|
The special effects (ape-men of the veldt, the final trip) did not age well. One thing that really sets this book apart is how incredibly plausible it all seems. While I admit that it gave a great sense of the chilling isolation of space, the ending was too much of a non-sequitur. There is too much that goes on beneath the surface for a film, but it works as a novel perfectly. Recently, I decided to catch up on some older, classic films.
As Clarke says in the forward, "Here is one possible answer to that very reasonable question. It is uplifting and spiritual, and there is simply nothing else like it. Many sci-fi books try to be spiritual, but this is the first that I have read, sci-fi or not, to actually pull it off in a profound way. For as fantastic as the elements are, nothing seemed impossible.Even knowing (sort of) how it ends, this book has changed my life. I skeptically decided to check it out.I'm so glad I did. But this book is the product of a clearly scientific mind. They were very much impressed and recommended it to me. Yes there are evil computers.
One of the first I tried was 2001: A Space Odyssey. Yes there are aliens. The truth, as always, will be stranger." However, a friend I watched it with was intrigued enough to read the book. This is possibly the most important book I have ever read.
But in the end, this is a novel of ideas, and the ideas are quite fascinating to read about. The two major downsides of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY are the superficial characterization (this is a problem with all of Clarke's novels) and the surreal ending, which you will either love or hate. Unsurprisingly, Clarke gets many things wrong about life on Earth in 2001(for example, he assumes moon bases exist, as well as the USSR), but it doesn't undermine the power of the storyline.
But I found 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY to be an exception to this rule. Clarke is an engaging writer who makes complicated ideas understandable, and I found this novel quite engrossing. I enjoy reading science fiction, although it can be difficult reading some of the older novels, due to their dated quality.
This novel was originally written in 1968, before humankind even landed on the moon. In short, while I personally don't consider this novel a classic, it's fun and thought-provoking and well worth your time. 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY is a relatively short novel, and effectively reads like three interconnected novellas.
Each novella is filled with interesting information about space travel and Clarke's theories about the future.
Written just before the US landed on the moon, this book stands the test of time and addresses man's quest for exploration, increasing understanding of the universe and extraterrestial life.The history of man is one of finding things we do not yet understand. What response should the government and scientific community take.
You may disagree with his conclusions, but his answers are certain to provoke thought and a new perspective on life as we know it now. Arthur C Clark does a masterful job of exploring these questions.
Sci- Fi doesnt get any better than this. What do they mean, how did they get there, what threat if any, do they pose.
Isn't that what good literature always does. Written in 1968 (concurrently with the movie), this book is about how man came to be, what might lie ahead.
Imagine finding a huge monilith buried under the surface of the moon and then later another one near Jupiter.
You never develop a repoire with the major characters because they do not really matter in the story; they are just set pieces to Clarke's theme of the obelisk initiating evolution. His science is sound except for the human capability to survive in vacuum. The plot lacks depth and is slow to develop, and the only real exciting part of the novel is when HAL rebels against the crew of Discovery. The writing is a little awkward and doesn't flow particularly well. The last part of the book, like the movie, is a complete waste, nothing more than a description of a changing vista before the astronaut's eyes. Not surprisingly, the mundane actions of the "major" characters are described in utmost detail to explain how things such as walking will be different. Clarke would have done better speculating in a nonfiction book what the future of space exploration would be like, but in a novel where you have to include plot and character development, it's a failure. This is interesting, but not enough to sustain readers' interest.Clarke sometimes goes out of his way to explain the physics of the future.
Even though we are way past 2001 I believe that this book will never go out of style, and it will never be dated.
|
