Re: The Lost World: Errata

[DSmith0531@aol.com]

In a message dated 95-09-24 23:37:44 EDT, jpoling@infinet.com (Jeff Poling)
writes:

>And how much does it hurt NOT to have it in there?  Lost World is a work
>of fiction about a fictional place with fictional characters in fictional
>situations.  Expecting it to recount the entire long boring story of how
>Maiasaurua peeblsorum received its name is a bit much and totally irrelevant
>to the story as a whole.  This is NOT a doctoral dissertation, a reference
>book, or even The Dinosaur Heresies.

That is certainly true.  But considering that far more people will read this
book and see the upcoming movie than will bother to read fact-based
literature on dinosaurs, and considering the number of people who actually
BELIEVE what they read in science fiction novels and what they see in the
movies, I think it would benefit everybody if writers, like Crichton, would
relay real-world facts correctly in their stories.  As George said, if
Chrichton thought it was important enough to include information about who
named _Maiasaura_, then he could include CORRECT information.  If he's going
to bother researching these animals for inclusion in a story, he could bother
presenting CORRECT information in his novels.  Granted, many areas in
dinosaurology are not yet resolved, and I can understand Crichton taking some
liberties when presenting them - areas such as dinosaur behavior, poisonous
Dilophosaurs or chameleonic _Carnotaurus_.  But who named what is NOT open to
interpretation.  I say give credit where credit is due.

DSmith.