Best Clarke Books (was Re: 2001 - overrated flick)
LAL
Faraway, So Close) wrote:
> Stick to his early stuff: Rendezvous with Rama, Childhoods end, 2001, 2010
> etc and you will fine. All of the later Rama books and the last 2001 sequel
> are crap, pure crap.
One man's early is another man's late.
I'd would have said "Stick to his early stuff", ENDING with "Childhood's
End." By 2001 he had slipped from excellent SF writer to SF icon, IMNSHO.
In particular don't miss The City and the Stars, and if you're a serious
SF person you'll have to also read the earlier Against the Fall of Night
and compare the two versions of the story. Both are very good Big Idea
Books (tm) and not to be missed.
To link with another thread currently running about Clarke anticipating
the net as well as synchronous communications satellites, The City and the
Stars has the protagonist participating in a distributed net-linked
virtual reality adventure game. The book was published in 1956, long
before the net was invented. Score another one for Clarke.
BTW, Clarke is very indiscriminate about selling his name to other
writers. Don't be misled by the recent sequel to Against the Fall of
Night under some forgettable title by an author who should have known
better - and who wasn't formerly thought to be a hack like G Lee. Maybe
his reputation will survive. I hope.
I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see a Clarke brand of toilet paper
soon, with an orbital tower printed on each sheet to imply the, ah,
violating of the paying public that the G Lee books have promulgated.
I hate to be so irritated and negative about an author I admired so much,
but feet of clay are disconcerting in my heroes.
--
Standard disclaimers apply. Nobody here ever agrees with me on anything.
Carl Tait
Ralf Philipp <phi...@westnet.com> wrote:
>
>Reading _Rendezvous With Rama_, my
>favorite Clarke book, you can almost see what's happening in the book.
>[...] the ideas about
>life and humanity (see _Childhood's End_) that they give you.
I'm a Clarke newbie, and may be asking something that's in the FAQ
(if there is one), but here goes ....
I've just read my first three Clarke books in the past week. Two of
them were the ones Ralf mentioned: _Childhood's End_ was excellent;
_Rendezvous with Rama_ was one of the best books I've read in some time.
Unfortunately, my next choice was _Rama II_, a preachy soap opera filled
with all sorts of superstitious drivel. Really awful.
While I assume that Gentry Lee was responsible for most of the thinly-
disguised religious proselytizing in _Rama II_, I'm nonetheless
disappointed that Clarke willingly associated himself with such
sub-par work. So here's my question: given my intense dislike of
_Rama II_, which Clarke books should I read next, and which ones
should I avoid (other than the remaining Clarke/Lee books)?
Carl Tait
Lee/Nik Sandlin
Robert Dempsey - Faraway, So Close <dem...@stsci.edu> wrote:
>In article <43mot3$g...@ground.cs.columbia.edu>, ta...@news.cs.columbia.edu
(Carl Tait) writes:
>> (if there is one), but here goes ....
>>
>> I've just read my first three Clarke books in the past week. Two of
>> them were the ones Ralf mentioned: _Childhood's End_ was excellent;
>> _Rendezvous with Rama_ was one of the best books I've read in some time.
>> Unfortunately, my next choice was _Rama II_, a preachy soap opera filled
>> with all sorts of superstitious drivel. Really awful.
>>
>> While I assume that Gentry Lee was responsible for most of the thinly-
>> disguised religious proselytizing in _Rama II_, I'm nonetheless
>> disappointed that Clarke willingly associated himself with such
>> sub-par work. So here's my question: given my intense dislike of
>> _Rama II_, which Clarke books should I read next, and which ones
>> should I avoid (other than the remaining Clarke/Lee books)?
>>
>
>etc and you will fine. All of the later Rama books and the last 2001 sequel
>are crap, pure crap.
I agree, though I must admit I'm unpleasantly surprised to learn that
Rendezvous With Rama is now considered "early." I remember when it was
considered "late." Clarke's best work, I think, was done before 2001 --
Childhood's End and The City And The Stars are the best of the novels, and
there are a lot of good stories scattered through his collections. Some
of the other novels -- The Deep Range, A Fall of Moondust, etc -- have
great things in them, but there you keep running up against his main
failing as a writer: his cardboard characterizations. Some people don't
seem to mind, that, though. Avoid the Gentry Lee stuff like the plague. I
myself think that Clarke's solo work after Rama has shown a considerable
falling off, but other people do like 2010 and The Fountains of Paradise.
L
Daniel Saraga
>While I assume that Gentry Lee was responsible for most of the thinly-
>disguised religious proselytizing in _Rama II_, I'm nonetheless
>disappointed that Clarke willingly associated himself with such
>sub-par work. So here's my question: given my intense dislike of
>_Rama II_, which Clarke books should I read next, and which ones
>should I avoid (other than the remaining Clarke/Lee books)?
I myself am a newbie to this group as well, but I did enjoy _Earthlight_.
Albeit some of the technology can be proven false, it is still a very
intersting read.
BTW. I know this group is read worldwide, but does anybody know of any used
book-stores that specialize in sci-fi and would most likely have Clarke's books
in say the Toronto or Peterborough area (Canada)?
-------------
Daniel Saraga - Admin. Studies - Trent University - Peterborough, Ontario
Peter Lacey
Clarke still seems to be able to write well, but only in very short
spurts. Check out "The Hammer of God": it's hardly a story, just a
bunch of small events strung together. At least Clarke seems to realize
his limitations: contrast to Heinlein's later stuff, such as "Time enough
for love" etc.; he seemed to become obsessed with procreation and wrote
immense novels which had about 5% action. If Clarke writes anything else
it will be interesting to see if he changes style.
David Mears
> ... which Clarke books should I read next ...
A few others have mentioned it in passing; my most favorite book by
Clark is The City and the Stars. By all means, read that one! (It's
actually a rewritten version of The Fall of Night. Clark was unhappy
with his first effort and decided it had to be rewritten. I think I
agree with him. Although FoN wasn't too bad, CatS is MUCH better.)
David B. Mears
Hewlett-Packard
Cupertino CA
me...@cup.hp.com
Jim_...@transarc.com
> In article <philipp.47...@westnet.com>,
> Ralf Philipp <phi...@westnet.com> wrote:
> >
> >Reading _Rendezvous With Rama_, my
> >favorite Clarke book, you can almost see what's happening in the book.
> >[...] the ideas about
> >life and humanity (see _Childhood's End_) that they give you.
>
> I'm a Clarke newbie, and may be asking something that's in the FAQ
>
> I've just read my first three Clarke books in the past week. Two of
> them were the ones Ralf mentioned: _Childhood's End_ was excellent;
> _Rendezvous with Rama_ was one of the best books I've read in some time.
> Unfortunately, my next choice was _Rama II_, a preachy soap opera filled
> with all sorts of superstitious drivel. Really awful.
You should avoid most of what Clark has written over the last decade
or so, including all the sequels to Rama, 2001 (except maybe 2010,
which is reasonable), etc.
As for Clarke's best book: I recommend The City and the Stars.
******************************************************************
Jim Mann jm...@transarc.com
Transarc Corporation
The Gulf Tower, 707 Grant Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15219 (412) 338-4442
WWW Homepage: http://www.transarc.com/~jmann/Home.html
Carmen Andres
: > ... which Clarke books should I read next ...
I enjoyed the Ghost of Grand Banks (I think that's the title) and Hammer
of the Gods. They are shorter but I thought hard to put down.
Benedict Walmisley
>
> I'd would have said "Stick to his early stuff", ENDING with "Childhood's
> End." By 2001 he had slipped from excellent SF writer to SF icon, IMNSHO.
> In particular don't miss The City and the Stars, and if you're a serious
> SF person you'll have to also read the earlier Against the Fall of Night
> and compare the two versions of the story. Both are very good Big Idea
> Books (tm) and not to be missed.
Very true... However, <<The Fountains of Paradise>> was good BUT Charles
Sheffield produced a far better book with the same premise called the
<<Web between worlds>>. It would appear the rule is : If you hear your parents
mention a name STOP BUYING THE BOOKS. [ or if X gets on TV stop ... ]
Melissa Jan
: Faraway, So Close) wrote:
: > Stick to his early stuff: Rendezvous with Rama, Childhoods end, 2001, 2010
: > etc and you will fine. All of the later Rama books and the last 2001 sequel
: > are crap, pure crap.
From what I have observed, you would basically want to stop in 1978
with _The Fountains of Paradise_. After that, we get into the Gentry
Lee era and all of the qualities that made Clarke such a superb author
are gone... Admittedly, so of his stuff prior to that date is merely
good, a (very) few things dip into mediocre, but after '78 the only
thing worth reading is _Songs of Distant Earth_.
Don't miss this point, I love Clarke's books. He's still on the list
of my "Top Five" favorite authors, and _Childhood's End_ will always
have a special place in my heart as that was the first sf book I read
(at the very regretably late age of 13, so I've only been reading sf
for about a decade, but oh my what a decade!).
As for my personal favorites:
Novels-
1. _The Fountains of Paradise_
2. _Childhood's End_
3. _Rendevzous with Rama_
4. _The City and the Stars_
5. _Imperial Earth_
Anthologies-
1. _The Nine Billion Names of God_
2. _Reach for Tomorrow_
3. _Tales from the White Hart_
4. _More Than One Universe_ (repeats a lot of the above)
BTW, I've horrified more than one English teacher by making the
claim that Clarke is the Best short story writer ever :)
And what I'd really love is an absolutely comprehensive collection
of all his short stories (I'd be forking out the $$$ for that).
-Melissa
Urban Fredriksson
>Very true... However, <<The Fountains of Paradise>> was good BUT Charles
>Sheffield produced a far better book with the same premise called the
><<Web between worlds>>.
As well as several other really ridiculous ideas.
I like Sheffield, but Web Between Worlds isn't better than
The Fountains of Paradise.
--
Urban Fredriksson u...@icl.se Docendo discimus
Jack Harper
Fredriksson) wrote:
To me, for what its worth, the very best part of "Fountains of Paradise"
was the side "thread" running about the alien probe entering the solar
system -- can't think of the name of the thing except that it came from
"Starholm" I think. Once or twice a year, I take the book from the shelf
and just read the chapters about the probe...The rest, I must admit, I
pretty much ignore.
Regards to all.
Jack Harper
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Harper Bank Systems 2000, Inc.
e-mail: jha...@bs2000.com 350 Indiana Street, Suite 350
voice: 303-277-1892 fax: 303-277-1785 Golden, Colorado 80401 USA
"21st Century Banking Applications"
Private Label Optical Bank Card Systems
Visit our Web Page: http://www.bs2000.com/talos
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Jo Ann Malina
They can't very well do that until he stops writing them, and I doubt
he'll do that while he's still alive...
Don't neglect Clarke's essays, which were mind-blowing to me when I
first encountered them as a young teen (12-13) and which I have enjoyed
ever since. I must have read "Challenge of the Spaceship" a dozen times
that summer I found the paperback in the basement of Kroch's and
Brentano's. "Profiles of the Future" and "The View from Serendip" are
more recent collections. Can't think of the names of the others now,
but I'm sure some of them must still be in print. I like those even
better than his fiction.
As for the original point of this thread, "2001" being an overrated
movie: context is everything. Though certain things in 2001 became
cliches in later films, when it first appeared, it was absolutely fresh
and mind opening. In the spring of 1968 when the film came out, no
human had yet set foot on the moon; we were still sure there would be
Pan Am (or someone's) regularly scheduled flights there by the end of
the century; and good science fiction films like "Forbidden Planet"
could be counted on one's fingers. Most sf films pre-2001 were low
budget, low imagination space operas full of monsters in zipper suits
and "boy meets girl -- alien steals girl -- boy rescues girl while
saving earth from aliens" plots.
"2001" had impeccable science. The silence of space, the reality of the
distance from here to Jupiter, the size, shape and complexity of the
space station and ship, were all rooted in the science of the time and
the expectation of the future. Many of the details in the film -- such
as the noticeable delay in talking to earth from more than a light-
second or two away, the gravity boots of the stewardesses, the fact that
one could survive for several seconds in a vacuum -- were not new to
Clarke fans, as he had discussed them in his essays. Some of the things
were guesses, but they were reasonable guesses for the time.
"2001" also had great special effects for the time. Everything had an
air of reality about it. The special effects of newer science fiction
-- which is actually fantasy, as it assumes such things as artificial
gravity, faster than light travel, humanoid alien races that can all
coexist in our environment -- are mostly about explosions and chases.
"2001" didn't focus much on characterization -- to most people Hal was
the most real "person." The hero of the film, if you will, was the
whole species, and how we will cope with the strangeness of the cosmos.
One of Clarke's favorite quotations is "The universe is not only queerer
than we imagine, it is queerer than we CAN imagine." Another is "The
earth is the cradle of mankind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever."
These are ideas that lift us out of our mundane existence, and they
permeate "2001."
It's as if after the mid-70's, when we gave up on the moon, we stopped
believing in the future. We're not going to do it the hard way: space
station, moon base, Mars base, asteriod mining. We want the universe
and we want it now. So we retreated into fantasy. Star Wars had some
decent mythological underpinnings, but it was not about "How will we
cope with trying to move off this planet?" but earth history transposed
to a cosmic stage. Its less-intelligent imitators went even further
down this path. I measure the onset of decay from the moment in "Star
Wars" when there's an explosion in vacuum -- and you hear it. The "whiz
bang" was more important than getting it right.
There's a large element of fantasy to "2001," especially the 2nd part,
about the aliens. But at least it tried to deal with the idea of
contact with things we simply cannot understand or fit into our old
framework. Current science fiction, from Star Trek on down, is about a
universe full of beings who turn out to be humans with silly putty ears
and noses. Ho-hum.
I was fortunate enough to be home from college at spring break when
"2001" opened. Couldn't afford opening night, but went the next
afternoon. The theater was almost empty. Sitting near me was a woman
and her 12 year old son, who was carefully explaining everything in the
film to her. I moved to get away from that, and though I don't usually
like to sit down in front, I ended up in the front row, not of some
nasty little multi-screen theater, but one of Chicago's downtown movie
palaces, with the stars wrapped around me. And after intermission, we
entered that black hole... It is an experience I will never forget.
*) *) *) *) *) *) *) *) *) *) *)!(* (* (* (* (* (* (* (* (* (* (* (* (*
Jo Ann Malina, Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
jo...@slac.stanford.edu -or- 415/926-2846
Neither Stanford nor the DOE would be caught dead with these opinions.
Nor do they consult me when formulating theirs.
--------
Healthy functioning requires environmental support. --Fritz Perls
Melissa Jan
: To me, for what its worth, the very best part of "Fountains of Paradise"
: was the side "thread" running about the alien probe entering the solar
: system -- can't think of the name of the thing except that it came from
: "Starholm" I think. Once or twice a year, I take the book from the shelf
: and just read the chapters about the probe...The rest, I must admit, I
: pretty much ignore.
(Excuse me while I sputter...)
ONLY the Starglider parts?????? They're good, yes, but how can you
appreciate them without the rest of the book???
(OK, now that that's out of my system)
The reason why _The Fountains of Paradise_ is my favorite Clarke book,
and one of my favorite books overall, is because of its perfect weave
and balance. There's three seperate strands tied in a most intricate
knot: ancient history (Kalidasa), the present (Vannevar Morgan), and
the future (the Starholmer).
Then these parts intertwine: Kalidasa never "conquers" the monks, even
though he tries to build his way to heaven. Morgan, when he builds his
tower to "heaven", also comes into conflict with the monks. He manages
to defeat the monks only because of the intervention of the one time
monk, the Venerable Parakarma (Choam Goldberg), who, in his attempt to
foil the oribital tower, actually makes it possible (rough quote:
"in what kind of world can butterflies balance a million ton tower").
Starglider ties in here because it is the cause of Goldberg's joining
the monks-- if Starglider hadn't demolished religions, Goldberg most
probably would never have had to seek God so desperately (eg. in his
equations, etc.). Finally, all three threads come together at once
at the end of the story-- the Starholmer arrives, interacts with
humanity, admiring the space elevator, which is Morgan's triumph (he
who was so driven by immortalizing his name) but is nonetheless,
with quite delicious and beautiful irony, named "Kalidasa's Tower."
I think Clarke really outdid himself in this book, which is why I
jump so vehmently to its defense. I'll admit, I didn't see all
these factors the first time I read the book, but my appreciation
has grown with each successive reading (now about 30th or so times).
-Melissa
----
The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the
source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger,
who can no longer pause to wonder and stand wrapt in awe, is as good as
dead. --Albert Einstein
Peter Austin
> : > ... which Clarke books should I read next ...
>
>
> I enjoyed the Ghost of Grand Banks (I think that's the title) and Hammer
> of the Gods. They are shorter but I thought hard to put down.
Did you mean hard to KEEP down ??
Peter Austin
-----------------------------------------------------------
| _--_|\ | Particle Analysis Facility
| / \ | A joint Curtin University CSIRO initiative
| -->\_.--._/ |
| v | p.au...@info.curtin.edu.au
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ernest S. Tomlinson
(Another reader writes:)
>> I enjoyed the Ghost of Grand Banks (I think that's the title) and Hammer
>> of the Gods. They are shorter but I thought hard to put down.
>Did you mean hard to KEEP down ??
_The Hammer of God_ is not a book to be set aside lightly. It should be
thrown with great force.
-et (just misquoting Dorothy Parker....)
--
Ernest S. Tomlinson, e...@ugcs.caltech.edu and masc...@rohan.sdsu.edu
"Are we not der supermen? Aryan-pure, supermen?"
"Ja, we ist der supermen. Super-duper-supermen!"
Ketchup is a vegetable
>Jack Harper (jha...@bs2000.com) wrote:
Now try a similar analysis with IMPERIAL EARTH and tell me if it isn't
one of his best. The threads are a little more subtle though and therefore,
for me very very enjoyable.
Samir
Thomas A. Wideman
Hammer of God (although I freely admit both are somewhat Closed Captioned
for the Hard of Thinking...)
My favorite Clarke story is a short story -- I don't remember the name --
about using programs at a soccer game to incinerate a bad referee. Anyone
remember that one?
TW
Daniela Sciaky
wrote:
> My favorite is Childhood's End. Does anyone own the movie rights. It
would make a fantastic movie.
Childhood's End and Way Station by Simak vye for my favorites. Childhood's
End is quick, to the point and doesn't require the purchase of endless
overpriced sequels. It makes me wish I were seven so that I wouldn't be
left behind!
Daniela
Daniel Tropea
Mike Stephen
I think that one was in a collection called "Tales from the White Hart".
I remember a few stories from that bunch. A lot of them were very
enjoyable reading in my early years.
Still one of my favorite Clarke stories is Sentinal which was the short story
that 2001 is based on. My other favorites are signed (autographed copys)
of "The Exploration of Space" and "Interplanetary Flight" (1949 and 1950).
It is not signed with my name but it is by Clarke to my father. He spent
some time with Clarke in the thirties. Clarke sent Christmas cards until
recently. My father had all of Clarke's books in the house while I was a preteen.
It may have something to do with my appreciation of his writing
at an early age. Clarke's books were my first introduction to science fiction.
I have been lost ever since.....
Mike.....
Melissa Jan
: In <75710.1511-27...@stockyard22.onramp.net>, 75710...@compuserve.com (Thomas A. Wideman) writes:
: >Actually, I like all of Clarke's books, including Ghost of Grand Banks and
: >Hammer of God (although I freely admit both are somewhat Closed Captioned
: >for the Hard of Thinking...)
: >
: >My favorite Clarke story is a short story -- I don't remember the name --
: >about using programs at a soccer game to incinerate a bad referee. Anyone
: >remember that one?
: I think that one was in a collection called "Tales from the White Hart".
: I remember a few stories from that bunch. A lot of them were very
: enjoyable reading in my early years.
Nope. Very, very good guess, however. I thought I sounded awfully like
a Harry Purvis story too, but then not quite...
The correct answer is "A Slight Case of Sunstroke" and it is anthologized
in _Tales of Ten Worlds_.
:Still one of my favorite Clarke stories is Sentinal which was the short story
:that 2001 is based on. My other favorites are signed (autographed copys)
:of "The Exploration of Space" and "Interplanetary Flight" (1949 and 1950).
:It is not signed with my name but it is by Clarke to my father. He spent
:some time with Clarke in the thirties. Clarke sent Christmas cards until
:recently. My father had all of C's books in the house while I was a preteen.
:It may have something to do with my appreciation of his writing
:at an early age. Clarke's books were my first introduction to science fiction.
Wow, your father knew Clarke personally... That's so cool! I wish my
parents knew folks like that, but they know nothing about sf, so despite
my great interest in science and astronomy at a very early age, they
never pointed me towards any sf (instead, there was Dickens and Tolstoy
and such, ick! IMHO, of course <grin>). I stumbled onto Clarke's
_Childhood's End_ entirely by accident at the unfortunately late age of 13
and was then hooked too.
Melissa
--
That woman speaks eight languages and can't say "no" in any of them.
-- Dorothy Parker
Mike Stephen
My Mother and Father were married in India after WWII, and then went
on to run a tea plantation in Ceylon. Of more significance than knowing
Clarke, they were both good friends with Lord and Lady Montbatton, at
that time Vicroy of India. I was lucky that my father read lots of science
fiction when I was young. Asimov was also a popular author, although dad
did not know him as he did Clarke.
Although Clarke is enjoyable reading, Dickens and such are far better writers,
its just that the subject matter is not as entertaining to us science fiction buffs.
However my all time favorite book is not by Clarke at all!! It is a book called
"Earth Abides". Very entertaining. I use it when I visit high schools to teach
reading skills. Although it was written in 1958, it still reads like a 1990 fiction.
A bit of Steven Kings stand novel was based on Earth Abides.
"Most people pay me for my opinions. However for you it's FREE!"
C. Smith
: However my all time favorite book is not by Clarke at all!! It is a book
: called "Earth Abides". Very entertaining. I use it when I visit high schools
: to teach reading skills. Although it was written in 1958, it still reads like
: 1990 fiction. A bit of Steven Kings stand novel was based on Earth Abides.
I agree that "Earth Abides" by George R. Stewart has held up very well
over time. This is all the more amazing given that it was written in 1949
(I'm looking at the copyright date contained in the first edition that I
inherited from my grandfather).
Stewart is probablly best known for his nonfiction chronicling of the
Donner Party in "Ordeal by Hunger." I still like "Earth Abides," in part
for its San Francisco Bay Area local (I believe Stewart lived in Berkeley
or thereabouts).
Stephen King's "The Stand" certainly starts with the same idea as
Stewart's work, but then takes it in a much different direction.
Just my 2 cents worth...
C. Smith
Daniel P. B. Smith
Krzysztof Szkaradzinski <szka...@cadvision.com> wrote:
>I like Clarke books very much. Probably the biggest impression (I'm not
>saying it's the best though) on me made "Islands in the Sky". It's a simple
>story about adventures of a boy who won a TV show and went for a trip to
>space station. What caught my attention was a way he returned home.
Forgot that part. Refresh my memory. (Although I do have the paperback
kicking around somewhere...)
>The
>book was written sometime in very late forties or very early fifties, yet
>Clarke described a working model of a space shuttle very accurately. At
>that time it was a great imagination (with a lot of science underneath.)
>I wonder if NASA designers have read this book!
I LOVED that book. The match burning with a spherical flame and going out.
Getting lost in some corridor and encountering a five-foot-tall hydra
(grew that big in zero G). Encountering a mysterious alien cylinder-shaped
spaceship--that, when approached closely, turned out to be some radioactive
The pilot or commander who has no legs, which would have disqualified him
on earth but turns out to be a benefit in space.
--
Daniel P. B. Smith
dpbs...@world.std.com