Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mark CMG" data-source="post: 6506127" data-attributes="member: 10479">Well, Crichton combines two tales, both supposedly true though Ahmad ibn Fadlan's tale (used as the setup and through line for Eaters) is likely more actual then the mythical Beowulf epic poem which oral tradition would suggest is also based in truth.  So, better to say that Eaters is Crichton's take on Ahmad ibn Fadlan's actual story up to when Ahmad ibn Fadlan joins the group to travel north then becomes Crichton's take on Beowulf with Ahmad ibn Fadlan being a stand-in for the Christian elements that were likely woven into Beowulf at the time of it's first known written record or somewhere later in its oral tradition just prior to its being written down as we know it.Point being it is strongly based on Ahmad ibn Fadlan's account of his travels up to the transition into being a modern take on Beowulf (which, again, attempts to substitute real world analogs for the mythical Grendel, his mother, and the dragon).  Since oral traditions take liberties along the way with re-tellings, as evidenced by the grafting of the Christian elements into the tale, it certainly seems like that tradition grants Crichton license to do as he did.  Honestly, I don't think we're all that far apart except for your defending the use of the idiom whole cloth which simply doesn't apply in any sense of its usage.</blockquote>