Rating: 
Summary: A Fine Read
Review: This novel is solid, however a little disappointing. A like the destination of Saturn over Jupiter, as the magnificence of the rings, and the depcription of Japetus, make it very awe-inspiring to read. However, I feel that clarke does too much to desctibe the monolith as the creation of physical beings, and looses much of the ominous mysteriousness which made the movie so great, when he actually descirbes the "creatures" process of evolutoin, etc. But overall, this book does a fantastic job of portraying the unimaginable vastness of the universe, the overarching prupose behind its creation.
Rating:
Summary: Premium science fiction
Review: I promised myself that I would read this book before the end of 2001, and I did. I enjoy reading books set at specific dates in the future to see how much the author got right. The worst I can say about Clarke's vision of 2001 is that he failed to foresee the downfall of the USSR (even the CIA was unable to do that). OK, so he sees us as having regular flights to the Moon and a colony on the Moon. We have the technology to do so today--we just do not have the collective political will. Many of his predictions, however, feel right, even if they are not dead on. He has some great ideas for how to overcome the challenges of space, especially the lack of gravity (great when you realize that we had not yet flown a man to the moon when the book was first published). For instance, he describes a space toilet that spins to create an artificial gravity using centrifugal force so that you can get your business to fall in the right place (makes me wonder what the Shuttle astronauts do now). Aside from all the predicting-the-future stuff, it is a great story, some premium science-fiction. I was completely swept up by the idea that some extra-terrestrial life monkeyed (so to speak) with our species millions of years ago to start us down the road to intelligent life--and then set up a signaling device to let them know when we had arrived (the monolith on the Moon, for those of you who remember the movie). Clarke also does an excellent job of describing what it must be like to travel within our own solar system for the first time--the feeling of leaving our sun, our life-giver behind. And speaking of the movie, the book explains a lot that you do not quite get in the movie, so that is a bonus. It also raises some other questions not presented in the movie at all. While each stands alone as its own piece of work, the book and the movie really should be considered companion works. I removed a star from my rating because this book never reaches the depth and complexity of truely great science fiction. It just scratches the surface of a deeper story that you know is there. I assume that the sequels explore these themes more completely. Further, while the conflict between David Bowman and HAL is what most people remember from the movie, it actually plays a smaller role in the book, to the point where I did not get the sense of menace from HAL that I remember feeling from the movie. I actually felt sorry for HAL. Overall, though, a great book, and this edition has an entertaining memoir of Stanley Kubrick, his partner in making the film.
Rating:
Summary: I Still Prefer The Movie
Review: Being "2001- A Space Odissey" one of my favourite films, I was really excited about reading the novel based on its screenplay. Now, after finishing my reading, I love film much more, but I didn't like the novel very much. In my opinion, Arthur C. Clarke's work has much more details and gives away many subtle nuances of the film. Everthing that kept me thinking about for days when I first saw the picture was easily 'solved' in the novel. I mean, he explains -- or at least tries to -- everthing we saw in the picture. Opposite to the film also, there are many, many dialogues, and some solutions that shouldn't be given to the reader, once he/she could come up with his/her own interpretation. In the novel things are very clear and not so much dubious. It seems to me that many things Kubrick tried to hide in order to make us think about, Clarke just give them facts and figures. It took way all the magic that the movie had created in my mind. If I haven't had watched "2001..." once, I would think this novel was terrific. But, as I said, I have watched this movies dozen times. Moreover, Clark's way of writing is a bit boring and sometimes it seemed to me that he was treating me like child -- as when we explaing abstract concepts to little children. Bowman is a bit shallow as a character, he seems not to have many inner conflicts, what really makes charaters interesting and worthy to carry for. I thought really boring a chapter where the auhor writes about the different theories about E.T.s, and I didn't think it read at least intesting. In some parts of the novel, the writer makes us feel that scentists and astronuasts are a kind of blessed human beings, much better than us, ordinary people. [But maybe it is just me!!] Anyway, it can be an interesting reading mainly if you compare what they expected the world to be in the year 2001 and -- now that this year is over, we already are in 2002-- how the world, people and science were. The are much more errors than guesses when it comes to Clarke's 'predictions'. For instance, the greatest one is we haven't been living, colonizing or exploring planets in the way they mention in 2001. Space Travels are not as easy and common as in the novel. I also think the writer reads a bit naive when talking about living in other planets. According to his writings, there seemed to be no war or fights between nations for discorvered lands. I think when mankind will be able to live and colonize another planets there will be wars -- just like in past centuries when Africa was being colonized. He also mention URSS, but it's been many years that this union has been dissolved. Of course, when this novel was written the world was living beyond the shadow of the Cold War, and the writer hadn't imagined that I might have ended in the 90's as well as the end of URSS. On the other hand, he is right about people being able to exchange information via computers. [Although computers are not as smart as HAL 9000] Many times in the novel, the astronauts read newspaper in a computer screen -- ie the Internet, albeit it was not possible to Clarke predict that this would be the net's name. The part I like most in the novel is the first one; the one about the pre human beings. It made many points clearer because I could read what was going on inside their minds-- something we can not be sure in the movie. I also appreciated the ending. Not only does the author explain about the star child -- a bit frustrating --, but he also goes a bit further with a little pessimistic event -- very creepy! All in all, it is not a bad novel, but I think it misses a lot when compared to the movie. I'm not a sci-fi geek, but I could understand most of the language used in the story, so this will not be a problem for those who intend to read it and don't understand scientific language. Anyway, I gave it four stars, because I like the story very much.
Rating:
Summary: Widely considered one of the best. . .
Review: . . .serious science fiction novels ever written. This reviewer has to agree. From a beginning 10 million years in the past, to the "creation" of whatever it is that David Bowman becomes, 2001: A Space Odyssey grips the reader and doesn't let go. Much has been said about this book; and I'm not going to re-hash what other reviewers have written. I just wanted to add a few thoughts: 1) In the third novel in this series "2061: Odyssey 3" Clarke admits what became evident in the second book (and in the original movie). There are significant differences between the book and the movie, most importantly, the replacement of Jupiter for Saturn as the destination of "Discovery". While Saturn's moon Iaptus was a more "believable" destination (and location for the Monolith) the story could not have been sustained over several novels. 2) From a perspective of 35 years later, it is interesting to see Clarke's perspective of the "Cold War" and how it would affect man in space. 3) Clarke's theology is present in this book -- and only becomes more clear throughout the subsequent volumes. It is an utterly humanistic theology centered on the evolution of mind. Nevertheless, there remains still hints of the transcendent (also visible in several of Clarke's other novels) which clearly disturb the otherwise cold rationality of his thought.
Rating:
Summary: Forget the film, read this instead
Review: This is one of the most absorbing novels I've read in some time. A discovery on the moon leads man to journey in to the depths of space to find it's and perhaps mankinds origins. The book is written beautifully and you acually feel as though you are out there in space yourself. And then there is HAL, the computer system that runs the ship who, in my opinion, makes this novel a classic (and how many times has HAL been copied since). Do not judge this book on the tremendously boring Kurbrick film, read Clarke's novel instead. The novel has far more atmosphere and makes ten times more sense than what Kubrick produced.
Get it and read it, it it totally worth while.
Rating: 
Summary: Great book
Review: I wanted to read 2001 before screening the theatrical re-release, but unfortunately it is only playing 'in select cities.' (Don't you just hate it when they do that?) I had often heard that the film and the novel work together as companion pieces, and that is a very truthful statement. As soon as I picked it up, I found myself enjoying the novel more than I had the film. I was also very pleased to find that the book was not very 'dated.' I recommend '2001: A Space Odyssey' to any Sci-Fi fan. Fans of the film won't feel like they have already read this novel. It reads like a new experience.
Rating:
Summary: the ultimate space novel
Review: For anyone who likes novels about space exploration, this certainly qualifies.
In many ways, the novel gives a better understanding of the events in the film, such as the first encounter with the monolith.
The space flight of the Discovery is well written. The pace is what one would expect in such a flight; slow, mudane, building toward a climax. Then the routine is interruptted and the suspense builds. Next comes the great mystery of the second monolith and the weird sences it reviels to Bowman.
One can see the similarities Clarke gives between the dying tribe of the man-apes and the future society; both are on the edge of oblivian and have their normal views of the world distrupted by the unseen aliens. And both are given something of a savior that could very well change their world.
Few sci-fi novels can aproach the greatness of 2001. Not even the
sequels can match it. Any true fan of sci-fi is bound to love this!
Rating:
Summary: is this the best book ever written?
Review: is this the best book ever written? well, it certainly deserves a serious consideration for the title.it all begins with the haunting description of an ancient civilisation of ape men, then progresses to the discovery of a mysterious monolith on the moon,carries on into the depths of the solar system as a spacecraft is sent out to investigate the source of an ominous signal and finally culminates incredibly in places your imagination will never be able to understand nor believe. this book is probably the most influential sci fi classics of our times,its arguments are cogent, its implications are amazing and its visual images are stunning. its not a book, its literally a transcendent experience. if you're a sci fan devour it, if you're just an avid reader, buy it.everybody must read this book, if not have it on their book shelf. its a piece of history.
Rating:
Summary: Embodiment of the phrase, "thought provoking"
Review: Many books survive the translation into the medium of film, but the converse is rarely true. 2001 is one of those rare exceptions. This is due in no small part to the very key role that Clarke played in the making of the film. The central and critical theme in the film came from "The Sentinel" a story that Clarke wrote long before Kubrick's involvement. Consequently, the film was built on a secure literary foundation and the concurrent novel could be sourced upon the muse of writers and not that of directors. The other secret to the novel's success is Clarke. A lesser author would have floundered. But Clarke is one of the grand masters of the genre and, in addition to the prodigious intellect and creative powers that he could bring to bear, his reputation allowed him the freedom to depart from the film's script and impose his own vision on the novel. The result is a book with enough differences from the film that it can be separated from its twin sibling and judged on its own merits. This is especially important when we consider how large an effect the film has had on the genre's psyche. So many superlatives have been heaped upon this work, that there is nothing to be gained in further praising it. More useful then, is defining who will not like it. Those who wish their thinking done for them will not like this book. It asks too many difficult questions and has the temerity to leave them unanswered. It even implies that some questions can have no answers. Some people will find that this messes with their minds to a totally unacceptable degree. Likewise, it will not appeal to action junkies. The pace of the book reflects something of reality. For example, the journey to Saturn is described in much the way such a journey might feel - leisurely and methodically, with the crisis arising at the end and not a series of emergencies manufactured just to pump up the plot. The descriptions of astronaut routine are fascinating, but only to those who have cultivated a sense of patience. Those with the attention span of a flea will find this book boring. Most of all, this book won't appeal to those who want comfort: whether the comfort of formula, the boundaries of the purely human, or the reassurance of what is already known. This novel has earned its reputation because it seeks to expand our minds, beyond the human and into the unknown. There is absolutely nothing formulaic about it. The only beef I have with Clarke is that he didn't leave well enough alone. None of the sequels remotely approach the quality of the original and some of the subsequent explanations destroy much of the mystery that made 2001 so unique.
Rating:
Summary: Art Clarke saves the world from itself
Review: The amazing thing about this book is that it isn't dated. I mean, the internet, for instance. Art didn't see the form we have today, but he did forsee e-newspapers. The plot wears well, and reminds us how the world was in the '80's, we thought they would push the button and turn the key, and blow civilization away long before now. Mr. Clarke's solution to the problem is unique, to say the least.
|
