Eaters of the Dead

Rating:
Summary: One of Crichton's best
Review: This book is off the beaten path for Crichton. You will not find advanced technology or genetic research in here, and no one ever receives a critical fax. It is just an ancient tall tale well told, and told bluntly. It's highly cinematic, and like a camera it never blinks, especially in the harsher passages--Crichton lifts one savage thing after another up to your eyes for your personal inspection. That accomplishment is due partly to his narrator, Ibn Fadlan, a man who lived a thousand years ago, and who chronicled whatever passed in front of his eyes with cold precision. Crichton just took Fadlan's lead, maintaining a this-is-exactly-what-I-saw tone to the end.
If you enjoy books to help you escape, this is one of them. Read it and imagine life as it must have been, the mad fears and beliefs people held dearly back then. Remember reading The Hobbit for the first time? For me, Eaters has attained that rank. Plus, in my opinion, it has one of the best last lines (of the text) of any book, Crichton or otherwise.

Rating:
Summary: Interesting idea but writing and style suffers
Review: This is the second Crichton novel I have ever read. I think Crichton has a good ability to find new ideas and explore them in fiction. In the early 1990's, it was genetic engineering (Jurassic Park), in "Timeline" it was the possibilities offered by quantum computing (I haven't heard/read anything else about this though).

As other reviewers note, this novel is based on a fragmented manuscript relating the doings of an Arab who travels with and fights with Vikings in Scandinavia around the early 10th century AD. Crichton obviously did his research, as he usually does, which is evidenced by explanatory footnotes, a list of the sources he consulted and so on.

As Crichton says in, "A Factual Note on Eaters of the Dead," he originally set out to find out if "Beowulf" had any basis in historical fact, as Heinrich Schliemann did for "The Iliad" in the 19th century. However, the task proved too difficult. So, he decided to write a novel instead. The idea of having a foreign observer to provide a unique (hopefully objective) perspective is a good one. The discussion the Vikings have over Fadlan's monotheism is amusing, as is his interaction with the polytheistic beliefs of the Vikings.

The novel has the tone of an official report, where the observer simply records the events that happen around him. There are no embellishments or flourishes. This can make the text tough going; there is little to keep the reader interested in the story. I wish Crichton had been freer in his style rather than writing what is best described as a fictional historical document.

The most interesting parts of the novel were the notes, appendixes and Introduction. For example, Crichton writes in his appendixes that there is some discussion over whether the "eaters of the dead" (the "monsters" of the novel) are in fact Neanderthals. In the appendixes, Crichton says, "While I was writing, I felt that I was drawing the line between fact and diction clearly.... But within a few years, I could no longer be certain which passages were real, and which were made up." (page 198) He ends his comment by briefly discussing post modernism, "I mention this because the tendency to blur the boundary between fact and fiction has become widespread in modern society... But this attitude of 'post-modern' scholars represents a more fundamental change. Some in academic life now argue seriously that there is no difference between fact and fiction, that all ways of reading text are arbitrary and personal, and that pure invention is as valid as hard research." (page 198) He calls this trend, "... at worst, it is nasty and dangerous." It is obvious that such relativism is clearly false, but this is not an appropriate place to criticize such an idea (see my review of "Relativism: Feet planted firmly in mid-air" by Gregory Koukl and Francis Beckwith).

I have not yet seen the film adaptation of this novel and I'm not sure if I will or not. Clearly, the slow, report-like format of the novel could not be successfully reproduced on film. I fear that the "13th warrior" (the title of the film adaptation of this novel) is simply an action film with monsters and Vikings...

Rating:
Summary: Entertaining viking adventure story
Review: Loosely based on writings found that were by an Arab scholar about his interactions with a band of Viking warriors during the time period when the Norsemen were at their raping and pillaging best that morphs into a story with a lot of similarities to Beowulf.

Rating:
Summary: Elegant Tour de Force for Medieval Lit Buffs
Review: Think of Michael Crichton, and you're likely to think of his more techno-thriller mega-hits (all of which have been made into blockbuster movies), some of which might beg the question of how well he can REALLY write. Ponder no more. EATERS OF THE DEAD is a brilliant tour de force exploring the legend of Beowulf through the eyes of an Arab travelling into Viking lands in the 10th century. Crichton weaves actual historical fact seamlessly with myth and legend to create an "eye witness" account of a ferocious battle between warriors en route to Valhalla and monsters of the mist. This is one of the few books made into a film (released under the title "THE 13TH WARRIOR") where the film actually improves upon what is already a gem of a book. Read the book, then rent the movie. John McTiernan's masterful direction, and the incredibly spooky locations make this tale of superstition and terror a great ride (and it's one of the best performances Antonio Banderas has ever given - he wisely chose to be part of a stellar ensemble cast). Book: A- Movie: A+

Rating:
Summary: A Fabulous Read!!!
Review: Eaters of the dead is a truly spectacular book. It keeps the reader on the edge with detail while still getting an interesting plot out. Not too many authors can do such a thing. Michael Crichton is simply an amazing author. Every book of his that I have read, I have finished in less than 2 weeks. I just simply cannot put them down. Ibn Fadlon is a devout Muslim who is sent on a mission to the King of Bulgars. On his mission he encounters some Viking warriors. Ibn, believing in his Muslim ways, disapproves in how the men act and take care of themselves, but its rather fascinating reading on how he likes and dislikes many of the other ways of the Vikings. The best part of the book, is the ending, it is simply remarkable. This book contains factual information while still not becoming boring. I also like the footnotes that Crichton puts on the bottom of some pages. There are some words that I have never heard before and telling the reader what they mean is very helpful in the understanding of this book. The only thing that I don't like about this book is that it doesn't develop many characters. You really only get to know one of them. I would recommend this book to anyone that is interested in history and the customs of the Vikings, and has the stomach to read some grueling details.

Rating:
Summary: Exciting read
Review: This book is presented as an account of an Arab traveler taken along a quest with Vikings around a thousand years ago. Crichton does a good job of presenting the text as an historical account and in many ways this reads as an interesting historical narrative of true events. The story is a fairly quick read and I think any that enjoy action/adventure stories set in the distant past would like it.

Because of the footnotes and eyewitness type narrative done in a fictional novel, it's hard to know what customs and beliefs presented are actual and what are totally made up. It all reads as true to life, and I suppose that is what makes it so interesting. I'm going to guess that Crichtons presentation of customs and rituals such as the one in which the Viking men can and do take any of the slave woman at will, often several times a day, is completely made up, a males fantasy indeed, however it makes for interesting reading and I'm sure it's intertwined with some customs that are actually factual.

I saw the movie when it first came out, and that fact didn't diminish the reading of the novel. I'd also like to point out that, unlike Timeline, in which Crichton takes characters back in time in a time traveling machine, this book supposes an eyewitness account of a foreigner traveling to distant lands back at the time the adventure happened and that Crichton merely translated the story for us from several scholarly texts. I liked this approach better as it wasn't as fantastic or as hard to shallow.

In any case, while this book is hardly classical literature, it's a fun read and I give it a good recommendation.

Rating:
Summary: Allah and Odin
Review: I admit that I struggled with whether or not I was reading fiction or nonfiction when I first encountered this novel. Actually, I thought that I was reading fiction based on actual research. Considering the scholarly listing of sources in the back of the book I do not think that I was being too gullible. After all, there actually was a 10th century Arab traveler by the name of Ibn Fadlan.

Then I noticed that the story was sounding more and more like Beowulf. In fact, it was like a cross between _Lord of the Rings_ and Beowulf- complete with weapon-forging dwarves in caves. I finally realized that this was what Crichton was trying to do. He was creating a plausible historical verification for the events that occur in Beowulf seen through the eyes of an outside observer. And he did it very well.

At first I found the picture presented of the Vikings to be disgusting. They are presented with no redeeming features at all i.e. dirty, uncouth, treacherous, drunken, lascivious pigs. But then slowly, as they travel on their heros' journey to the far north the characters slowly seem to be transformed. Traits such as humor, honor, and courage begin to show through. This continues until the leader of the party (Buliwyn) appears finally not only as the most classical of questing heroes, but also as the resurrected image of Odin himself.

One other thing little thing, the monsters of the mist being portrayed as cannibalistic, warlike Neanderthals seems a bit far fetched. After all, it seems that the Neanderthalers were a gentle folk who were probably exterminated by Homo sapiens that were not all that dissimilar from the Vikings....

Rating:
Summary: I am now morally opposed to reading anything by Crichton
Review: I did enjoy reading this book but I am very angered by the way the author lied. In the introduction, he claims that this book pretty much was an accurate translation of the originial text. He mentions a number of minor details that he changed (like changing the syntax to make the meaning more understandable or indenting paragraphs) so as to give the reader the impression that he in no way changed the meaning. The book has a lot of footnotes that seems very authentic and an authentic looking bibliography as well. But then you get to the afterward and Crichton is like, "Bwa ha ha ha! You fool! I made the whole story up! I made the bibliography up! I made the footnotes up! Ha ha ha ha!" He even made the translator up (giving him a name that in Latin means "trickery-deciet") (Of course, he stated all this more politely than that.)

So know how confused I am now? I thought I was learning all this nifty stuff about Viking and Arab life and now I have no clue if any of it is true. It is based on real manuscripts, but do these real manuscripts actually mention the flesh eating people at all or is that completely made up? Were the vikings really so promiscuous? I don't even know that. That could be fiction too, since Crichton says we should view the entire novel as fiction. It's not fair to do this to people who have barely any knowledge of vikings. If he wants to write a work of fiction, that's fine, but just be honest about it. Don't out right lie to the readers. Don't make up bibliographies and footnotes. I think he must wish he was a real researcher but doesn't have the intelligence to be one. I am so mad!!!

Rating:
Summary: Eaters makes you full
Review: The Eaters of the Dead is based partly on fact and largely on imagination. Michael Crichton wrote this story on a dare. His task, rewriting Beowulf so it would be more readable for the masses. The story was then made into a movie, The 13th Warrior, which starred Antonio Banderas.

The story starts with Ahmed Ibn Fadlan, a member of the royal court in Baghdad, being sent, as a punishment for involvement with a rich man's wife, to the land of the Ogurs. At the request of their ruler, for instruction in Islam. Ibn, as he is called in the book, encounters various people along the way telling us of their lifestyles and some of their "filthy" habits. He eventually meets "Northmen" or Vikings on the banks of the Volga River. (This is reportedly one of the earliest records we have of their lifestyle.) His only way to communicate with them is by speaking Latin with Herger, one of the Vikings and waiting for translation when Herger is in the mood.

Ibn's party arrives just in time to see the funeral of the Viking leader and the naming of a new King, Buliwyf. A messenger arrives from the north seeking help for his village and Ibn is sent on a journey with Buliwyf and eleven other warriors to conquer an evil so horrible it cannot be named. Once the warriors arrive in the village of Rothgar they endure all sorts of challenges from dealing with the conniving Prince to conquering the Eater's of the Dead.

Ahmed Ibn Fadlan kept an actual record of his journey and parts of it have been translated to English. Crichton got his main story idea from this journal. Interestingly, there are lots of footnotes in the book citing a reference or resource, which are sometimes factual and sometimes part of Crichton's imagination. (There is an afterward to the book that clears up some of those references.)

I have never read Beowulf but I have read this book 3 times. It's an easy read but it is hard to keep from confusing the fiction from the fact.

Rating:
Summary: A good but badly titled novel
Review: As I understand it, Crichton essentially wrote this on something of a dare: Could he re-write the Beowulf saga and make it work for modern readers?

To do so, he inserts an unusal element: Ibn Fadlan. Faslan is a Muslim, who is sent on a mission to the King of Saqaliba (and not by choice, he has essentially been forced on the journey). He eventually meets a group of Scandanavians who he considers to be truuly barbaric (guess that's why they call them "barbarians). For Fadlan, his new traveling companions are disgusting and horrific, but the leader of the group, Buliwyf ("Beowulf"), who can communicate in Latin, likes Fadlan and Buliwyf sort of adopts Fadlan, sort of like a puppy dog (probably much to Fadlan's chagrin).

Fadlan then finds himself enmeshed in a journey to Scandinavia to save Buliwyf's people from the "monsters of the mist." Ibn Fadlan travels north with Buliwyf and soon finds himself facing seemingly near invincible enemies who curiously always gather their dead and take them with them after a battle.

This was an extremely clever take on the Beowulf legend, subtlely telling a tale that could literally have been the basis for the Beowulf saga had it actually occurred. As with many of Crichton's best works, its engrossing reading, though not necessarily great literature.

As the story progresses, the Scandavians characters prove to be far less one-dimensional then they originally appeared and Fadlan gets a lesson in understanding other cultures. The explanation for what the "monsters of the mist" are is also a clever twist and, oddly, a believeable one.

Unfortunately, the title of the book (it describes one of the more problematic habits of the monsters of the mist) probably kept more than a few readers away when this was first published, and I'm not even sure it was ever published in hardback as I've searched and never been able to find it in hardback format. The film version actually had a more enticing title: "The Thirteenth Warrior."

Despite the title, this is Crichton in top form and a very engrossing read.