Review: Solaris by Stanislaw Lem

Vertigo

Mad Mountain Man
Supporter
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
8,767
Location
Scottish Highlands
solaris-stanislav-lem.png


First let’s get the translation straight; Wikipedia states there is only one English translation, by Joanna Kilmartin and Steve Cox, and that this is actually a translation of the French translation and, further, that Lem himself, who read English fluently, repeatedly voiced his disappointed in this translation. It further states that an improved translation seems unlikely due to rights issues. However my edition states ‘This is the first English translation directly from the original’ by one Bill Johnston and I have absolutely no idea whether this is considered a better or worse translation but I found the prose clumsy and extremely heavy going. So please bear that in mind regarding my comments below!

So what is the book about? I’m not sure I can answer that question. I’m not even sure Lem could have answered it. On a purely prosaic level it is about the planet Solaris. Largely ignored when first discovered as it was calculated that its unstable orbit around a binary pair of stars meant it would shortly be meeting its end, but it later turns out that orbit was somehow being actively managed to maintain stability by what was now interpreted to be a sentient planet; at least the ocean of plasma covering the surface is thought to be sentient. This new understanding has generated much renewed interest in the planet and the possibility of making Contact with it. By the start of the book this research has been ongoing for over a hundred years with the only real progress being the creation of whole libraries of books cataloguing the unfathomable behaviour of the ocean of plasma, of Solaris. Many theories abound but there has been absolutely no success in creating any plausible interpretation of these phenomena. Into this scenario steps Kris Kelvin the newest recruit to the permanent research station on Solaris numbering just four members including Kelvin.

The narrative divides quite distinctly into two separate threads; the human interactions of the research team and the description of the behaviour of the Solaris over the many years it has been studied. The first is handled as a fairly straight forward story narrative as the crew try to understand the ‘ghosts’ so disturbingly created by Solaris from their own memories. The second is handled through an immense amount of incredibly dense pure exposition. Hard to read and simply documenting the history of observations of Solaris’ behaviour over the years and the abortive attempts to understand them. This latter makes up a good half of the text and its sole purpose seems to be to present Solaris as being utterly impenetrable and that ultimately all attempts to understand it are doomed. So effectively half of the book is just descriptions of the incomprehensible actions of the planet which remain to the end of the book unexplained and unexplainable. Very unsatisfying; the only philosophical conclusion seems to be that any attempt to understand any alien intelligence will be inevitably doomed to the same failure.

Due to this lack of understanding and explanation these two threads never really coalesce; the human interactions are almost entirely driven by the actions of Solaris but there is no understanding as to how or why and, most disappointingly, the book never makes any attempt to give any conclusive explanation. It is interesting to consider the three cinematic adaptations of the book; the first was a 1966 Russian two part film for TV, the second another Russian Film made in 1972 and the third, and the one probably most familiar to people in the West, a Hollywood film starring George Clooney made in 2002. What is interesting about these films is that they highlight the dual nature of the book; the first adaption concentrating on the planet Solaris whilst the second two concentrate on the human interactions. Lem himself states that these last two have got it wrong, that ‘This is why the book was entitled "Solaris" and not "Love in Outer Space."’

So we can take it from Lem himself that the main drive of the book is the unfathomable nature of alien intelligence. He provides us with excessively longwinded and dense descriptions of the behaviour of Solaris and never provides any sort of conclusion or explanation for them. Ultimately it all seems rather pointless; to go to such lengths to describe all the bizarre and fantastic activities of Solaris and then to tell the reader that this behaviour can never be understood. I was left feeling why bother? It’s a short book but it took a long time to read, ploughing through all that dense exposition, and at the end left me feeling cheated with no reward for all that effort. Solaris is described as Philosophical SF and maybe I’m just not philosopher enough to appreciate it. A somewhat grudging three stars; it did have some very interesting ideas.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great review of one of the best novels in science fiction. I read the book in the early '80s. Then about 10 years later, I saw the 1972 Russian film. I knew that it differed from the book, but I liked it for what it was, heady science fiction. When the George Clooney version came out on DVD, I bought it. I like that adaptation too, not for its adherence to the book, but for being a good sci-fi movie (with an excellent film score to boot.) Perhaps this winter when things slow down, I'll reread the book. I'll try to find the Bill Johnston translation.
 
Great review of one of the best novels in science fiction. I read the book in the early '80s. Then about 10 years later, I saw the 1972 Russian film. I knew that it differed from the book, but I liked it for what it was, heady science fiction. When the George Clooney version came out on DVD, I bought it. I like that adaptation too, not for its adherence to the book, but for being a good sci-fi movie (with an excellent film score to boot.) Perhaps this winter when things slow down, I'll reread the book. I'll try to find the Bill Johnston translation.
The edition currently on sale at places like Amazon all appear to be this translation but I haven't seen any critical comment on the quality of the translation, so, even though Lem might not have liked that first translation it doesn't mean this one is automatically better.
 
For me, the permanent mystery of Solaris was wholly appropriate and to the point.
Did you notice the age of Harey?
How old do you think Harey and Kris were when they started to live together?
 
For me, the permanent mystery of Solaris was wholly appropriate and to the point.
Did you notice the age of Harey?
How old do you think Harey and Kris were when they started to live together?
Not sure it's relevant; all that's relevant is that it is now something like ten years since she died and she appears to be the same age as she was at the end which is inevitable as she is purely constructed from his memories of her. Also they figure that she would never grow any older.

Making Solaris a mystery is fine and indeed is absolutely necessary for the book; what was therefore pointless was spending as much time as Lem does describing is such intricate detail so many of the 'mimoids.' Yes give us one or two explanations but there was so much detailed exposition tediously describing multiple phenomena that was ultimately pointless as no explanation of them would ever be provided. One or two would have sufficed to make the point and having Kelvin witnessing them in some way (similar to the account of the helicopter pilot) would have made those descriptions much more readable.
 

Back
Top