Favourite Arthur C. Clarke

In the past year I read Rendezvous with Rama, Childhood's End, and am currently reading City and the Stars. While I don't think he is the best writer out there, his ideas really surprise me, especially since he wrote some of them in the 50's. It is quite cool. The book I'm reading now is 60 years old and doesn't read like it to me. He seems more invested in the ideas and story than the characters and they can seem a little on the surface.

I have been enjoying his books though. Brian, I would really recommend Rama...at least the first. I hear the follow-ups are not nearly as good.
 
It was cool in The City and the Stars when the MC stepped into a room and the screens turned on when he passed them, much like occupancy sensors of today. And he speaks of computers and memory storage, but just uses different words for them since the words hadn't really been invented yet. Pretty neat.
 
ratsy said:
Brian, I would really recommend Rama
Click to expand...

I enjoyed 2001, and have the two sequels in a gifted box of old novels. Imperial Earth was also in there, but the story so far feels like it lacks structure.

It's as if Clarke is simply running through a list of different issues that might affect affect a colony on Titan, as and when he thinks on them - and then inserts characters and flashbacks accordingly to accommodate his ideas.

The trouble is, although there are some clever ideas in here, he wrote it before the Voyager missions were even launched, and before the Pioneer 11 flyby, so some of his conjectures are outright wrong or have dated badly.

It might be better to let this on go, and save myself for one of the better novels.
 
Edward M. Grant said:
I re-read Fall Of Moondust recently, and it's a good book, but we now know that it wouldn't happen because the Moon doesn't have seas of dust. Had it been set on the third moon of Jaglon Beta, it would have survived the decades much better.
Click to expand...

I consider this to be an interesting point. With all of the accurate science in Moondust, like comparing infrared to Plato's Allegory of the Cave people have a problem with the story not conforming to the reality that we now know. The point is that it could not have been known in 1961. That is one aspect of science that kids need to learn.

Einstein said that imagination is more important than facts.

psik
 
scidata said:
Rendezvous with Rama is an interesting book. It has the technological depth of a Clarke novel, the epic social implications of an Asimov novel (the long sweep of history), and the descriptive texture of a Jules Verne novel. It will probably remain a classic long after its original readers are all dead and gone.
Click to expand...

Should be a movie.:)
 
I like that first video a lot. It's a little off topic but around 3:30 reminds me of a dream I once had, where I ate so much chicken that I grew wings and could fly and in that dream I flew over a river and fields a bit they the ones in the video.

Is that second video actually based on Rama? To me it looks too torus/ring/doughnut shaped to be Rama.


In response to the overall thread topic:

Rendezvous with Rama is not only my favourite of Clarke's, it's my favourite of any novel (at the moment).

As for Clarke's short stories: At one point I did think Out of the Cradle, Endlessly Orbiting... was my favourite however I think I've started favouring Crusade.
 
ratsy said:
In the past year I read Rendezvous with Rama, Childhood's End, and am currently reading City and the Stars. While I don't think he is the best writer out there, his ideas really surprise me, especially since he wrote some of them in the 50's. It is quite cool. The book I'm reading now is 60 years old and doesn't read like it to me. He seems more invested in the ideas and story than the characters and they can seem a little on the surface.
Click to expand...

That is very much the point of SF in my opinion. I started reading SF in 4th grade before I took English Lit in high school. Too me the teachers were constantly trying to make a big deal out of unimportant things in unimportant stories.

For the most part good SF story tellers are not trying to be good writers by literary standards and the literary people can't come up with good SF stories. I read Neuromancer shortly after it came out. I finished it but was not impressed. I tried reading it again years later after so many people were saying it was so great and could not get through it again. Gibson may be a better writer than James P. Hogan but I cannot find his stories interesting. Lois Bujold is about the best writer I know of that still makes good SF. But someone called her work "turgid". Writing good characters takes more words that do not promote the SF storyline.

psik
 
I second Manephelien about A Fall of Moondust.

He also wrote a short story that I liked quite a bit. Perhaps someone else recalls which collection it is in. Without giving anything away, it is the one about a couple of kids that find a small alien spaceship with tiny aliens in it and hide it in a barn. One of the kids was called "Red".
 
I've only read Rendevous With Rama. Not sure what to watch next.
 
RAMA II I think is epic. I really enjoyed Rendevous With Rama aswell but I just felt that this book gave a great deep picture of what the Ramans were actually like. So I think Caliban you should definetly pickup Rama II.
 
Gallagherooj111 said:
RAMA II I think is epic. I really enjoyed Rendevous With Rama aswell but I just felt that this book gave a great deep picture of what the Ramans were actually like. So I think Caliban you should definetly pickup Rama II.
Click to expand...

And welcome to the chrons forums, @Gallagherooj111. :)
 
2010 remains my favourite. It was my first proper science fiction novel.

I think Rendezvouz with Rama comes a close second.
 
It's a long time since I read his most famous works, especially Rama - it must be 30 years maybe. I have a soft-spot for The Songs of Distant Earth... which may be unique in the world of SF fandom.
 
psikeyhackr said:
That is very much the point of SF in my opinion. I started reading SF in 4th grade before I took English Lit in high school. Too me the teachers were constantly trying to make a big deal out of unimportant things in unimportant stories.

For the most part good SF story tellers are not trying to be good writers by literary standards and the literary people can't come up with good SF stories. I read Neuromancer shortly after it came out. I finished it but was not impressed. I tried reading it again years later after so many people were saying it was so great and could not get through it again. Gibson may be a better writer than James P. Hogan but I cannot find his stories interesting. Lois Bujold is about the best writer I know of that still makes good SF. But someone called her work "turgid". Writing good characters takes more words that do not promote the SF storyline.

psik
Click to expand...
Glad to see there is someone else who couldn't make it through Neuromancer. I couldn't get through it the first time. I'm sure that it's partially because I'm dating myself having grown up reading Clark, Asimov, Heinlein and others.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Astro Pen Your Favourite Painting Art 14
D What predictions of the future were your favourites? Writing Discussion 8
Fiberglass Cyborg Favourite Unusual Minor Historical Figures History 3
D What's everyone's favourite grammar checker failures? Grammar & Spelling 4
Lacedaemonian What is your favourite version of the Arthurian legend? History 34

Similar threads


Back
Top