There was a man named Arthur C. Clarke who once wrote a book that was a childhood favorite of mine, “The City and The Stars.” In recent years, he has most often worked with a co-author, Gentry Lee. Recently I purchased, with great anticipation, a new novel credited to Clarke, “3001: The Final Odyssey.” I find very little in this novel that suggests the author I once knew-- in the manner of readers-- so very well. The writing is savorless, witless, and flat, as if pitched to the juvenile market. Key events come and go without discernible drama; and even the level of scientific “prediction” seems remarkably conservative. Anyone else think this was basically a few notions passed in front of Mr. Clarke, massaged, ghosted, and printed? Sad to say, we all get old…
Well, getting old hasn’t stopped him from yanking NASA’s chain about life on Mars and defending himself against some rather indelicate charges, all in the past year.
Oh, no. I just had a horrible thought. What if Arthur C. Clarke is Seethruart?
Speaking of IMHO, I think that’s where this belongs. Off it goes.
Not to mention that 3001 has Poole born in 1996, FIVE YEARS before the year 2001. WTF? How could they get that date wrong? It’s only in the title of the freakin’ book!!
Most of Clarke’s collaborations suck out loud. Notable exception: Richter 10, which I enjoyed immensely ( pity Mike McQuay died shortly after writing it).
Otherwise I’m a big fan of Clarke and NOT of Gentry Lee.
Clarke’s writing skills may seem to be slipping, but he’s a very old, very feeble man who has lived through wars, illness, and the Bitish Internal Revenue service.
Is his time over? has he lost his touch? well, who cares. The guy who invented the communications sattelite, the guy who wrote Rendezvous with Rama, the guy who helped develop the foul-weather landing systems still in use at airports all over the world, should be cut a little slack.
OBTW, the 1996 birhtdate is a misprint. Not something Clarke did. Though why they left the misprint in in subsequent editions I’ll never know.
b.
Funny, I thought Richter 10 read like something intended for a second-string Saturday morning cartoon on some channel most people forget they have.
I seem to remember reading an “out” clause in one of the prefaces that explained the books weren’t all necessarily set in the same universe.
In no other genre could you pull that one off, but I swallowed it hook, like and sinker. I loved the novel of 2001. 2010 hung together for me, 2061 I can’t really remember, and 3001 passed like a dreamless sleep. If there was a point to the chronicles, it has left me behind.
That said I’ll plough on through any old garbage unless someone physically takes the book away and replaces it with something better.
WHat do you read that DOESN’T read like something intended for a second-string Saturday morning cartoon on some channel most people forget they have? I’m always open to suggestions for new, good reading material.
b.
I didn’t mean to sound like I was criticizing you for liking a book. I would never criticize someone for liking something I didn’t. I just find it amusing how the same thing can get completely different reviews.
But I rarely read fiction anymore. I only read Richter 10* because it was on my apartment building’s bookshelf and I was between other things.
But I did recently read The People’s Choice. If that were made into a Saturday morning cartoon it would be a really bad one.