Posted on 03/18/2008 3:02:47 PM PDT by fishtank
I don’t expect to see that myself. Apollo was my generation. Very disappointing the day Clarke left.
Many people who are fans of "2001" hated it but I thought it was an absolutely glorious film.
I will always hold Asimov at number one of my Sci-Fi writer ratings but Clarke is number two. I thoroughly loved the "Rama" series of novels.
What was the reason for him doing that? I can’t remember.
Damn literature!
Their vision and portrayals of Humanity and its journey to the future gave us all faith and hope. Rest in peace.
Just Damn.
One of the best SF writers ever.
Well, All I have to say then is “attempt no landings there”......
Sad day. An obscure Clarke novel, “The Sands of Mars”, was one of the first SF novels I read as a kid. His collection of bar stories, “Tales from the White Hart” hooked me. I haven’t re-read them in years, but I still remember some of the plots.
“Rendezvous with Rama” is one of my all-time favorites (though the sequels were snoozers). All of the “Space Odyssey” books are good. Never liked “Childhood’s End”, though I know many people consider it his best work.
Clarke also wrote “The Star” - classic short story about space travelers exploring a burned-out planet that circled the remains of what may have been the Nativity Star - it was good fiction but showed Clarke’s naturalistic worldview.
I guess we all gotta go sometime. It is sad to consider that Mr. Clarke is likely not with Jesus today.
Prayers and best wishes to you.
Off to the great Monolith in the sky.
A fitting tombstone.
Sir Arthur C. Clarke also proposed the concept of Geostationary Satellite Communications in 1945.
Like his contemporaries and friends, Dr. Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlien, they both wrote speculative fiction (Science Fiction to the masses) as well as hard science texts. And now they all are the new masters of modern fiction, living as immortals on the shelves of countless libraries and personal collections.
Just too bad that we haven't reached the future that they envisioned before their deaths. But they have given us a good road map to that future.
Kubrick intentionally left questions unanswered in 2001, and some of us like it that way. It works as mysterious, technological eye candy, with an excellent soundtrack. For many it stimulated the imagination. Others hated the film for the same reasons. Kubrick noted that children tended like 2001, but not so much their parents. His theory was children in 1968 were raised with cartoons and other visual stimulation on TV, whereas their parents were more accustomed to radio and books.
2010 was entirely the work of Clarke. Kubrick had nothing to do with it. Clarke explained everything in his book, 2001, and tied up loose ends in 2010. So I don't find it surprising that people like either 2001 or 2010, but not both.
He gave some lame reason, but I suspect he was under severe pressure.
'cept me. I even liked the follow up novel "2061".
If I may ask, from who or what?
From those who wanted these advanced projects killed:
the Apollo Moon Program
the Superconducting Supercollider
American preeeminence in science and technology
American energy independence
Thanks! Yeah, shoulda figured those folks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.