web site hit counter 2010: Odyssey Two - Ebooks PDF Online
Hot Best Seller

2010: Odyssey Two

Availability: Ready to download

When 2001: A Space Odyssey first shocked, amazed, and delighted millions in the late 1960s, the novel was quickly recognized as a classic. Since then, its fame has grown steadily among the multitudes who have read the novel or seen the film based on it. Yet, along with almost universal acclaim, a host of questions has grown more insistent through the years: Who or what tran When 2001: A Space Odyssey first shocked, amazed, and delighted millions in the late 1960s, the novel was quickly recognized as a classic. Since then, its fame has grown steadily among the multitudes who have read the novel or seen the film based on it. Yet, along with almost universal acclaim, a host of questions has grown more insistent through the years: Who or what transformed Dave Bowman into the Star-Child? What purpose lay behind the transformation? What would become of the Star-Child? What alien purpose lay behind the monoliths on the Moon and out in space? What could drive HAL, a stable, intelligent computer, to kill the crew? Was HAL really insane? What happened to HAL and the spaceship Discovery after Dave Bowman disappeared? Would there be a sequel? Now all those questions and many more have been answered. In this stunning sequel to his international bestseller, Clarke has written what will truly be one of the great books of the '80s. Cosmic in sweep, eloquent in its depiction of Man's place in the Universe, and filled with the romance of space, this novel is a monumental achievement.


Compare

When 2001: A Space Odyssey first shocked, amazed, and delighted millions in the late 1960s, the novel was quickly recognized as a classic. Since then, its fame has grown steadily among the multitudes who have read the novel or seen the film based on it. Yet, along with almost universal acclaim, a host of questions has grown more insistent through the years: Who or what tran When 2001: A Space Odyssey first shocked, amazed, and delighted millions in the late 1960s, the novel was quickly recognized as a classic. Since then, its fame has grown steadily among the multitudes who have read the novel or seen the film based on it. Yet, along with almost universal acclaim, a host of questions has grown more insistent through the years: Who or what transformed Dave Bowman into the Star-Child? What purpose lay behind the transformation? What would become of the Star-Child? What alien purpose lay behind the monoliths on the Moon and out in space? What could drive HAL, a stable, intelligent computer, to kill the crew? Was HAL really insane? What happened to HAL and the spaceship Discovery after Dave Bowman disappeared? Would there be a sequel? Now all those questions and many more have been answered. In this stunning sequel to his international bestseller, Clarke has written what will truly be one of the great books of the '80s. Cosmic in sweep, eloquent in its depiction of Man's place in the Universe, and filled with the romance of space, this novel is a monumental achievement.

30 review for 2010: Odyssey Two

  1. 5 out of 5

    Henry Avila

    The enigma of the Spaceship Discovery lost in Jupiter's orbit ( the setting has been changed from Saturn in the original book, to match Kubrick's film). The imaginative Arthur C. Clarke's sequel to 2001, has Dr. Heywood Floyd again recruited on a joint U.S. and Soviet, woops,(written in 1982) expedition, to the giant sphere, the numerous colors yep orange too, planet, find out what happened. The crew of the Soviet ship Leonov consists of seven Russians and three Americans, with both male and fem The enigma of the Spaceship Discovery lost in Jupiter's orbit ( the setting has been changed from Saturn in the original book, to match Kubrick's film). The imaginative Arthur C. Clarke's sequel to 2001, has Dr. Heywood Floyd again recruited on a joint U.S. and Soviet, woops,(written in 1982) expedition, to the giant sphere, the numerous colors yep orange too, planet, find out what happened. The crew of the Soviet ship Leonov consists of seven Russians and three Americans, with both male and female members. Dr.Floyd, Dr. Chandra, builder of the malfunctioning computer Hal (a long repair trip) and Walter Curnow a systems specialist, are the Americans. Curnow job is to get Discovery working again before it crashes down on Io a hellish volcanic world and one of the many exotic Jovian moons. But the real reason of the trip is of course just a little more complicated people are so devious. Discovery's Captain David Bowman's disappearance and his last words"My God it's full of stars" haunts the Earth still to this very day ...what does he mean ? The mysterious black monolith that is floating in space between Jupiter and her moon , how dangerous a threat is it to Earth? The quite able Captain Tatiana Orlova is in charge and even has her husband on board makes for an interesting voyage, but no time for a honeymoon. All the crew begin to call the monolith "Big Brother", even the uncomfortable Soviets. A shocking development arises when the Chinese send the spaceship Tsien, ahead of the Leonov using all their fuel to arrive first. An unbelievable suicide mission? What is their ultimate goal steal valuable information from the Discovery and Big Brother... The puzzle continues when the Chinese land on another Jovian moon, the strange ice satellite Europa. An understandable confusion in the spaceship, indeed but meanwhile the view of Jupiter's dazzling atmosphere is not to be missed. Its constant color changes, white, red , orange, and the Great Red Spot nonetheless something strange is seen from the Leonov, a black image is spreading on the Fifth Planet.Soon it will engulf the entire sphere....What is it doing and more important for what reason maybe to cause trouble for the Soviets and Americans a chilling prospect. Exciting follow up to 2001, not as good to be honest since few book could top the original in the genre, however an agreeable space adventure.

  2. 5 out of 5

    Apatt

    “Daisy, Daisy give me your answer do.” Funny that this innocuous kiddies’ tune always reminds me of a homicidal supercomputer. Arthur C. Clarke, in spite of being a sci-fi legend, is not known for his characterization, but HAL 9000 is one of the most memorable sci-fi characters ever, with his friend Dave Bowman not far behind. With 2010: Odyssey Two, we are back to “the future” which is now the past. Some people will be put off from reading this book because it is set six years ago and nothing lik “Daisy, Daisy give me your answer do.” Funny that this innocuous kiddies’ tune always reminds me of a homicidal supercomputer. Arthur C. Clarke, in spite of being a sci-fi legend, is not known for his characterization, but HAL 9000 is one of the most memorable sci-fi characters ever, with his friend Dave Bowman not far behind. With 2010: Odyssey Two, we are back to “the future” which is now the past. Some people will be put off from reading this book because it is set six years ago and nothing like what transpires in the book occurred in the real 2010. Us long time sci-fi readers are very tolerant of the real future overtaking the fictional one. The important thing is the story, and the alien technology in this book has not been made to look silly by today’s Earthly tech. Better still, Clarke makes the super tech seems believable. 2010: Odyssey Two takes place nine years after the classic 2001: A Space Odyssey (thank you, Captain Obvious!). At the end of the previous book the spaceship Discovery is abandoned in Jupiter’s orbit and the ship’s single survivor, David Bowman, went through a gigantic monolith that turns out to be a portal of some kind, and nobody has heard from him since. And what is all this “OMG! - it’s full of stars” business? Has he sneaked off to Beverly Hills? Spacecraft Discovery This sequel is centered on the Russian spacecraft The Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov, manned mostly by Russian crew with a couple of Americans to legitimize entry into The Discovery, which is US property. Their mission is to find out what happened to Discovery, HAL 9000 and Bowman, and also to investigate the giant “Big Brother/Zagadka” monolith that Bowman went through. What they discover is a project of cosmic proportions. The early part of 2010: Odyssey Two is less than riveting as Clarke goes into detail about the family life of the book’s protagonist, Heywood Floyd and their pet dolphins. Then there are several lengthy scientific expository passages leading up to the rendezvous with the Discovery which are too dry for my taste. I do like hard SF, the real world science enhances the verisimilitude of the futuristic plot. Unfortunately, long infodumps tend to be very dry read like extracts from a scientific journal article. This is a trap that hard sf authors often fall into, though, to his credit, Clarke’s expositions are more accessible than most. Science in tandem with storytelling, on the other hand, can be very effective and fascinating. The best parts of this book are where Clarke successfully integrate the science into the narrative. The giant "Big Brother/Zagadka" monolith at Jupiter (click to embiggen) For example, Clarke’s application of scientific minutiae during Floyd’s exploration of the Discovery derelict makes for a wonderfully atmospheric scene (love the surprising Ridley Scott’s Alien reference). The restoration and rebooting revival of HAL 9000 is my favorite part of the book, gotta love that HAL! As for David Bowman, he has become something posthuman, but still retains much of his humanity in his thoughts and actions. Not the same old Dave For most of the book 2010: Odyssey Two chugs along at a deliberate pace, though the first half of the book is not all that compelling but readable enough to stay out of the bin. The narrative becomes much more exciting as things become increasingly outlandish, and David Bowman goes on his almost metaphysical missions at the behest of his inscrutable alien masters. The (view spoiler)[redemption (hide spoiler)] of HAL 9000 is also rather moving. The climax of the book is a real humdinger and the epilogue is also great. I enjoyed 2010: Odyssey Two, though it is not nearly as compelling as 2001: A Space Odyssey. I don’t think I will be reading 2061: Odyssey Three as the principle of diminishing returns continues to operate. I recommend this book with the above-mentioned reservations. TL;DR: It’s pretty good. The Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov by Joseph Soiza (the smaller spaceship is the Discovery) Notes: • I can’t remember anything about the movie adaptation, 2010: The Year We Make Contact • Love the stuff about the von Neumann machines “exponentiating”. • My review of 2001: A Space Odyssey Quotes: “How did one annoy a two-kilometre-long black rectangular slab? And just what form would its disapproval take?” “The fact that Nikolai’s English was much the worst on the ship was totally unimportant, since most of the time both men spoke a computerese wholly unintelligible to anyone else.” “It was not hard to form the words, and to impose them on the currents pulsing in the audio circuits. The real difficulty was to slow down his thoughts to the glacial tempo of the human brain. And then to have to wait an eternity for the answer” “You mean, we’ve just seen an example of astronomical engineering?” Catchphrase for this book: “ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS - EXCEPT EUROPA.”

  3. 4 out of 5

    Jen

    As soon as I finished reading this I thought, man, I wish I didn't suck so badly at science, because being an astronomer would be SO FREAKING COOL. But I do suck so badly at science, so I just get to read wonders like this and wish I was half as good a writer as Arthur C. Clarke, who gets to be really friggin' smart in TWO CAREERS, which is totally unfair. There are several great things about this book. First, and one of the things that I love to read old sci-fi books for, is what Clarke in the 80 As soon as I finished reading this I thought, man, I wish I didn't suck so badly at science, because being an astronomer would be SO FREAKING COOL. But I do suck so badly at science, so I just get to read wonders like this and wish I was half as good a writer as Arthur C. Clarke, who gets to be really friggin' smart in TWO CAREERS, which is totally unfair. There are several great things about this book. First, and one of the things that I love to read old sci-fi books for, is what Clarke in the 80s thought 2010 was going to look like. Some of it is actually kind of close, which is pretty cool, and some of it is either useless and we never bothered to create it or it's still beyond us in terms of technology. Second, I read the first book about seven years ago and have completely forgotten it, so the references in this were a little lost on me. But that totally doesn't matter! This isn't a completely stand-alone book, but it's not nearly as intricately dependent on the first book as it could be. Yes, you need to know the original plot, but beyond that you're good to go. Third, HOW DOES CLARKE MANAGE TO KEEP YOU ENGAGED WITHOUT ANY SORT OF REAL VILLAIN? This is how you know you're scary good; half of the book is trying to figure out what's going on with crazy computer Hal, unless it's dealing with the strange things on Europa, or wait, there are these aliens that aren't aliens SURPRISE DAVID BOWMAN I mean what? And yet, I couldn't put it down. I really, really wanted to know what was going to happen, and I may track down the next book, because Clarke is made of scientific awesome. Also, the descriptions of the solar system? Beautiful, man. Word paintings. I only give it four stars because the ending felt a little flat (and by ending, I mean the last 5 or so pages, and the epilogue was...I don't know what it was, but it felt a little forced). Perhaps this will be remedied by reading book three, I don't know, but it felt a tad anticlimactic, and therefore is cheated out of its fifth star. Sorry, Zagadka.

  4. 4 out of 5

    B Schrodinger

    Space Baby's Big Day Out. After the events in 2001 (Dave becoming a Space Baby, HAL being shut down while singing), the world is left in wonder about what happened out near Saturn..JUPITER! Sorry, Jupiter. Right? It was Jupiter all along. Dr Floyd, the bureaucrat who ventured to the Moon to check out TMA-1 is back and now he looks like Roy Schneider (who I see died in 2008 :( ). The Russkis are headed out to check out what happened slightly quicker than what the U.S. can manage. Oh how times don't Space Baby's Big Day Out. After the events in 2001 (Dave becoming a Space Baby, HAL being shut down while singing), the world is left in wonder about what happened out near Saturn..JUPITER! Sorry, Jupiter. Right? It was Jupiter all along. Dr Floyd, the bureaucrat who ventured to the Moon to check out TMA-1 is back and now he looks like Roy Schneider (who I see died in 2008 :( ). The Russkis are headed out to check out what happened slightly quicker than what the U.S. can manage. Oh how times don't change. Anyway, partnerships all are happy, joint U.S. and Russian crew. So this is the story of recovering HAL and the further adventures of Space Baby Dave. And while it isn't as grand and as awe inspiring as 2001, it's still a fun read with lots of nerdy details and some small instances of more than two dimensional characterisation. There is a brilliant flashback chapter involving Dave as a child and the death of his older brother. The farmer aliens are in the background, if they are even still alive and active. Maybe it's just their machines acting for them now. Maybe they are retired to some higher dimension or some other bullshit. The events are plausible and very much fun. Even their out stuff with Space Baby is not as far out as those final chapters of 2001. It's nowhere near as hippy-dippy. So if you read 2001, and YOU SHOULD, carry onto the second volume. Not as good, much more understandable, and good fun. I found myself sad about HAL's fate though.

  5. 4 out of 5

    Bea

    '...And because, in all the Galaxy, they had found nothing more precious than Mind, they encouraged its dawning everywhere. They became farmers in the field of stars; they sowed, and sometimes they reaped. And sometimes, dispassionately, they had to weed.' Guys, I think I've found my new favourite series... ever? These books are SO GOOD. The amount of work and research put into them is incredible and both the first book and this one have completely blown my mind. Proper review to come. '...And because, in all the Galaxy, they had found nothing more precious than Mind, they encouraged its dawning everywhere. They became farmers in the field of stars; they sowed, and sometimes they reaped. And sometimes, dispassionately, they had to weed.' Guys, I think I've found my new favourite series... ever? These books are SO GOOD. The amount of work and research put into them is incredible and both the first book and this one have completely blown my mind. Proper review to come.

  6. 4 out of 5

    RJ - Slayer of Trolls

    The movie sequel is not as good as the original, but in many ways this might be Clarke's most polished effort. He actually takes the time to think out a plot and characters, and it's interesting to see what happens following the events in the first book/movie. The movie sequel is not as good as the original, but in many ways this might be Clarke's most polished effort. He actually takes the time to think out a plot and characters, and it's interesting to see what happens following the events in the first book/movie.

  7. 5 out of 5

    Patrick

    Wow! This was a very fun read! I loved it!

  8. 5 out of 5

    Jersy

    This book was really good concerning characters and their relationships. I loved reading their interactions and some of their personal issues. However, for some reason, the actual plot didn't get me hooked. Maybe one aspect of it was that we spent too few time on aspects I was interested in (e.g. Hal) but the things we spent time on too often just couldn't hold my attention. The last third was much more interesting to me, but I couldn't really say for sure what my problem was before that. I would This book was really good concerning characters and their relationships. I loved reading their interactions and some of their personal issues. However, for some reason, the actual plot didn't get me hooked. Maybe one aspect of it was that we spent too few time on aspects I was interested in (e.g. Hal) but the things we spent time on too often just couldn't hold my attention. The last third was much more interesting to me, but I couldn't really say for sure what my problem was before that. I would say it works as a continuation of 2001, even though it feels as if on a smaller scale.

  9. 4 out of 5

    Simon

    Both Arthur C. Clarke's novel "2010" and the film version directed by Peter Hyams are generally regarded as disappointments compared to its predecessor "2001". While I do find things to appreciate in both, I have to agree with the consensus. The book of "2010", like "2001", contains quite a bit more exposition and more subplots that were left out of the film for pacing or budgetary reasons. The first thing I notice is that Clarke's "2010" novel retcons the Discovery mission's destination in the f Both Arthur C. Clarke's novel "2010" and the film version directed by Peter Hyams are generally regarded as disappointments compared to its predecessor "2001". While I do find things to appreciate in both, I have to agree with the consensus. The book of "2010", like "2001", contains quite a bit more exposition and more subplots that were left out of the film for pacing or budgetary reasons. The first thing I notice is that Clarke's "2010" novel retcons the Discovery mission's destination in the first book from Saturn to Jupiter, to concur with Stanley Kubrick's film since the special effects crew could not make a convincing model of Saturn's rings. The second thing I notice is that there is way more focus on geopolitics and character-driven drama than in not just "2001" but also the film of "2010": Clarke spends a good deal of the page count getting into the heads of both the Western-affliated scientists and the crew of the Soviet spaceship Alexei Leonov they hitch a ride on in order to retrieve the Discovery. To be honest, neither characterisation nor political drama are among Clarke's strengths as a novelist if this book is any indication since he struggles to give the many different characters interesting personalities and make the geopolitics suspenseful. Perhaps the biggest difference between book and film of "2010" is the addition of an entire subplot about a doomed Chinese expedition to Jupiter's moon Europa that culminates in the crew being attacked and killed by bizarre Europan wildlife except for one Taikonaut who manages to escape. This subplot is very effectively written, being full of eerie cosmic horror atmosphere that feels more like John Carpenter's "The Thing" or H. P. Lovecraft's "Mountains of Madness" than something at home in a "2001" sequel, I can understand why it was cut from the film but to be honest I find that more engaging than the main storyline. The point in the plot where David Bowman as an incorporeal energy-being visits his left-behind family on Earth allows Clarke to comment on the convergence between the themes of "2001" and George Adamski-style UFO contactees' concerns, which I noticed in my own review of the former book in the series, something I did appreciate... but I still found that follow-up to Bowman's transformation into the Starchild something of an anticlimax. I feel even more so about the monolith-building aliens' endgame for humanity turning out to be... transforming Jupiter into a new sun. For all the transcendence of humanity's limitations through provoking another step up the evolutionary ladder to divinity that "2001" focused on, it feels out of character for the monolith-builders to just want to give a new sun to people who are entirely human in the current sense of the term. I get the mental imagery of Clarke beginning work on "2010" without having decided which exactly grand plan for humanity's future the monolith-builders would have in store, writing down all his ideas for that on separate notes and then picking one at random out of a hat. The book of "2010" is not a total loss, however. The subplot about the doomed Chinese expedition to Europa would have made an amazing science-fiction horror story as the focus of an entire novel, showing quite the imagination for dreaming up alien environments from Clarke's side. Once the Leonov finally gets to Jupiter we get some impressive descriptions of the beauty of Jupiter and its moons on par with the special effects mastery in the film, as well as more in depth descriptions of what I kept expecting to see when I first watched Kubrick's "2001" film: The TMA-2 monolith being examined by a team of expert scientists from different academic fields while they ponder the philosophical questions of humanity's place in the cosmos. Still, all the answers that Clarke puts forward here in "2010" to the questions asked in "2001" feel at best disappointing at worst downright baffling. The result is a very uneven reading experience. There is still good writing to be found in here, but nobody really needs to read "2010".

  10. 4 out of 5

    Kevin

    A slow moving plot, the last 50 or so pages we get some results and some 'action', so to speak. However, HAL 9000 doesn't turn renegade as in 2001, as the sentient AI has been handicapped after the events of the first novel. In fact, the book is quite boring as no one ends up being killed and nothing much seems to go wrong, and in effect it just speculative Sci-Fi about Alien intellegences (this time on one of Jupiters moon - Europa). But the plant/hybrid intellegence does destroy a Chinese miss A slow moving plot, the last 50 or so pages we get some results and some 'action', so to speak. However, HAL 9000 doesn't turn renegade as in 2001, as the sentient AI has been handicapped after the events of the first novel. In fact, the book is quite boring as no one ends up being killed and nothing much seems to go wrong, and in effect it just speculative Sci-Fi about Alien intellegences (this time on one of Jupiters moon - Europa). But the plant/hybrid intellegence does destroy a Chinese mission to try and get to the Discovery - the spacecraft featured in 2001 before the joint Russian/American venture to find out what happened to David Bowman and the renegade HAL 9000. It was ok as a read, not one of the better Arthur C Clarke books I have read, and some aspects of it - like Jupiter turning in a Sun at the end of the book (Bowmans being/spirit visits one of the joint venture crewpersons to warn them to leave the Jovian system before Jupiter goes kind of supernova from the Monolith they find that is millennia years old) was umm, quite boring. I digress. Short book and hence a short review, and ok to pass the time, but nothing really struck me as genius compared to Clarkes other works. It was average. I may or may not pick up the last two books in this series. Depends on how I feel. Unimpressed to be honest. 3 stars.

  11. 5 out of 5

    Richard Knight

    Boooooring. Having read the first book many years ago, one thing I remember with that story was just how dazzling and daring it felt. Much like the movie, certain images will forever be ingrained in my head. That Odyssey I loved journeying on. But this one, not so much. I mostly think it's all the characters, none of whom are interesting. Their voyage doesn't really seem all that harrowing in this story, and even if it was, I was so uninterested with the characters that I probably would have app Boooooring. Having read the first book many years ago, one thing I remember with that story was just how dazzling and daring it felt. Much like the movie, certain images will forever be ingrained in my head. That Odyssey I loved journeying on. But this one, not so much. I mostly think it's all the characters, none of whom are interesting. Their voyage doesn't really seem all that harrowing in this story, and even if it was, I was so uninterested with the characters that I probably would have appreciated it more if they had all died. As it stood, I couldn't make a connection with any of them. I also thought the questions left by the last book, like what happened to David Bowman, and was HAL really insane, didn't have satisfying answers. Yes, those characters were probably the most, if not only, interesting part about this book, but even they couldn't salvage this yawn - inducing mission. I won't be investing time in the third book, 2061. Oh, and PS. Arthur C. Clarke really liked the word "myriad." It's all over this book. So much so, that if one were to make a drinking game every time they saw the word here, they would probably go blind and die. He used it SO much.

  12. 5 out of 5

    Vishal

    This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. I'll suggest the reader of this review to go through plot-summary of this novel and a little familiariation with its prequel, 2001: A Space Odyssey. I'll only be expatiating here on some aspects I found fascinating. Although, the novel contains many captivating sub-plots and a driving, gripping backdrop; I want to credit Arthur C Clarke for the most wonderful depictions of the Jovian system. Within the first half, he describes the bands of Jovian clouds, the cyclonic storms, the radiation belt an I'll suggest the reader of this review to go through plot-summary of this novel and a little familiariation with its prequel, 2001: A Space Odyssey. I'll only be expatiating here on some aspects I found fascinating. Although, the novel contains many captivating sub-plots and a driving, gripping backdrop; I want to credit Arthur C Clarke for the most wonderful depictions of the Jovian system. Within the first half, he describes the bands of Jovian clouds, the cyclonic storms, the radiation belt and the high-energy electron beam connecting Io to Jupiter; he depicts Io, a land of fiery volcanoes, violent eruptions making umbrella clouds and molten lava lakes; and he uses all the available information about Callisto, Ganymede and Europa to paint a vivid and entrancing picture of the moonscapes using his never-exhausting arsenal of beautiful, sublime metaphors. Perhaps, Clarke's level of ingenious and prolific depiction of the real planets and satellites could only be matched by none other than the Great Carl Sagan. I give Clarke enormous credit and due respect for not weaving mystical and unreal, speculative scenery of the worlds, but instead relying on the available information to show such a scenario that could possibly never be imagined by any of the Earth-bound fantasy writers. It is true, that the Universe is not stranger than we imagine, but it is stranger than we can imagine. Also, it turns out that the strange, eerie, surreal and enigmatic Universe is actually much more profoundly beautiful and enchanting than we can possibly imagine. However, Clarke does resort to speculation in the latter half when he begins to describe the non-corporeal Dave Bowman's descent into sub-surface Europa to look for indigenous life and his descent into Jovian atmosphere to look for gaseous life, metallic hydrogen and the diamond core as big as the Earth. These speculations still stand on the solid ground of research and inferential hypotheses propounded by reputable scientists. However, the climax of Jupiter condensing and initiating nuclear fusion is absolutely speculative fantasy and couldn't be given much serious consideration, even though the condensation is said to be trigerred by higher forms of technological intelligence. I should point out that, in the prequel, Dave Bowman was converted by the invisible masters of the Galaxy into a pure-energy life-form, retaining his memory and consciousness. The invisible masters are the entities which look for developing intelligence across the Galaxy and then ensure its survival and development by setting up dark rectangular slabs which direct the life-forms and protect them. This patronizing sort of intelligence occurred to me as highly disturbing and rather unsettling one; this hypothesis regards humans as highly vulnerable to self-destruction and incapable of supporting themselves against the follies and vices they commit, threatening their prospects of survival in consequence. Which is obviously true, but I find my own ideas to be better in sync with those of Isaac Asimov and Carl Sagan which hold the belief in human intelligence, our ability to overcome our weaknesses and the potential of conquering the cosmos without needing any sort of external intervention. It also occurs to me that despite being a close friend of Carl Sagan, Clarke was highly inclined towards theistic philosophies and his idea, showing invisible masters guarding and helping the intelligences, can be said to be the manifestation serving his purpose of having deities in real world. His description of HAL 9000, the self-conscious artificial intelligence aboard Discovery, and the treatment it is subjected to, raises many questions and concerns about our ethics of dealing with non-human, non-organic intelligence. The crew never regards HAL as a person, and they stand at a ready to dissipate it in case it disobeys them, they even abandon HAL to save themselves while running from Jovian collapse and ignition. Clarke's HAL talks and behaves distinctively like a person, it shows efforts for self-preservation and even subdued fear. But Clarke doesn't go into details about it unlike his contemporary, Isaac Asimov. It holds imperative that we review our understanding and ethics about treating other forms of consciousness, robots, computers and even animals in a better and compassionate way. It is rather a hard-science fiction novel, relying almost exclusively on pure scientific facts and inferences, and almost negligibly on unrealistic speculations. His description of space travel, the environment aboard the ship, interactions and relationships of the crew; are satisfying. Clarke is a master at weaving dark, haunting atmospheres which always show his cynicism and impart fear and thrill into reader's mind. He succeeds superbly at it, while describing the anxiety, fear, stress and agony of the crew whose characters are otherwise, at best, a little more than single-layered caricatures.

  13. 5 out of 5

    Kimber

    Recommended for fans of 2001: A Space Odyssey "The Universe isn't just stranger than you ever imagined. The Universe is stranger than you CAN imagine." This novel is a slow-build, a slowly revealed unraveling of cosmic triggers. Clarke writes a narrative that doesn't just entertain--it informs, it elucidates and it expands the mind beyond its narrowly defined corridors. And that's the point. Recommended for fans of 2001: A Space Odyssey "The Universe isn't just stranger than you ever imagined. The Universe is stranger than you CAN imagine." This novel is a slow-build, a slowly revealed unraveling of cosmic triggers. Clarke writes a narrative that doesn't just entertain--it informs, it elucidates and it expands the mind beyond its narrowly defined corridors. And that's the point.

  14. 5 out of 5

    Heidi

    This sequel to 2001 was fine, but it wasn't nearly as good as 2001. Heywood Floyd and a couple of other Americans join the Russians on a trip to rescue the stranded spaceship Discovery and learn what happened to astronaut David Bowman, who disappeared at the end of 2001. They also want to probe the mystery of the black monolith, which is hanging in space around...Jupiter? Yes, they end up at Jupiter, even though in the book 2001, the black monolith was sitting on one of Saturn's moons. And when D This sequel to 2001 was fine, but it wasn't nearly as good as 2001. Heywood Floyd and a couple of other Americans join the Russians on a trip to rescue the stranded spaceship Discovery and learn what happened to astronaut David Bowman, who disappeared at the end of 2001. They also want to probe the mystery of the black monolith, which is hanging in space around...Jupiter? Yes, they end up at Jupiter, even though in the book 2001, the black monolith was sitting on one of Saturn's moons. And when David Bowman disappeared, the Discovery was orbiting Saturn. And Bowman's fellow astronaut, Frank Poole, died in a much different way than was related in 2010. And several of the other significant events were changed somehow between the two books. I can only assume Arthur C. Clarke decided to follow the movie adaptation of his book when he wrote the sequel, instead of following the plot of the original book. Silly man--didn't he know the book was WAY better than the movie? It's kind of jarring to read one book right after the other and have them not line up...kind of like reading Lost World after reading Jurassic Park and having characters somehow come back to life. And the believability factor in this book wasn't quite as good. Heywood Floyd's presence on the ship is rather inexplicable--he's basically a politician, not an astronaut and barely a scientist, he can't help with anything, and he spends most of his time staying out of everyone's way. His only job is to send messages back to Earth. The guy was likeable enough, but he didn't DO anything. And after two months around the Russians, every American on the ship can speak perfect Russian (without actually studying it) and sometimes have long conversations amongst THEMSELVES in Russian instead of English. And the plot...I dunno. This one just didn't grab me. I like my science fiction to have some science, but 2010 didn't have much. It was nice that HAL, the psychotic computer from the first book, got to redeem himself in this one.

  15. 5 out of 5

    Oleksandr Zholud

    This novel is the direct continuation of 2001: A Space Odyssey, and in difference between the book and the movie it surprisingly follows the later. The novel was nominated for Hugo Award in 1983. The story starts were the previous book ends – there is a unknown alien artifact on a moon of Jupiter and one human already assessed it, vanishing from our space-time. Now a new mission is sent there. The mission uses Soviet ship Leonov and a joint USSR-USA team to get to the earlier ship and to the arti This novel is the direct continuation of 2001: A Space Odyssey, and in difference between the book and the movie it surprisingly follows the later. The novel was nominated for Hugo Award in 1983. The story starts were the previous book ends – there is a unknown alien artifact on a moon of Jupiter and one human already assessed it, vanishing from our space-time. Now a new mission is sent there. The mission uses Soviet ship Leonov and a joint USSR-USA team to get to the earlier ship and to the artifact. It is interesting to note that the ship captain is a woman – it isn’t the first instant, but nevertheless quite unusual for the early 80s SF. This ship is not the only one – Chinese also try to get there (again, quite prophetic, for in 1980 China almost twice as poor as India and more than 10 times poorer than Brazil). The astronaut David Bowman returns is a ‘spirit’ form to Earth. New alien life forms discovered. HAL 9000 is resurrected. A little of science stuff about orbital mechanics, physics, etc. Overall an interesting fast read, which cares more about the plot than characters’ development.

  16. 4 out of 5

    Baal Of

    I enjoyed this one almost as much as the first. I like the way Clarke sticks to realistic orbital mechanics, which emphasizes the vastness of space. I can understand why some people would find this boring, but I was captivated for the entire novel. I liked the interactions between the Russian and American astronauts, and the addition of the surprise Chinese mission was great. (view spoiler)[And then the disappearance of Zagadka with the subsequent conversion of Jupiter into a sun capped the whol I enjoyed this one almost as much as the first. I like the way Clarke sticks to realistic orbital mechanics, which emphasizes the vastness of space. I can understand why some people would find this boring, but I was captivated for the entire novel. I liked the interactions between the Russian and American astronauts, and the addition of the surprise Chinese mission was great. (view spoiler)[And then the disappearance of Zagadka with the subsequent conversion of Jupiter into a sun capped the whole story off nicely. (hide spoiler)] Clarke really does a fantastic job of translating the scientific wonder of the solar system into a compelling plot.

  17. 4 out of 5

    Kath ❅

    3.75 stars I liked this sequel way more than I thought I was going to. 2001 is such a staple of pop culture and most people have at least heard of the movie but I've never heard anyone talk about the sequels to the book. For me, the first book was slightly better. I liked the body of the story of the first book a bit more but I liked the last few chapters of this book and the ending more than I liked the ending of the last book.I also liked that in this book the cast of characters was bigger. Don 3.75 stars I liked this sequel way more than I thought I was going to. 2001 is such a staple of pop culture and most people have at least heard of the movie but I've never heard anyone talk about the sequels to the book. For me, the first book was slightly better. I liked the body of the story of the first book a bit more but I liked the last few chapters of this book and the ending more than I liked the ending of the last book.I also liked that in this book the cast of characters was bigger. Don't get me wrong, I loved the characters of the first book, but I loved the way the many people who were in this book interacted. I think the ending of the first book is known for being a little confusing and hard to understand what was going on, even in the movie, I did find that I could follow the plot of this book more easily. I thought the plot of this book was very good, much better than what I expected. I went into this book thinking that I would read this book but not read the last to book in the series but this book may have made me change my mind, which I see as being a good thing. I thought this book connected nicely to the first book with trying to explain some of the more confusing parts of the last book . There were some weird moments in this book, though. In the first couple of chapters, the book introduced another AI just like HAL 9000 called SAL 9000. I thought this other AI would play a bigger role but it never showed back up. Some plot things like that tripped me up a bit but overall I really enjoyed it. A was pleasantly surprised by this sequel. In other news, this is the book that completes my 2016 reading challenge! This is my first year doing the challenge and I really liked doing it. I was a good way to try to get myself motivated to incorporate more time for reading into my life even when I am busy with other things like school. I definitely want to participate in more reading challenges in the coming years because this was very fun. I am excited to see how many more books I can read in 2016

  18. 5 out of 5

    Lanko

    Overall disappointing considering the first masterpiece. Gone is the sense of wonder, mystery and excitement. The first half of the book was pretty dry and slow and honestly I don't remember much of it. The second half was slightly better mainly because we find HAL-9000 again and what the heck happened with him. I think Clarke tried to put some characterization for his astronauts, but it didn't work, specially when most of it was to tell us who, why and how characters acted, thought and believed. Overall disappointing considering the first masterpiece. Gone is the sense of wonder, mystery and excitement. The first half of the book was pretty dry and slow and honestly I don't remember much of it. The second half was slightly better mainly because we find HAL-9000 again and what the heck happened with him. I think Clarke tried to put some characterization for his astronauts, but it didn't work, specially when most of it was to tell us who, why and how characters acted, thought and believed. And some things were contradictory regarding the first book. I was pretty sure everything happened in Saturn in the first book. After researching, indeed it did, but somehow things changed to Jupiter here. Researching again, I found out Clarke changed the story to match the movie of the book. I guess I can understand the reason, but it's strange to say, read a story in England, but then in the sequel you change it so that everything happened in the US and it becomes the new canon, because of a TV show. Only around the last ~20% or 15% things picked up. It's when the sense of wonder and amazement returned. I think Arthur Clarke definitely daydreamed about life in other planets, species far more advanced than us, new technologies and ways to live and all his unique thoughts (some from other researchers) and one day decided to write it down. It really had me "wow, wow and wow" and wondering why the previous 85% percent of the book wasn't like that. Or like the first book. Some really big stuff happens at the end, and considering the sequel happen in 2061, it makes me curious to see how things turned out... but not right now.

  19. 4 out of 5

    Andreas

    This series started as a one-off book released in conjunction with the Stanley Kubrick movie of the same name. The series consists of: * 2001: A Space Odyssey * 2010: Odyssey Two. (Also made into a film) * 2061 Odyssey Three * 3001: The Final Odyssey The first and second books are enthralling. 2061 is more of the same, and thus decent but somewhat pointless as part of the arc. 3001 is an attempt at closing up all the loose threads, and does so in a satisfying way. For a long time, these books frus This series started as a one-off book released in conjunction with the Stanley Kubrick movie of the same name. The series consists of: * 2001: A Space Odyssey * 2010: Odyssey Two. (Also made into a film) * 2061 Odyssey Three * 3001: The Final Odyssey The first and second books are enthralling. 2061 is more of the same, and thus decent but somewhat pointless as part of the arc. 3001 is an attempt at closing up all the loose threads, and does so in a satisfying way. For a long time, these books frustrated me because I just didn’t get them. On the surface, they are hard SciFi, but there is quite a bit of existential pondering about the nature of life. When I finally just relaxed and accepted the fact that there are mystical things going on, I realized that this is the whole point. The reader is supposed to be in awe, and there are some things that mankind is not meant to know (yet). Just remember to accept the mystery and embrace the sense of wonder. http://www.books.rosboch.net/?p=561

  20. 4 out of 5

    Efka

    A very slow book this Odyssey is, and it does not quite live up to it's predecessor, though I have to admit, that it starts good and ends in a very climactic and dramatic fashion, maybe even beating the first Odyssey's ending. The real problem is mid-book, which sometimes is plain boring. A decent book, some familiar characters making a comeback also is a nice bonus, but the writing at moment feels a bit chaotic and stretched out too much and without necessity. Overall, read it if you liked 2001 A very slow book this Odyssey is, and it does not quite live up to it's predecessor, though I have to admit, that it starts good and ends in a very climactic and dramatic fashion, maybe even beating the first Odyssey's ending. The real problem is mid-book, which sometimes is plain boring. A decent book, some familiar characters making a comeback also is a nice bonus, but the writing at moment feels a bit chaotic and stretched out too much and without necessity. Overall, read it if you liked 2001 Space Odyssey, chances are you will enjoy this book too.

  21. 4 out of 5

    Chris Greensmith

    "Unlike the Great Red Spot, the Great Black Spot was not a continuous structure; it was built up from myriads of tiny dots, like a half-tone print viewed through a magnifying glass. Over most of its area, the dots were so closely spaced that they were almost touching, but at the rim they became more and more widely spaced, so that the Spot ended in a grey penumbra rather than at a sharp frontier. "Unlike the Great Red Spot, the Great Black Spot was not a continuous structure; it was built up from myriads of tiny dots, like a half-tone print viewed through a magnifying glass. Over most of its area, the dots were so closely spaced that they were almost touching, but at the rim they became more and more widely spaced, so that the Spot ended in a grey penumbra rather than at a sharp frontier.

  22. 4 out of 5

    Rusty

    I read Stephen Baxter’s Proxima last week. And while it wasn’t the best book ever written, it is the perfect type of book for me. And by that I mean that, for whatever reason, those type of novels do something to me, deep inside, that really resonates. It’s why I’ll always love that type of Science Fiction way more than I ever will Fantasy. I’ve never found a Fantasy book, no matter how good, that can make me shut the book once it’s over, and go sit outside and stare at the stars. I’m inclined t I read Stephen Baxter’s Proxima last week. And while it wasn’t the best book ever written, it is the perfect type of book for me. And by that I mean that, for whatever reason, those type of novels do something to me, deep inside, that really resonates. It’s why I’ll always love that type of Science Fiction way more than I ever will Fantasy. I’ve never found a Fantasy book, no matter how good, that can make me shut the book once it’s over, and go sit outside and stare at the stars. I’m inclined to sit outside and stare at the stars anyway, I don’t need to read a book to get me excited about that, but nonetheless, the best way I can describe that stirring inside of me is… well… it’s religious. That I’m-so-insignificant-in-the-face-of-the-cosmos type of humility is hard to replicate. Nothing in my daily life makes me face my bigger place in the universe like a well written science fiction book can. And so when I was done with Baxter, I briefly considered rereading one of his older books, but at the last minute I decided it was time to go back to 2010, which I’ve never read. I know, I’m lame. I read 2001 a year or two ago, enjoyed it, and feel like it’s a real companion piece to the movie. It actually explains all the crazy stuff that goes on at the end. Now, I’m about to commit blasphemy here, but I actually always liked 2010, the movie, more than I ever did 2001. In fact, the first time I saw it, the scene where Jonathan Lithgow’s character has to move over from the ship he’s on (I forget the name) over to The Discovery was the first time in my life I realized a spacewalk would actually be terrifying. And I seem to recall having an actual nightmare or two about it. I’m somewhere far enough in space that the earth isn’t in my field of view, and I have to do some ridiculous spacewalk from one ship to another, and to make even the teeniest of errors means I float away, into the blackness, until my suit gives way and I slowly die, poisoned by my own CO2. Actually not a bad way to go, I’ve been told. But still, the isolation I think is what makes it so scary. Knowing that my body will most likely never be found, just somewhere floating around the solar system, orbiting the sun in a never ending coldness… ugh. I shiver. I don’t think the movie has aged quite as well as 2001 has. But it gets grandfathered in as being great since I saw it at such an impressionable time in my life. When I picked up this book, I was a bit surprised that Clarke immediately said, in his introduction to this novel, that the places where 2001 the novel differed from 2001 the movie, mean that he was going with the movie’s continuity instead of his own. So all that stuff that happened out at Saturn in the first book? Forget about it. It happened near Jupiter instead. So weird, he makes it quite clear that he wrote the novel with Kubrick’s input, and the script and book were being done in tandem. He seemed to think the movie made the better choices where the two differed. I’m not used to that. Go figure. As for the novel itself, look, you aren’t reading 2010 if you haven’t read 2001, are you? I mean, you have to know what you’re getting into here. And it ain’t for the characters. Or the prose. Clarke is an ideas man. He wants to talk about orbital mechanics and delta vee. He wants to discuss the surface of Europa and the volcanos of Io, he’s the sort of guy who wants to know what it would be like – what it would be like to experience - aerobraking a spacecraft through the upper layers of Jupiter’s atmosphere. So these novels, as most of his are, that I’ve read anyway, are thought experiments about what goes on at the fringes of science. Characters are just vehicles to let those experiments play out. It means that the prose is littered with nonsensical phrases like when he tries to describe a group of space travelers screaming at a second group of astronauts/cosmonauts on a ship they are rescuing, he says that they ‘almost might’ hear the shouts of the other ship. I know what he means by that (that they can’t hear, because of the hard vacuum of space, but that the one group is shouting so loud, you’d be forgiven for believing they could be heard in the second vessel, where it not a breach of physics for such a thing to happen). It isn’t said very eloquently, but I get it. This book is odd when you start breaking it down and looking at it structurally. But all that is to miss what this novel is, at least for me. It’s about the universe, how strange it is, how scary it is, and how small we are in it. And of course, also about enigmatic aliens that like screwing with us. Because like has been said elsewhere, they’re just some kids with a magnifying glass, and we’re a bunch of ants scurrying around, unaware of how f**ked we really are. As it stands, I actually like the book for 2010 better than 2001. It doesn’t have the incredibly long passages on prehistoric earth, or the inexplicable robotic humans that populated the first book (I mean humans that act with the personality of robots). Clarke is at least trying to tell a story this time. Also, I’m sad that this book takes place 4 years in the past. Meaning that it was meant to take place during the year 2010. Goddammit. We haven’t been out of earth’s orbit since 1972. It’s been a long time, and a lot of the mid-20th century science fiction that had us jaunting out to Jupiter and further by now makes me sad. I’m not seriously thinking that we could have made that sort of stuff happen by now, but we sure as hell could have Lagrangian habitats, colonies on the moon, and some people noodling around on Mars by now. That’s the present I want to be living in. So… mixed feelings. Not about this, though, but that lack of a Jetson's future that I want to be living in.

  23. 4 out of 5

    Bishnu Bhatta Buttowski

    One of the best yet thought provoking lines in this book is "In all the Galaxy, they had found nothing more precious than Mind, they encouraged its dawning everywhere. They became farmers in the fields of stars; they sowed, and sometimes they reaped. And sometimes, dispassionately, they had to weed. " I enjoyed this book very much. This book tells the story about how intelligent life seem to foster the life on any planets or place, how would the civilization develop, what is the evolution trends One of the best yet thought provoking lines in this book is "In all the Galaxy, they had found nothing more precious than Mind, they encouraged its dawning everywhere. They became farmers in the fields of stars; they sowed, and sometimes they reaped. And sometimes, dispassionately, they had to weed. " I enjoyed this book very much. This book tells the story about how intelligent life seem to foster the life on any planets or place, how would the civilization develop, what is the evolution trends that Earthlings and their technology would have to follow now. And another thing, the facts used about the planets and the technology follows the past research and development and this is somewhat accurate book.

  24. 5 out of 5

    scrillla

    2010: Odyssey Two by Arthur C. Clarke is another beautiful journey through the solar system filled with transformation and unexpected beginnings. 2010 is the 2nd in the Space Odyssey Saga and the sequel to 2001. I mention this because it's important that you've read 2001 in order to understand 2010. Dr. Heywood Floyd, chairman of the National Council of Aeronautics, makes a reappearance and is the protagonist or main character for 2010. He has been chosen to be a part of a recovery mission of sor 2010: Odyssey Two by Arthur C. Clarke is another beautiful journey through the solar system filled with transformation and unexpected beginnings. 2010 is the 2nd in the Space Odyssey Saga and the sequel to 2001. I mention this because it's important that you've read 2001 in order to understand 2010. Dr. Heywood Floyd, chairman of the National Council of Aeronautics, makes a reappearance and is the protagonist or main character for 2010. He has been chosen to be a part of a recovery mission of sorts for the U.S. ship Discovery, which was left stranded in orbit between Jupiter and Io after the ship's crew members met strange endings, and one beginning. The spaceshuttle Alex Leonov and her crew's main objective is to redezvous with Discovery and try to revive it's artificial intelligence aboard, Hal 9000 (also making a reappearance from 2001), so that Discovery can be safely led back to earth. The second objective is to study as much as possible the black monolith on Io resembling the one found on Earth's moon, known as Big Brother. There is one question that everyone aboard Leonov would love to know the answer to: Where is Dave Bowman and what happened to him? Studying Big Brother seems to be the only way to find out. All in all, Floyd and the rest of Leonov's crew are led on a breathtaking and uncanningly dangerous mission, one that beholds things humans have never experienced in any way, shape or form. Heywood Floyd was asked to be a part of the redezvous with Discovery, and at first is on the rocks because of his new wife Caroline who is appalled at the thought that he is even considering leaving his little son. You eventually get a snippet of his thoughts, stating that no matter what.. he knew he would've done it. He had to. This zest for space travel, to experience and discover things that no human has ever done before, is what makes me instantly fall in love with his character. His sense of humour, and wonder, are the two most prominent personality traits in Heywood Floyd and it makes him a very suitable main character in Odyssey #2. Dave Bowman continues his transformation into something completely alien but still somewhat human. He feels the presence of a higher power, but cannot completely grasp what it's intentions or thoughts are. He learns how to maneuver his new form quickly and starts to uncover the answers to his questions while re-experiencing memories and people from his past life on Earth. He then acts as the eyes in the Jovian system for the higher power that is controlling him. Arthur C. Clarke tops Odyssey 1 in this sequel with imagination and intrigue. The book is exactly what the title says it is, but presented in a way only Clarke could master. He answers questions left from the first book while leaving the most important ones yet to answered. Dave Bowman and Heywood Floyd are modest yet unforgettable characters, one I hope to hear more of in the following books. The series is only going up in my opinion. The Space Odyssey Saga is one that should be read by readers of all ages and preferences. It's obvious how this series quickly became a classic and totem for Sci-Fi as a genre and space exploration in general. Can't wait to read the next one.

  25. 4 out of 5

    Hope

    I have mixed feelings about this book. Given that title, it should be a sequel to the novel 2001: A Space Odyssey, but it's not. It's more a semi-sequel to the movie of the same name. Where the novel and the book differ, 2010 follows the movie, expect where it changes things to make this novel more consistent. Since it's been a long time since I've seen the movie, I'm not aware of what those differences are. Clark's writing continues to be quite beautiful. He has the rare combination of being bo I have mixed feelings about this book. Given that title, it should be a sequel to the novel 2001: A Space Odyssey, but it's not. It's more a semi-sequel to the movie of the same name. Where the novel and the book differ, 2010 follows the movie, expect where it changes things to make this novel more consistent. Since it's been a long time since I've seen the movie, I'm not aware of what those differences are. Clark's writing continues to be quite beautiful. He has the rare combination of being both an excellent scientist, and an evocative writer. He describes the extra-terrestrial places and events both accurately, and evocatively. I would happily hand this book to someone with no science background; I think it would be very clear what's going on, and may well spark an interest in astronomy and space travel. As long as Mr. Clark focuses on extraordinary people, his characters are great. In this novel, since the action almost entirely take place off-planet, he avoids having to write about ordinary people, which isn't his strong suit. The storyline is very good in this novel, and even the more fantastical elements are believable. I'm most impressed with the ending - other novels by Mr. Clark end with more of a whimper than a bang, but this one ends well. It's not a neat and tidy wrap up of all loose ends, but it is a very satisfying ending.

  26. 5 out of 5

    Sandy

    "I'm sure the universe is full of intelligent life. It's just been too intelligent to come here." I've always liked Arthur C. Clarke's imagination. Way ahead his time and quite shocking. Wouldn't say I loved this as much as I loved 2001. I personally think Dr. Floyd needed to be left alone on this but I get it. It's a continuation after Hal went rogue & Frank went MIA (at least that's what earthlings thought). Slower than 2001 but full of new plots and advancements. Few mind blowing passages like "I'm sure the universe is full of intelligent life. It's just been too intelligent to come here." I've always liked Arthur C. Clarke's imagination. Way ahead his time and quite shocking. Wouldn't say I loved this as much as I loved 2001. I personally think Dr. Floyd needed to be left alone on this but I get it. It's a continuation after Hal went rogue & Frank went MIA (at least that's what earthlings thought). Slower than 2001 but full of new plots and advancements. Few mind blowing passages like when the Chinese lands on Europa. It's as serious as it's big brother but more fun. My thought is, don't expect the same excitement from the predecessor. But read it regardless. No regrets cos the middle child is always the boring one.

  27. 4 out of 5

    Tuan Ho

    Wow! I really can't think of anyone who can match Arthur C. Clarke in his ability to instill a sense of timeless wonder and awe that just makes your mind orgasm with joy! Clarke's writing is just beautiful to read. He makes you understand all the technical stuff, but does it in the most poetic way imagineable. The last few chapters and the epilogue reminded me of why I love Arthur C. Clarke. Just brilliant! Wow! I really can't think of anyone who can match Arthur C. Clarke in his ability to instill a sense of timeless wonder and awe that just makes your mind orgasm with joy! Clarke's writing is just beautiful to read. He makes you understand all the technical stuff, but does it in the most poetic way imagineable. The last few chapters and the epilogue reminded me of why I love Arthur C. Clarke. Just brilliant!

  28. 5 out of 5

    Agnes

    Another sf perfection ...

  29. 4 out of 5

    David

    Just as exciting, speculative, brilliant, and delightfully creepy as the first. I hope the third and fourth books continue to be as good as the first two!

  30. 5 out of 5

    Jamila

    Definitely another higher ranked 3.5! By some happy accident i decided to read the introductory author's note, which i for some reason very rarely bother to do (i think maybe i don't want the author to say anything that will influence how i go into the story). But it is lucky i did because for some reason Clarke decided this book was to be a sequel to the movie, not the first book???? I'm not sure... who would watch the movie and decide to read the second book without reading the first book but Definitely another higher ranked 3.5! By some happy accident i decided to read the introductory author's note, which i for some reason very rarely bother to do (i think maybe i don't want the author to say anything that will influence how i go into the story). But it is lucky i did because for some reason Clarke decided this book was to be a sequel to the movie, not the first book???? I'm not sure... who would watch the movie and decide to read the second book without reading the first book but maybe that's not as odd a decision as i feel it is. By the end of this book i think i can see why Clarke did it though. I suspect he felt the direction he wanted to take the story in would better build on the choices of the movie than the book. It's kind of an uncommon blessing for an author to be able to make decisions about his sequel without being bound to the decisions he made for the first installment LOL. Although i am still confused about why the differences between the first book/movie exist if they were written concurrently. I am just confused about so many things sjfkdgjdl but i am really really enjoying the cosmic mystery that is unfolding in this series and can't wait to learn more.

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.