Arthur C Clarke

[Brian G Turner]

Well, I quite loved "2001". But I'm very wary about sequels.

Anyone read much of his writing? Are the sequels up to scratch or a cash in? How about Rama? Any other novels recommended as among the best of Arthur C Clarke?

 

[nemesis]

Rama is worth reading.

 

[littlemissattitude]

2010 wasn't bad - but the film was better. The other sequels to 2001 seemed to me to be pretty much a waste of time.

 

[Brian G Turner]

My physics teacher once made us watch "2010" on the last days of one term.

I saw it knocking around on DVD recently, but it was simply a direct lift from video, so I left it.

"2010" was a good film - an enjoyable film - but really I'm not sure that "2001" ever needed a sequel. My suspicion is that the sequels were derived primarily for commerical, rather than artisitc, reasons.

No doubt that will cause unintended offense to the Clarke fans - I am merely hypothesising here.

 

[G-borg]

'Childhoods End' is a must read if you want to know more about Clarke.

Apart from 2001, this is his most succesful work.

 

[Hypes]

I personally preferred the Rama series to the 2001 franchise.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

I'd have to agree with that - althohgh later volumes lacked that mysterious unfolding, to an extent, they had a lot of fascinating ideas and even some spiritual speculations.

I recently re-read Earthlight, one of his novels. While it wasn't an earth-shaking book, it was very thought provoking, if a bit slow-moving. Clarke is not a very visual writer, and action does not come easily to him - the big punch-up space battle in this book effectively takes place off-stage, as it is told to us from the point of view of two men who are watching the hole thing from a hidey-hole some distance away. Despite all this, its the stregth of his ideas that carries it through.

Clarke is also good at working out clever plots with little twists in the tail. In many ways, I think he works best in short stories, where the core idea(s) he is exploring do not need to be burdened with too much story craft. The Nine Billion Names of God is a great example of this, and one of the best SF short stories I've ever read, btw.

I'd say his weaknesses are common to most of his contemporaries, while the strenght of his concepts easily places him among the first ranks.

 

[Genus]

Well some say the man was a scientific philospher first, and an author second. Considering he invented the geo-stationary orbit and that a lot of his theories have been used in first contact directives, they may well be right.

If you liked Clarke, read somes Stephen Baxter and Ben Bova, two people he rated very highly. Personally, I think Baxter is a better writer than Clarke, but that's going out on a very big limb on a very big tree...

 

[erickad71]

I've read Ben Bova some years back. I believe it was his Mars book. From what I remember it was pretty good. I would recommend him.

 

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy]

I'd actually agree with you on Baxter, Genus. His themes are very akin to Clarke's but his characters just seem a bit more alive. In fact, he's a regular collaborator with Clarke now.

I've read a few Ben Bova shorts here and there, I ought to track down some of his books.

 

[Michael]

I liked Beyond the Fall of Night. I think it the first part was an original novella by Clarke and the second part a collaboration, but I can't remember who co-authored it.

I did like 2069 and 3001. I haven't read any of his other work yet, but I keep hearing good things about Rama all the time.

 

[dragonqueen]

I've read quite a few of his books, the fiction are good, but in the non fiction, I find he has quite a big head, saying how great he is. It's annoying, he may be good, but that's for others to find out, not for him to go telling everyone

 

[TheManInTheBowlerHat]

I'm absolutely burning through 2010 at the moment - reading as I post, despite the fact that I'm horribly tired - tomorrow morning will be the only chance that I have to get back to the library, so I need have finished it by then so I can return it and borrow 2061/3001. He's a fantastic writer! I'm rather enoying it.

 

[TheManInTheBowlerHat]

Something's just come out of the monolith! I bet it's Bowman! I bet it's Bowman! It's Bowman! Hurrah!

 

[SPA_KING]

Props to all of you who could make it through one of his books. I attempted and I think I fell asleep or I just couldn't get into it. Not light reading.

 

[chrispenycate]

The first "real science" science fiction book I read was an Arthur C. Clarke - I would have been about nine, trapped in my bedroom with chicken pox or measles or something, and, sick of going to the childrens section of the library trying to find something I hadn't already read, my parents gave me "Earthlight" to shut me up. The start of the rot. He was also the first "scientific" sci-fi where I found a technical error (which I pointed out to my general science teacher, who egreed with me, and hadn't read the book, so borrowed it from me) I may not have liked everything he wrote, and frequently his superb short stories worked better than his novels, but I'll go on reading everything he writes as long as he can keep writing.

 

[manephelien]

I've read quite a few of his books, the fiction are good, but in the non fiction, I find he has quite a big head, saying how great he is. It's annoying, he may be good, but that's for others to find out, not for him to go telling everyone

Clarke is rather modest compared to Asimov, who was blowing his own trumpet ceaselessly. So much so, in fact, that it rather turned into a joke.

I like Rendezvous with Rama and the Odyssey series, but when I first read A Fall of Moondust, I was blown away. Clarke has been criticized for writing flat characters, but that book at least had characters who were anything but flat. I really like The Deep Range as well.

 

[Fahim]

Props to all of you who could make it through one of his books. I attempted and I think I fell asleep or I just couldn't get into it. Not light reading.

You'll probably do better with his short stories - some of them are absolutely brilliant and leave you with that sense of wonder which is central to (at least my) enjoyment of good science fiction Some of his earlier novels, like "The Deep Range", aren't such tough going either ...

 

[JDP]

Yeah, the rama series is good, I liked all the 2001 stuff too (can't remember that much about it to be honest - maybe time for a reread). I see what some of you are saying about his characters - In many ways, I prefer his collaborations to his solo work (Maybe why I like the Rama series so much).