Arthur C. Clarke, a true giant in the industry, has reportedly passed away at the age of 90.
While many associate him most strongly with "2001," the work of his that had the most impact on me was "Childhood's End." If you haven't read it, you really should; I think I'll go reread it this week, as a matter of fact.
Ask Kathleen on her blog to share with you the story of the guy in the "Childhood's End" costume at an Atlanta convention.
PAD
Posted by Peter David at March 19, 2008 08:50 AM | TrackBack | Other blogs commentingI don't know if this is a sad passing, since 90 years is a good long life. But it is eventful. The last of the old line SF greats.
Beyond his legacy of writing, it must also be remembered that he originated the concept of the communications satellite.
I said it last night, when I found out. He's moved on to The Final Odyssey. Rest in Peace sir, I found the world a better place for having your works for me to indulge in.
Peter, what type of format is Childhood's End (novel, short story, etc.), and can you give a brief, TV Guide listing-like explanation of the concept and why it's so good? I'm curious. Thanks.
On one hand, this feels like sad news. On the other, he lived such a long, productive life that it seems more appropriate that he should be celebrated, not mourned.
In any case, once I finish the book I'm currently reading (shouldn't take too long, it's just a V novel I picked up at a used bookstore) I think I shall go back and re-read 2001 and the related other works. (I hesitate to say sequels, as there are so many continuity changes between the books in that series that it can cause a headache if you try and reconcile them.) Heck, I may even re-read 3001, which I originally found rather disappointing.
It is kind of funny when I think back that other then 3001, which hadn't been published yet when I started reading them, I read them in reverse order starting with 2061. Of course, since I had seen the films I was able to have a good idea what was going on so I suppose it wasn't really that funny after all.
I think next time I'm at a book store, I may even check out something else of his. I only ever read the five books of the (for lack of a better term) Monolith series. (I'd say 2000 series if 3001 hadn't come along.) Probably about time to read something else of his.
At least there is plenty more. Not like when Douglas Adams went and all I had to look forward to was A Salmon of Doubt. Don't get me wrong, great book. But it took me forever to finish because I didn't want there to be no more Douglas Adams to read.
Peter, what type of format is Childhood's End (novel, short story, etc.), and can you give a brief, TV Guide listing-like explanation of the concept and why it's so good? I'm curious. Thanks.
It's a novel.
I haven't read Childhood's End since Clarke was about 65 years old, but as I recall in it the Overlords come to Earth and help in the next step of our development. It starts with huge ships arriving over every major city (typical 1950's sci-fi) but moves far beyond that as mankind enters a prosperous age and, fifty years after their arrival, the Overlords finally come out of their ships and reveal themselves...
Luigi, Childhood's End is a novel, and is difficult to summarize without sounding trite. Let's just say that I second Peter's recommendation: go read it.
As I said to people last night, this is really the end of an era -- the last of that generation's true greats is now gone. May all your odysseys be good ones, Sir Arthur.
TWL
Childhood's End was my favorite of Clarke's novels, too. In this era of scads of novels about the technological singularity, CE seems way ahead of its time (although that singularity was biological rather than technological).
Tim: The last of the SF greats of that generation are gone? Isn't that news to Ray Bradbury, Jack Vance and Fred Pohl?
Going ... going ...
Just how many of the early 'greats' are left anyway? Heinlein, Asimov, Smith, Norton ... all gone. Now, Clarke.
By and large they don't make them like that any more.
CHILDHOOD'S END is a good one indeed. 2001 remains my favourite, but I'll never forget various bits in END, either - the bull fight sequence for example. Generally, however, I tend to remember Clarke more for his delightful short stories. RESCUE PARTY anyone?
Childhood's End was extremely good. I also really liked Rendezvous with Rama, though the sequels that he did with a co-author were not nearly as good.
What Michael Rawdon said about those still living. Particularly Pohl who 1) I believe is the last great who started in the late 30s/early 40s (Clarke actually wasn't active until the 50s) 2) Oddly enough, is co-author of Clarke's upcoming (last?) book.
My favorites were CHILDHOOD'S END, RENDEZVOUS WITH RAMA, and stories like "Nine Billion Names of God".
Man, I remember as a teenager staying up all night to finish RAMA, before heading to school the next day a virtual sleep-deprived zombie. I just could not go to sleep when reading the second half of the book. I would put it down for a minute or so, try to get some sleep, then pick it up and continue to read.
No disrespect to Vance and Pohl (Bradbury is of another generation), but Clarke is the last of the masters of SF i.e. Clarke, Asimov and Heinlein.
Michael,
Ray Bradbury, Jack Vance and Fred Pohl?
I'll sort of agree and sort of disagree with each.
Vance and Pohl -- from the point of view of a passionate SF reader, absolutely I'll give you those, but toss those names out to the average person-on-the-street and I'd be surprised if one in ten could recognize either name. As J. Alexander wrote, Clarke is (was) really one of the masters of that generation, and I'd be surprised if either Vance or Pohl seriously disagreed with that.
Bradbury has the name recognition and is certainly the right generation (being only a couple of years younger than Clarke), but he's really not the same sort of writer as the others -- he's a fantasy writer more than science fiction. That's nothing against him -- he's written some amazing stuff over the years -- but you never saw Bradbury's stuff in Astounding or its successors.
In any case, I'm not sure this is really the thread for an in-depth discussion of who was or wasn't one of "the greats." Clarke was one of them, and the world is lesser for his departure; let's leave it at that.
TWL
Today I am ashamed to say it's been since my Junior High school days that I read many of Clarke's books. Last year I reread Rendezvous with Rama and enjoyed it immensely.
Since PAD mentioned "Childhood's End" as his favorite, I will say for Luigi's sake, that I nearly liked it despite reading it for a high school English class (Epic, Science Fiction and Fantasy). The problem was the teacher. She could ruin and take the fun out of anything. I may give it a reread just to give it a fresh chance.
Sir Arthur led a full life. The news of his death shouldn't have hit me hard at all. But it did, for purely selfish reasons. Growing up during the '70s and '80s, I had five childhood heroes: Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov, Gene Roddenberry, Douglas Adams and Arthur C. Clarke.
And now they're all gone.
I'd like to second (third? fourth?) PAD's recommendation of Childhood's End. It remains one of my favorite books. I still impatiently await a movie adaptation.
--- Scott
As much as I enjoyed Childhood's End, my favorite Clarke novel was The Fountains of Paradise, followed closely by The Songs of Distant Earth. That man's prose was poetry.
HAL-9000: Dr. Chandra, will I dream?
Dr. Chandra: I don't know.
Hopefully HAL’s true voice is now dreaming the dreams he so richly deserves.
Everything PAD says about Childhood's End is true. I'd always hoped for a filmed version but so many elements of it has been already used, in everything from anime to Independence Day. The ending is probably too bleak (from a certain standpoint, anyway) for Hollywood to contemplate. They'd probably just screw it up.
Given how much great material the big 3--Heinlein, Asimove and Clarke--produced, it's rather amazing that so little has been filmed (and in the case of Ellison's great unfilmed screenplay for I Robot, a real shame).
I didn't start reading casually until I was 13. Just one year later I was introduced to the world of science fiction literature through Clarke's SPACE ODYSSEY series. I had never read anything like them before. I followed those three (3001 still a couple years off) with RAMA, which still stands as my favorite novel of all time. I truly credit his work for opening my mind to the broader universe around me.
May he forever journey the starts he brought to life through his words.
"I'd always hoped for a filmed version but so many elements of it has been already used"
Not only that, but a really good, worthy of the original material film would make Jackson's LOTR look like he was shooting in his backyard with action figures. Now, look at everything that Jackson put into those three films. Not just in terms of story, look at the effort. Now, I've heard that Morgan Freeman's finally getting Rendesvous with Rama in front of the cameras. Maybe, if that's done really well, maybe, just MAYBE, there's someone out there willing to take on the challenge. Not just of adapting the work, but of adapting it, not chopping it up into fishbait, and making everything borrowed by other places seem fresh.
Peter, what type of format is Childhood's End (novel, short story, etc.), and can you give a brief, TV Guide listing-like explanation of the concept and why it's so good? I'm curious. Thanks.
Let me try.
Aliens from an advanced civilization make first contact with Earth, but the aliens remain physically hidden, as if afraid to show us their true forms. The reason why is one of the book's cliffhangers.
That is the first half of the book. The second half has these aliens preparing mankind for a huge evolutionary leap that will change the world forever. That is why it's "Childhood's End", mankind becomes mature, as a race.
The book was published in 1953, and I think it was the first (and most famous) novel to deal with this scientific version of "rapture" that would become a feature in science fiction. That is why it's considered a classic.
Personally, I was never really a big fan of Arthur C. Clarke. It's costumary to only say good things of the recently departed, but the truth is I always found Clarke not very good at characterization, dramatic pacing, style, etc.
But I respected him for his bold ideas, and his vision. That is why he became a giant in the SF field. I just don't think his books were page-turners.
A random thought I just had...
Clarke opened his novel 2001: A Space Odyssey with the following words:
"Behind every man now alive stand thirty ghosts, for that is the ratio by which the dead outnumber the living. Since the dawn of time, roughly a hundred billion human beings have walked the planet Earth."
When Clarke wrote that introduction, sometime around 1966, the world had about 3.2 billion people in it.
There are about 6.6 billion people in the world today, in 2008, and the number of human beings who have ever lived has risen to roughly 106 billion. So behind every man alive today stand a paltry fifteen ghosts.
Population control, anyone? :)
I have read many of Mr. David's novels and i read imzadi twice. His work is so captivating!
Various fan clubs in new york are planning a star trek celebration affair, and we were wondering how to contact Mr. David for a possible guest appearence.
Does anyone know the address of his public relations person?
Growing up during the '70s and '80s, I had five childhood heroes: Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov, Gene Roddenberry, Douglas Adams and Arthur C. Clarke.
I feel much the same way, although my list is slightly different. My big role models (even as an adult, not just as a child) were Sagan, Asimov, and Richard Feynman. I'm never going to have the sheer brilliance of any of them, but on good days I like to think that I have at least some of their teaching/communication skills, and I certainly have the "not suffering pseudoscientific bullshit" aspect of all three down. :-) Feynman's demonstration and statement to the Challenger Commission strike me as something that should be taught in every school, ideally on January 28 of each year.
It's costumary to only say good things of the recently departed, but the truth is I always found Clarke not very good at characterization, dramatic pacing, style, etc.
On some level I have to agree. Clarke's greatest strength was in his visionary ideas and his willingness to follow those ideas through to some of their more interesting consequences. In some cases, like 2061, the books wound up being 90% "wouldn't it be neat if" and 10% story.
TWL
I started reading Arthur Clarke before two humans orbited the Earth at the same time. As a result, _A Fall of Moondust_, his stories about the race to the Moon (he had the U.S., Russia and Great Britian in competition), and his Mars novel were the books that shaped my view of the future. _The City and the Stars_ and _Childhood's End_ shaped my imagination.
Let's hear it for Star-mangled Spanners...
Anyone interested in my making convention appearances can write to me at padguy@aol.com
And now back to remembrances of Arthur C. Clarke.
PAD
Childhood's End favorite Clarke novel
"The Wall of Darkness" and "Meeting with Medusa" for short stories.
It was the ideas. He was first with a lot of things that are cliches now.
All of my Clarke and Asimov novels are in storage right now, and it's been driving me nuts this week. I desperately want to sit down and try and recapture some of the wonder I had when I was a kid reading Childhood's End and Rendezvous with Rama.
I think I actually preferred his short stories. One of my favourite collections was Tales from the White Hart - a collection of short stories set in a pub where scientists would tell tall tales. I don't know why that one grabbed me more than others, but it did.
A great man.
Scott Martin: There are about 6.6 billion people in the world today...
Luigi Novi: 6.7, actually.
Luigi Novi: 6.7, actually.
Drat. Okay, let's recompute and try it again...
"Behind every man now alive stand 14.82 ghosts, for that is..."
Hmm. It kinda loses the poetry when you throw in the decimal places, doesn't it? :)
Scott Martin wrote:
Drat. Okay, let's recompute and try it again...
"Behind every man now alive stand 14.82 ghosts, for that is..."
Hmm. It kinda loses the poetry when you throw in the decimal places, doesn't it? :)
Totally decimates it. :)
Hey all,
Clarke's passing is sad, but whomever mentioned that we should celebrate his life and not mourn his death is on to something; he left a remarkable body of work which for my part was at it's best with The Nine Billion Names of God. That happens to be my personal favorite, but Childhood's End is quite excellent and as worthwhile a read as anything in Clarke's ouvre.
best,
Andy Tafelski
Hmmm. I forgot to mention a short story of Clarke's that was completely amazing. "The Star", I believe. Without revealing any spoilers, it is hard to believe that he did not end up on the right wing enemy list for even suggesting the idea.
J. Alexander - They probably wouldn't have cared because they're just alien types and whoever cared about those?
I think edhopper's post questioning whether Arthur C. Clarke's death is a sad passing leads to bad thinking on two grounds. First of all, advanced age does not make someone's life valueless, so Mr. Clarke's death took from him something he had the right to value. Second, and I think more important, mourning is probably more a matter of the survivors' feeling of loss than the feelings of the deceased. When my father died (about 17 years younger than Mr. Clarke) I didn't cry because I thought he was suffering, but because I had lost him - with all of the missed conversations and unsaid things that entails. "Oh, he was old, so maybe this is nothing" is the thinking of a very young person who thinks he will never grow old.