THX_1138 Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 I am surprised that this was not posted earlier: Famous science fiction author, Sir Arthur Charles Clarke died this past week in his adopted hometown of Colombo, Sri Lanka. Arthur Clarke was born on a farm in the United States and at young age suffered a dibilitating bout of polio that restricted him to a wheelchair for much of his adult life. Thus, unable to assist on his parent's farm, he turned to the plethora of science fiction books (usually rare in the early 20th century) that were brought back by american soldiers returning from the first world war in europe. Those books intrigued him, and soon inspired him to write science fiction that the world would come to respect, adore and even worship. More on this later... i am still quite distressed about his passing away. The guy was more than just a hero to me, he was a bit like a pseudo father who dreamed this ellaborate dreams and i strived to fulfill them...
Dhondy Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 Maybe not many have read him here, THX. Science doesn't seem to carry a particularly strong flavour here, so science fiction might not be everybody's cup of tea either. We, or at least my generation, grew up on a diet of Isaac Asimov. Must say I haven't read Clarke, but know what you mean by missing somebody like that. I felt the same way when Alistair Maclean and Desmond Bagley died.
Guest HariSampath Posted March 22, 2008 Posted March 22, 2008 Oh I loved his 2001 A Space Odyssey very much , the Stanley Kubrik movie was a classic in my opinion. Although the end was a bit heavy for the average viewer, anyone with a deeper perspective may have seen it was not dissimilar to what ancient Hindu thought about the greater human evolution.
THX_1138 Posted March 23, 2008 Author Posted March 23, 2008 Maybe not many have read him here, THX. Science doesn't seem to carry a particularly strong flavour here, so science fiction might not be everybody's cup of tea either. We, or at least my generation, grew up on a diet of Isaac Asimov. Must say I haven't read Clarke, but know what you mean by missing somebody like that. I felt the same way when Alistair Maclean and Desmond Bagley died. i read guns of navarone by mclean and i was for some time infatuated with world war 2 literature... indeed good authors both maclean and bagley.
THX_1138 Posted March 23, 2008 Author Posted March 23, 2008 Oh I loved his 2001 A Space Odyssey very much ' date=' the Stanley Kubrik movie was a classic in my opinion. Although the end was a bit heavy for the average viewer, anyone with a deeper perspective may have seen it was not dissimilar to what ancient Hindu thought about the greater human evolution.[/quote'] actually if you read the sequels to 2001: A Space Odyssey, you will notice a number of indian characters. infact, the HAL 9000 computer was the creation of Dr. Chandra at the University of Chicago Department of Computer Science. Its interesting that you must bring up Hindu Philosophy in reference to David Bowman's assension, when Clarke wrote the novel (inspired by his short story the Sentinel) he was living in Sri Lanka and Bhuddhist and Hindu theology impacted him immensely. Though a famous and vociferous atheist, he once famously remarked (in a question from a religious leader in Sri Lanka) to a question inquiring if he believed in god: "No, I dont believe in God, but i am very interested in him!" I admire the man for his vision: Geostationary Satellites, a novel concept that he proposed a good twenty years before their implimentation when he formed the "Inter Planetary Council" and at first, his proposal was met with ridicule by the editor of Wireless World, but eventually published at the insistance of the Assistant Editor! As for his interactions with Isaac Asimov, they had differences in their writing: Asimov often wrote of fantastical concepts especially "FTL: Faster Than Light" travel, whereas Clarke stood steadfast by his three laws: 1. If a renouned and acclaimed Scientist states that something is possible, he is most likely correct, if he says it is not, then he is most likely incorrect. 2. Any substantially advance technology would appear to be Magic to the comman man. 3. Science above all had the means to bring peace and stability to humanity, and presented the most nonconflicting ambition. Thus, faster than light travel was something Clarke steered well clear of. Nonetheless, his works were beyond brilliant: Rendenzvous with Rama (named after the Hindu God Rama) sweeped the awards for the year it was published: receiving everything from the Booker Prize to the Hugo Awards. However, my personal favorite would have to be his greatest legacy: 2001 A Space Odyssey. Indeed when Kubrick made his movie (which was released simultaneously with the novel, and had Kubrick's interpretation of the short story: Sentinel, and not as often misunderstood, a dramatization of the novel), and his vision was just as magnificient. i would recommend that movie to everyone here, and dont dispair of you feel that the movie was particularly confusing. I did not grasp the context till a later viewing. But finally yes, the underlying message that we are currently at the highest level of our physiological evolution, and the only step forward would be neurological evolution, is indeed a novel concept. Maybe in the future, we would be downloaded into eternal machines or eventually into sheer energy and can then explore the corners of this universe (or maybe the infinite others that quite possibly exist simultaneously!)...
Anakin Posted March 23, 2008 Posted March 23, 2008 Haven't read much of his writing, I loved reading Jules Verne though. RIP
CC1981 Posted March 23, 2008 Posted March 23, 2008 Wasn't a fan of Arthur C Clarke at all- i read 2001 A space Oddessey and i didn't like it at all- came across as muddled, the plotline was definitely schizophrenic and the story had a sense of ' don't know where this is going, really' to it....maybe coz i read it when i was 12, but it definitely put me off Clarke's works.....As for sci-fi, i liked Jules Verne and Assimov, though i must say that Sci-fi is not my genre for reading. I prefer watching Sci-fi though and series like SG-1, Babylon-5, TNG, DS9 and Farscape are definitely in my favuorites list. In anycase, RIP, Mr Clarke.
The Outsider Posted March 23, 2008 Posted March 23, 2008 Science doesn't seem to carry a particularly strong flavour here, so science fiction might not be everybody's cup of tea either. They are not necessarily related. Always found science fiction to be drab and boring, with some exceptions like 2001 : A Space Odyssey or The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, but science never fails to excite and interest. RIP, Arthur Clarke.
THX_1138 Posted March 24, 2008 Author Posted March 24, 2008 shwetabh, i recommend the following: Rendezvous with Rama Andromeda Strain Solaris Ender's Game Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? if you read even one of the above, i am quite certain you will not be as dismissive of science fiction as "drab and boring". heck, if you did indeed read solaris or do androids dream of electric sheep, you might soon find yourself examining the traits that define your humanity (not intended as a veiled insult, just a remark that those two novels are exuberant examples of philosophy and enticing drama packed together).
Recommended Posts