State of Fear is a fictional work that significantly tackles the most sensitive issue in the modern age, global warming. The topic has in recent times turn into part of both day-to-day and political discourse as opinions become more controversial. The content of the novel handles this controversy in a fictional backdrop but with real-life statistics and scientific evidence. Therefore the book is as controversial akin to the content of the narrative that highlights the different camps in the climate change agenda. The global warming debate entails differing viewpoints from climate change deniers, environmentalists, eco-terrorists to climate scientists. Thus, Crichton highlights the politicization of science and pseudoscience that is sometimes entangled in this debate that each party seeks to triumph. Consequently showcases how a seemingly straightforward agenda harbors more than two opposing approaches that make it a much more complex issue.
The basic plot follows a group of environmentalists out to debunk and stop the efforts of ecological terrorists to prove their stance. While Crichton does not necessarily take a strong single stance regarding the issue in the narrative he shows how any camp can politicize science. Hence delves into the geopolitics of climate change and how scientific information can be manipulated by either party to push their agenda. The book, therefore, raises questions that aim to broaden the discourse around climate change. In that the intention of any camp is as valid or invalid as the scientific evidence and the politics alongside it. The novel emphasizes that facts can be easily swayed to fit into any narrative in manipulating truth and fear.
Accordingly, the narrative emulates real-life situations by referencing groups such as Earth Liberation Front (ELF) and the politics behind environmentalism and climate change denialism. The bigger idea of the book is to showcase that any data or information from either side should be scrutinized and put under the microscope. Ironically the mixed reception of the book by scientists and journalists alike regarding the science in it further puts Crichton’s work under scrutiny too. Thus acknowledging the complexity of the climate change debate akin to the narrative itself, as it is not as one-dimensional as it may seem.
