Rating: 
Summary: Thought-provoking sci-fi featuring more science than fiction
Review: For most sci-fi fans, it is impossible to read Clarke's novelization of "2001" without calling up scenes from Kubrick's movie. Unlike nearly all books inspired by movies, however, many readers will find that Clarke's fiction enriches, rather than retreads, familiar ground. In particular, the novel more fully explains the purpose of the monoliths and the movie's ambiguous--and to many, bizarre--ending.Those who complain about the book's datedness win the argument on purely literal grounds. The year 2001 has come and gone, and many of the "advances" in the book (and the movie) seem quaint, while humanity's adventures in space have, for the most part, stalled. Nevertheless, what is remarkable about Clarke's book is not the technology, which was doomed to obsolescence within a decade, but rather the science. Reading "2001" reminds us that, while our industrial innovations may have departed from the expectations of the late 1960s, the principles on which our technology is based and the astrophysics that informs our worldview have altered relatively little. Indeed, the novel in many spots reads like a science book, and this impression is underscored by Clarke's journalese, which ranges from informative to didactic. ("It was true that the Special Theory of Relativity had proved to be remarkably durable." "That pinpoint of incandescence must be a White Dwarf--one of those strange, fierce little stars, no larger than the Earth, yet containing millions of times its mass.") Even the attempts at characterization are reportorial: "Like all his colleagues, Bowman was unmarried; it was not fair to send family men on a mission of such duration." Heywood Floyd, David Bowman, and even Hal (the mutinous computer) are inarguably one-dimensional. Yet, none of this seems inappropriate, since Clarke--and Kubrick--clearly decided to forego traditional features of storytelling (character, plot, etc.) in favor of pure, extravagant speculation. Instead, Clarke has fully developed his true protagonists: science as a discipline and human progress as a whole.
Rating: 
Summary: The all-time classic
Review: There is not much that can be said about 2001 that hasn't been said already. It is, of course, a classic among classics, a story that begins three million years in the past and ends in what was, at the time Clarke and Kubrick developed the story, the near future. The background is well known: Stanley Kubrick wanted to make the proverbial "good science fiction movie," and to achieve this goal, he and Clarke collaborated to develop a screenplay based partly on some of Clarke's earlier short stories (The Sentinel, among others). Clarke then wrote the novel from the screenplay.
I must admit that I've never really liked 2001 all that much, to be honest. The "problem" with the movie is that you cannot today avoid knowing that you're watching something that was made in the 1960s. Most of the movie is set in the future, but it feels like the past. In the book, the annoying thing is that Clarke's style of writing (which usually works so well) is too brief and abrupt, and the ending doesn't satisfy. On the other hand, I do like the beginning, with Moon-Watcher and the early hominids struggling for survival, and I also like the idea of mankind being essentially the creation of an unknown alien intelligence. But I can't escape the feeling that the story should have been more "fleshed out." And, like I said, the ending, when Bowman is transformed into Star-Child, is not satisfying and even a bit disturbing, even if the story in this way does come full-circle at the very end. Don't get me wrong, it's an amazing idea, but somehow it just doesn't "feel" right. As an explanation to why there doesn't seem to be any intelligent life on other worlds in the universe (why have we not been visited?), it's certainly a breath-taking concept. But the idea of transcendence is a little bit too much mystical and "religious" for my taste. But who's really to say, after all? Maybe our weak and frail physical bodies, that age and decay all too quickly, are only a momentary stage in the chain of evolution. And maybe humanity is the last remaining race in the universe that still have not achieved the next stage.
This will forever remain the science fiction novel that Clarke is best remembered for. But that is perhaps a bit unfair, since both the book and the movie (that is, the writing of the screenplay) was a collaboration between Clarke and Kubrick. Clarke wrote the book, of course, but so many of the ideas and so much of the material was developed together with Kubrick. Still, 2001 was epoch-making, and no one can deny that as a movie, 2001 was the most influential science fiction movie ever made. It helped to clear the way for things to come, like Star Wars and the other great science fiction movies of the late -70s and early -80s. And that's one more thing that we can, at least in part, thank the genius of Sir Arthur C. Clarke for.
The millennium edition has a new foreword and an "In Memoriam" for Stanley Kubrick, who died in 1999. As Clarke says, "One of my deepest regrets now is that we shall not be able to welcome the year 2001 together."
Rating: 
Summary: Great book--I couldn't put it down!!!
Review: 2001: A Space Odyssey was an incredible work of science fiction. While I was reading this book I could not put it down. The characters seemed so real to me. You should read this book. Also read its sequel 2010: Odyssey Two. Incredible book!
Rating:
Summary: An interesting book with a great theory.
Review: 2001 was what many people consider the greatest science fiction movie of all time.However, I think I like the book more than the movie. It had a lot more detail and had important parts that were left out in the movie. The plot is that in the year 2001, the moon has been colonized by humans(I wish). When they find a strange object on the moon, they call Dr. Heywood Floyd from Earth to check it out. It appears to be a black monolith that was made 3 million years ago, long before there was any life or civilization on Earth. The book had some interesting ideas, such as the fact that every star in the universe is actually a solar system. The book had a great story. Actually, it was 3 stories, but the object was in all 3. The ending still is confusing, but it leaves you to come up with your own ending. Very original book, highly recomended.
Rating:
Summary: How it might have happened? And a look at ourselves.
Review: When Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick sat down together and simultaneously developed this book, and the visually stunning movie by the same name, you have to wonder if they imagined that they were creating something timeless as they have. While this book would fall under the genre Sci-Fi, the perhaps ficional elements about the evolution of man provide an entertaining backdrop for a story about where man has come from and where we are going. Have we learned from our mistakes? At the time this book was written, Clarke would indicate that we have not. Will we reach what scientific philosophers like Clarke believe are going to be our future evolutionary states? The way you begin to think as you read this book will remind you of any and all the nights you may have stared at the stars as a child and wondered what our role in the universe is. This book is as artistic a piece as the film for that reason, and it is far less confusing on the first read as compared to the first film viewing.
Rating:
Summary: THE BEGINNING OF A GREAT SCI-FI BOOK SERIES!
Review: This is one of the greatest science fiction novels ever written! Arthur C. Clarke creates a mind-bending story that builds on the feature film version! A must-read for any true sci-fi buff! Grade: A+
Rating:
Summary: A new Evolutionary step
Review: Arthur C Clarke has returned to his favorite theme - that of the proverbial First Encounter. We've had them in the RAMA series and in CHILDHOOD'S END. But this time we meet them by proxy. Everyone is quite familiar with the story but the originality and suprises (aided by an extraordinarily perceptive cinematic translation) just keep coming. It's like the author is drinking from a well of originality and talent that won't run dry. I loved the man-machine/man-monolith/man-Jupiter interactions. Clarke has ventured into the metaphysical here and the movie perfectly suggests to the viewer what we, the readers, can only imagine from the text. The idea of an extraterrestrial boost to Earthly intelligence has been suggested before (along with the idea that life itself arrived from outer space via meteorite). One still has to ask the question: OK, so where did THAT life come from? Clarke simply assumes that "it is" without questions. Another theme present in almost all his works is that we on this planet are still children of the universe, we are in the learning stage and must and will learn from the more "advanced" races. Whether this happens or not - my personal opinion is that it won't - it is still a good concept to bandy about.
Rating:
Summary: Is good scifi timeless?
Review: If I were to rely on this book alone, I would say yes! Although some minor details seem dated in the book, the main concepts and the depiction of the planets are detailed without being boring and sound believable (specially if you are not a professional astronomer). The book has great pacing (maybe except for the first part where the monolith tinkers with our ancestors brains) and culminates beautifully with the transformation of Bowman into the star-child. If you have already seen the movie or even read the book previously and enjoyed it, I would highly recommend this paperback edition for the rather lengthy preface by the author. There he describes his partnership with Kubrik, his conversations with Asimov (!) and, among other trivia, tells us that HAL has nothing to do with IBM (can you believe him?).
Rating:
Summary: The evolution of humankind.....
Review: This book is timeless. The allegorical significance of this novel will never diminish in importance and scope.....
Rating:
Summary: Comparing Both 2001's
Review: Comparing the 2001 of the book, 2001 A Space Odyssey to the 2001 we know, you can find major differences. Biggest of all would be the event of September 11, 2001. Reading this book makes you think, "How could our world be different, if we had or hadn't done something?" Like most books written about the future it's not accurate but it gives us an interesting idea of where we thought we would be. 2001 starts out easy to read and understand, then glides through the book in this way until the last few chapters. The last few chapters require almost a second read through and a few minutes of thinking to fully understand and enjoy what's going on. I enjoyed the sci-fi aspect of 2001, and the end. I literally couldn't put this book down until I was done.
|
