There was a news story a couple of years ago that Prince Charles was en route to Sri Lanka to knight Arthur Clarke, when there broke a tabloid story that Clarke was an admitted pedophile. The next day there was a vehement denial from Clarke, but then the story fizzled. Any ideas? Was Clarke ever knighted? If not… is it (gulp - shudder) uh, you know…
According to an article found at http://news6.thdo.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/s/w_asia/newsid_74000/74938.stm ; the charges were dismissed as groundless. This was around April 1998 and, yes, Prince Chuck was on his way to Sri Lanka to knight the famous SF author, but Clarke asked to delay the ceremony until the investigation was complete. He was finally knighted in May of this year.
The story seems to have come from a misunderstanding of an interview with Clarke by the London Daily Mirror. After they finally turned over the tape to the Sri Lankan officials, the matter was dropped. Clarke was vehement in claiming his innocence during the whole affair.
Thanks, I read the article, but they hardly said the charges were wholly unsubstantiated. In fact, according to the Mirror, which broke the story, they had audio tape of Clarke’s own statement affirming the allegations.
I am also interested as to whether he sued the mirror, if the allegations were patently false and no tape existed. At this stage of life, he may not care enough to do it. I sure as heck would just to clear my name for posterity.
I think it is equally plausible that the crown waited a couple of years until the hoopla blew over, and then knighted him. In short, I am still unconvinced.
The London tabloids are known for playing pretty fast and loose with the facts, so you never want to rely on them for a factual story. I think Clarke has been suing them, and, IIRC, he won.
Also, as a purely logistical matter, Clarke has been effectively crippled by post-polio syndrome for the last thirty years, at least. The man can’t even stand up without help, so these claims are ludicrous on their face.
I believe the tabloid that made the claim was doing it more to discredit Prince Charles (who was going to present the knighthood) than Clarke.
Da Ace:
I don’t know why you would say that. I’m not for a moment suggesting there’s any substance to these charges, but the fact he’s crippled has nothing to do with it.
If Sri Lanka is like other 3rd World countries I’ve been in, there’s virtually no service or commodity that can’t be obtained for a less-than-reasonable price.
And you don’t have to walk the streets yourself to get it; you can order in. Especially a rich novelist could.
Recall reading (I believe in “Locus”) that Clarke himself stated that at the time of the charges, he had been celibate for something like 18 years, in part, he said, because of health issues relating to his post-polio symptons.
Not that that would automatically make sex impossible, just in Carke’s case it did. I’m sure such a debilitating condition could affect one’s libido. So it may not have totally affected his ability to have sex, just his desire to do so.
Sir
I was trying to be kind, but let me be blunter. He’s been physically incapable of any kind of sexual relations for several decades. Walking in and of itself isn’t the main problem.
If you’ll follow the link I provided, it has links to other stories on the matter. After the Sri Lankan police asked for the Mirror tape, they suddenly became reluctant to hand it over. The reason became obvious after the authorities heard it and dismissed charges–there was no solid evidence on the tape.
Other stories also state that Clarke (not HM Government) asked to delay the ceremony.
This is why these types of accusations are so awful; look how easy it is to change the facts.