Arthur C. Clarke
Finished Rendevous with Rama last night. Read The City and The Stars just before that. Read both books as a teenager - 30+ years ago! Still good reads. It's interesting what I see now in the stories. City was first published in 1955, and Rama in 1973. The connecting thread is his most famous work, 2001, A Space Oddyssey. I may read that again someday, but am not inclined now. The link between these three books is the famous rectangle without an opening. What that means, only Clarke knows. The role of the rectangle is a bit different in each; yet has the same power to fascinate the characters in the books, however briefly.
The first book, City, took place in the far distant future. Religion was mentioned in a way that it ws obvious at that point in his life Clarke saw all religion as myth. In Rama the character who was a follower of a space Christ was at least of high moral character, and brave, etc even though he was still an oddball. The rhetoric against him wasn't as harsh in this book, although in the end his eschatology was wrong (he thought that Rama was a spaceship sent by god to save the remnant).
On a pure entertainment level both books were loads of fun. City is actually quite a journey when I think back on it. It centers on one character, with a changing series of sidekicks, but the amount of convincing storytelling that goes on in 212 pages is something to be admired. There are many ideas and philosophies kicked around - lots to mull over and consider. I'd easily recommend this to a teenager - never hurts one to think. One of the many intriguing questions worth mulling over as medical science allows us to live longer and longer lives - is it better to live forever and not have children hanging around - as the city grew into, or is it better to procreate, know love, and die? The book, wisely, doesn't answer this or any of the other questions it brings up. I can't remember which side I was on as a teenager; but my bet would be the city. Now that my body is falling apart, and I've had some knowledge of love, I side on the country - willing to die happily.
That's what is kind of cool of nostalgically re-reading books I read 30 years ago - to see how much my thinking has grown, if at all. The difficult thing is remembering how I felt or thought 30 years ago. Some things remain clear, others are a complete mystery.
Read today that Deep Throat announced himself. A hero of the sort that Clarke writes about - a lone man needing to explore the truth in a public manner using his mental abilities to think through issues without needing the public accolades.
Not sure what to read next. I picked up a hardcover copy of Leaves of Grass. Another book I read through many times - many years ago. I haven't picked it up in quite a long time - the paperback I had got lost somewhere along the way. Never had a hardback edition before. Something tells me that's what I'll be ripping into the next few weeks =:-)
The first book, City, took place in the far distant future. Religion was mentioned in a way that it ws obvious at that point in his life Clarke saw all religion as myth. In Rama the character who was a follower of a space Christ was at least of high moral character, and brave, etc even though he was still an oddball. The rhetoric against him wasn't as harsh in this book, although in the end his eschatology was wrong (he thought that Rama was a spaceship sent by god to save the remnant).
On a pure entertainment level both books were loads of fun. City is actually quite a journey when I think back on it. It centers on one character, with a changing series of sidekicks, but the amount of convincing storytelling that goes on in 212 pages is something to be admired. There are many ideas and philosophies kicked around - lots to mull over and consider. I'd easily recommend this to a teenager - never hurts one to think. One of the many intriguing questions worth mulling over as medical science allows us to live longer and longer lives - is it better to live forever and not have children hanging around - as the city grew into, or is it better to procreate, know love, and die? The book, wisely, doesn't answer this or any of the other questions it brings up. I can't remember which side I was on as a teenager; but my bet would be the city. Now that my body is falling apart, and I've had some knowledge of love, I side on the country - willing to die happily.
That's what is kind of cool of nostalgically re-reading books I read 30 years ago - to see how much my thinking has grown, if at all. The difficult thing is remembering how I felt or thought 30 years ago. Some things remain clear, others are a complete mystery.
Read today that Deep Throat announced himself. A hero of the sort that Clarke writes about - a lone man needing to explore the truth in a public manner using his mental abilities to think through issues without needing the public accolades.
Not sure what to read next. I picked up a hardcover copy of Leaves of Grass. Another book I read through many times - many years ago. I haven't picked it up in quite a long time - the paperback I had got lost somewhere along the way. Never had a hardback edition before. Something tells me that's what I'll be ripping into the next few weeks =:-)
posted by Cholla Needles | 10:49 PM
1 Comments:
Are you familiar with "cyberpunk"? IMO this is the most important subgenre of sci-fi to emerge in the past twenty or so years. Its two main proponents are William Gibson and Bruce Sterling (Sterling is, I believe, a Texan). If you haven't read "Neuromancer" by Gibson, get your sorry behind to a bookstore and buy it now!
Post a Comment
<< Home