clash of swords ( or lances to be precise). This is in the first quarter of the whole novel..The fight is explained with a brutality, which would make one feel surprised. Never before have I experienced the gory fight, when I watched all those brit knight movies.
Soon, it is time for history lessons. Crichton has done extensive research for this novel. And he painfully makes it visible in every paragraph that he has penned.
Did the editor actually went through this crap? Or is he one of those over worked software testers of TCS, who was doing this for an extra buck???
As the feeble story line toggles, dangles, and droops pathetically, around a few locations of a castle, a village, and a monastery, the characters try to create a make believe mystery, quoting that a person of their century might have come here earlier.
What's this? Chandrakaanta???
The novel reminds me of another pathetic work, 'Yaadein', a movie in Hindi. An excellent director Subhash Ghai confuses the audience between the sensitive story of a father and his three daughters to begin with, which suddenly shifts to Hritik Roshan's story of the revolt against his family's psedo values, where there was no room for love.
(Believe me, 'then', if I were him, I would have done the same for Kariena ;-) After 'Chameli', I have shifted my loyalities ;-) )
The ambience of the setting of the story, the attires of the characters, and their dialects are handled well, by the novel. So does the history text book.
The most essential part is the story. The story is very weak, and cannot be ignored despite all the efforts that went into the research for the book. Reams, and reams of historical facts are being blurted out by the weak characters, who have no sense of the time. By the time they come to the point.....ouch. It is 9 o clock. Time for the 'Sex and the City', rerun.
With warm regards,
Teju
(ps: Actually, I haven't yet finished the book. Had to take out my frustration before I could continue even for a page. 60 pages more. Will definitely update you on the disappointing climax.
Also, for the unenligthened junta, 'Sex and the City' is a television series, which involves four single women of New York city, who whine incessantly that the world lacks non-weird men, and drive the ones they find sane, to insanity. Thot of explaining it, to play safe from doubting Thomases ;-) )
No comments:
Post a Comment