I must say that although I am a fan of Arthur C. Clarke, this book was a disappointment. While it did have intriguing plot points, it cannot be said to be a meaty or particularly incisive novel.First, its strengths. As with all of Clarke's works that I have read, he is a master at balancing hard sci-fi with elegant prose, kneading the science into his stories rather than shoving lumps of scientific exposition in as needed. In other words, although his novels include thought experiments, they cannot be reduced to a mere framework for them. TSODE examines the apocalypse, space colonization, societal stagnation, mutiny, the question of intelligence, polyamory, human history, cultural preservation, and curiosity. Quite impressive for such a short novel! Clarke's treatment, as it often is, is hardly subtle, but there is an appeal to this approach: real humans explicitly ponder these issues, so why not let the characters converse about them as well? It is refreshing to read about characters with some level of self-awareness. I also found the general lack of plot pleasant. Such would be insufferable in a longer work, but is acceptable here (although some reviewers disagree). Clarke eschews the rapid-fire plot so common in short sci-fi novels in favor of letting the effects of the contact between the Thalassans and the Earthlings unfold gradually, weaving in thinner threads of the marine life of Thalassa and love triangles (among others). This produces a relaxed feeling that is appropriate given the languid lifestyle of the Tarnans. The novel, however, fails to reach its potential for identifiable reasons. First, none of the plot points are permitted to develop in enough detail. Clarke has proven himself capable of giving the readers tastes of many ideas without sacrificing depth (q.v. Against the Fall of Night). He fails to do so here. Are the scorps intelligent? What happens on Sagan Two? How is Thalassan life actually changed? Does Thalassa remain cut off from the other colonies? etc. Such questions deserve answers. Clarke's thought experiments are set up but not explored or resolved, and thus may as well have been presented without the framework of a novel.The second obvious shortcoming of the novel is the shallow thought present in it. Clarke essentially asserts that most religion has led to moral wrongs, that it is obsolete, etc. Such a cursory treatment is intellectually irresponsible, especially since Clarke espouses morality that is fundamentally based on principles as unverifiable as those upon which many theological systems are also based. His Mary Sue characters expound what one may assume to be Clarke's position on human society and philosophy with nothing be the most receptive of Mary sue-filled audiences. Lazy, lazy, lazy. And offensive, given the depth of many theological texts that are simply handwaved away by someone who has clearly not engaged with them seriously. Third, the lack of character depth. I think that focus on psychological changes in characters is very much overemphasized among modern readers, but because this novel explicitly involves the psychological effects of Earth's devastation on the exiles and the mutual changes wrought upon the exiles and the Thalassans following their first contact, the absence of said psychological analysis is unacceptable and feels like a gaping hole that Clarke does not even attempt to fill.I would still, however, recommend this book. I can certainly understand why it was one of Clarke's favorites, given that it is also his most masturbatory. Those interested in Clarke as a person should read it on that basis alone. It still, however, is a smooth read and manages to provoke thought on all the subjects it treats, even if it only treats them perfunctorily. Certainly not my favorite of his works, though, and I pray that human society will not develop along the lines that Clarke clearly hopes it will.
“He felt like a young student again, confronted with all the art and knowledge of mankind. The experience was both exhilarating and depressing; a whole universe lay at his fingertips, but the fraction of it he could explore in an entire lifetime was so negligible that he was sometimes overwhelmed with despair.” Los últimos días han sido un poco turbulentos, estaba extremadamente cansado y tuve mi ultimo día de clases para siempre, por eso, la lectura de este libro me tomo mas tiempo de lo programado.Arthur C. Clarke lo hizo otra vez. El hecho de que alguien pueda escribir una novela tan completa, entretenida y compleja pero sin ningún tipo de violencia, explosiones o sexo es admirable. El ritmo de la novela es lento, no tremendamente, pero lo es. Aun así, la novela es completamente interesante.Lo primero que quiero recalcar es su originalidad, la novela en si no cae en los convencionalismo de la CF, no es una guerra intergalactica y no hay una distopia mal hecha (me gustaría dar nombres, varios). Otro de sus puntos fuertes es el hecho de que es COMPLETAMENTE realista, la novela no tiene artefactos imposibles (a excepción del empuje que es en si, posible pero lejano, muy lejano) típicos de la ciencia ficción, no hay pistolas láser, no hay velocidad mas allá de la luz, no hay control mental ni nada de eso, la novela es realista al 99% y se agradece porque así se hace cercana, la novela no nos lleva mas allá de la raza humana, nos lleva a la raza humana misma. El ambiente es perfecto, esta semi utopía casi completamente cubierta de mar esta bien realizada, no existe una sobre descripción poética de los alrededores pero interiorizamos un edén, no hay guerras ni intolerancia racial o sexual, los problemas son meramente políticos pero sin mayor escala de una nimia envidia. Los personajes son excelentes, no nos hacen participe completamente de su interior pero tampoco nos privan por completo de este, el único problema que tuve (yo lo tuve, solo por desconcentrado) fue el que me costo aprenderme los nombres de los personajes, aunque no me molesto ni por asomo.Concluyendo, el libro es una obra maestra de la Ciencia Ficción, Clarke nos muestra a la humanidad desnuda y nos ayuda a ver nuestro futuro, lo que sera de nuestros pensamientos sociales, políticos y religiosos (la conversación de Alfa y Omega fue increíble) y nos ayuda a comprender como la tecnología no necesariamente sera mortal ni independiente a la humanidad, si no una ayuda y casi una dependencia. Increíble libro y recomendado no solo para los fanáticos de la CF, si no para cualquier persona que quiera leer un buen libro.
Do You like book The Songs Of Distant Earth (2015)?
I am a big Arthur C. Clarke fan. Still, this would count as one of his lesser works for me. The characters and plot aren't especially memorable. The premise is a faraway planet populated by humans who were shipped there as frozen embryos. So it is certainly a relevant topic. Passages of the novel have a lyrical quality. I like that. Still, on a deeper philosophical level it doesn't resonate with me the way 2001: A Space Odyssey and Childhood's End do. Regardless, it's a good yarn in fine Clarke fashion.
—Jake
Many years ago a friend of mine tricked me into reading this book. It was not much of a trick, since I was curious about the book. He had not read it and wanted someone to read it before, he did. I had responded that I did enjoy the book. Until I re-read this, I could not remember a single thing about it.I picked up the copy I have from a used bookstore a month ago, since I was interested in reading it again. Not to my surprise, I still enjoyed the book.Even though it is a quick read, I found the book interesting. The plot is straightforward. Survivors from Earth come across one of the planets that had been 'seeded' in order to try and save the human race.Arthur C. Clark does a great job of easily explaining the technology and showing how the reactions between both sets of humans and the questions raised with the encountering.The detail on the science is not too deep, so most readers should be able to understand. The book moves quick, and does not bog down at all. Very enjoyable.
—Christian Petrie
I read this book for the first time in 8th grade around the time it was first published in 1986, and today in 2014 I just finished reading it a second time. It still holds up. Could he have developed the characters a bit more here and there? Sure. Could the ending have extended a little farther, chronologically speaking? Yes. But what *is* there is beautiful, believable, and a joy to read. It has its sad, evocatively mournful moments, but it is ultimately a hopeful look at the future without spilling over into utopian la-la land. Technology-wise, it doesn't feel dated either. Clarke was a visionary. Full stop. He did extensive reading and consulting with experts in the sciences to make his space flight and devices as plausible as possible. In this story, he is also a visionary in human terms. Of the many SF books - and good ones, true classics - that I first read in the mid-late 80s, I have always remembered this book distinctly. It was the first positive, or at least matter-of-fact and accepting portrayal of homosexuality I had ever encountered in my life as a young teen in the Reagan-era rural south. I had only ever heard gayness described as wickedness and an abomination. ACC approached sexuality in a very tasteful but incredibly pragmatic way, as a wide spectrum of natural human behaviors that, divorced from petty prejudices, are actually normal and healthy. As a queer kid who would not come out for a good 10 years, this portrayal stood out to me and was the first step in thinking for myself and eventually accepting myself, despite a strictly fundamentalist upbringing. His thoughts on religion - skeptical, but not hostile - were also a welcome new view for me back then. His references to Buddhism in this book also sparked my interest in a way of life that would eventually fulfill my need for religion in a way that didn't contribute to self-loathing like my childhood religion had. This novel pointed me in the direction of a shift into thinking that would eventually bring me great comfort. I can say without exaggeration that this book really shaped who I am as a person today. And it's still an incredibly rich, high-quality SF read that has stood the test of time. Thank you, Mr. Clarke. Thank you.
—Elizabeth Bridges
