The Internet Book Database of Fiction

2010: Odyssey Two
I never would have thought that a sequel to the masterful 2001: A Space Odyssey would have been as good as the first, but 2010 is definately a worthy successor. To put it simply, the mystery of the first novel is somewhat explained in this book, but at the same time, more mysteries are created because of the explanation; thus, the book is ultimately an interesting read.
Another aspect of the book that is fascinating is the amount of possibility that abounds throughout. Although we have not been out to Jupiter, (and this I blame on the lack of funding for space exploration in recent years), we are almost technically there. Clarke explains things within this book, and when I look around, although he may have named them differently in his book, those things are present here and now. Things such as electronic newspapers that need to be expanded on the screen when you want to read them, and when you are done, you minimize what you are reading, and it goes back to being a tiny square on the screen. This is the type of description that makes the book interesting to read because it is based in the plausible and possible.
Clarke also pokes fun at Star Trek in the book, and this was most amusing. One character basically says to the other, "well, if we could beam around space like on Star Trek, then our problems would be solved." But they can't, and that's what makes reading Arthur C. Clarke so nice--he has a base from which he works that does not make the stories far-fetched.

[Admin edit] Teejay: I took the liberty of de-selecting the avatar you were using, because it's excessive size (half the width of my screen) was disrupting the display of various forum threads. Can you select something that's a little more compatable, size-wize, with what other people are using ? Thanks in advance.

My humble apologies for the inconvenience.

As for your review - well done, and agreed on most counts.

One small point of technical trivia ... ** SPOILER ALERT **

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Towards the end of the book, Clarke has the aliens implode Jupiter to form a miniature sun in order to provide an earth-like climate for one of it's moons that has early stage life forming in it's frozen seas (without googling, I suspect it was IO).

More recent advances in astrophysics have indicated that Jupiter has only 1/10 of the mass needed to form a "brown dwarf" star ... so, although it's a fabulously dramatic and stirring idea, I'm not sure that it's actually possible. Jupiter just doesnt have the mass necessary to sustain such a reaction. Even if there were a way to increase Jupiter's gravity well sufficiently to sustain such a reaction, the increase in gravity would wrench all of it's moons out of their orbit and crash them into jupiter's surface.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

** SPOILER END **

Very good point...but maybe in a parallel universe, one that is almostlike ours, maybe this sort of thing could happen? It definately is something to ponder...like the metafictional notion that what is in those books does not necessarily have to exist, but in a way does because it is the universe of Arthur C. Clarke. Metafiction theory usually looks at the past, or "history" as a fictional construct, but in the case with Arthur C. Clarke's Odyssey novels, the metafiction is in the future.
Essentially, each individual has his or her own perception of the universe that transcends but also incorporates fictional narrative, what we get in Clarke's literature is his version of the universe, separate and distinct from anyone else's.
...Just some food for thought.
p.s. real sorry about the avatar size, I have no idea why they get so big. When I posted it, it was pretty small!

IIRC - Mr clarke addressed that point somewhat - a portion of his storyline pointed out that the new artificial sun was going to have a very limited lifespan - but that it should be long enough to bring the creatures it wasthere to support - into sentient civilisation...

does anybody else remember that the same way?

kilt

I would like to hear people's opinion of Arthur C. Clarke's collaboration with some other author titled "The Cradle."

It is the only Clarke I've read and after the rave reviews of the author, I was terribly disappointed. I haven't so much as picked up another Clarke even to read the back.

Is The Cradle a fair representation of Clarke's work? If not, I'll give him another chance. If so, then he's just not my style.


This may be worthy of its own thread.

I don't remember much about Cradle excepting enjoying it. It was written with Gentry Lee who co-wrote the additions to Rendevous with Rama which I did not enjoy very much.

Go and read one of his classics - Odyssey 2001, Rendevous with Rama, Childhoods End, A Fall of Moondust, or The Fountains of Paradise. Better still yet find one of his many short story collections - I can recommend Nine Billion Names of God or Tales from the White Heart. He's one of the best short story writers ever in the SF field.

There are a couple of new books co-written with Stephen Baxter - The Trigger and Light of Other Days that I would also recommend, but then Baxter is also a great writer - try one of his novels too!

sE

Thanks sE. I hate it when I feel I'm missing out on something.


... I still haven't been conviced to pick up Dune again.

MidasKnight wrote:
... I still haven't been conviced to pick up Dune again.

That's unlikely to ever happen