Who might be interested in Invasive Species, and who might not.

Long(ish) ago, I sent out a query letter to an agent for an earlier version of my Invasive Species novel. This is the reply I got:

--------------------------------------

Dear Mr. Mayer,

I love the title, but this is way, way, way too far-out even for me.  This seems Spider-Man-esque, where the spider bites the guy and he takes on the powers of the spider, which is something that could only happen in a comic book. The whole point about Crichton is that his stuff is based on real science. I do love the fact that you've got slime-molds in a prominent position, though; they are among the Earth's most under-appreciated organisms. In any case, not for me, but thank you for an entertaining e-mail.

Best wishes,

Russ (big-name agent's last name redacted)

--------------------------------------

It's a nice reply. And he's right. The book is over the top.

But that's what I was going for.

I do sort of  take issue with the "based on real science" comment, though. My stuff is based on real science. Everything in Invasive Species was inspired by some discovery or by some way that nature works. Like Crichton, I mined the discovers of "real science" and tried to use them in clever and interesting ways to tell a story.

So what's the difference? Crichton takes a more conservative approach in all this, and so his stories may seem more believable. But, and I mean this in the kindest way possible, his stories don't reflect "real science" any better Spider-man's tale. Wrong is wrong when it comes to science, but being right about science is not the point when it comes to telling a story. Your goal is not to write about science in an accurate way. What you're trying to do, I think, is to show the reader, who may be interested in science, that, hey, maybe you can see where I'm pulling the idea out of and isn't it cool how I'm playing with it?

Besides, who doesn't like Spider-man?