I just finished The City and The Stars a few days ago: I saw on StoryGraph that you were reading it at the same time and have been looking forward to hearing your thoughts. Personally I loved it: I enjoyed it much more than Rendezvous with Rama (my only other experience with Clarke). I agree that there's not much guesswork in terms of if the characters will survive or not or whether the hero will succeed, but I had *no* idea what was going to happen next in terms of the actual events that happen. Clarke throws so many different ideas and scenarios at the reader in here that I was always eager to see what happens next. I also think it has aged extremely well as an allegory for where humanity is going and how technology can help (or hurt) us, especially in light of things like climate change.
There were definitely some events that surprised me in The City and the Stars though the overall plot was what felt predictable. When Alvin and his friend encountered the strange creature in the lake and the robot, I was genuinely like "wow, where did this come from!"
@@Kalanadi Ah, I get that. Totally agree about the lake: I also was in “where did this come from?!” mode when Vanamonde was introduced, totally came out of left field.
I don't really agree that it's more Kubrik's than Clarke's. They wrote the story together and the changes were mostly for consistency with medium and in my opinion Clarke took the ideas of 2001 way further than Kubrik did (though I love both versions). Edit: and I second the Childhood's End rec! Incredible thought experiment that book was.
Great video. Love seeing old classics reviewed. Its been atleast a decade since I've read any of these and you really jogged my memory perfectly. I remember all three as feeling a bit dated bit still decent reads. Great review
I just happened on this video today and wish I had discovered this when you posted it. Some of the books that are now called SF Masterworks are rather surprising to me. When I started reading SF back in the late 60's none of these books were considered great books by these authors. City and the Stars is a rewrite of Clarke's first novel Against the Fall of Night. Clarke has stated that didn't like the orginal and thus rewrote it. After which he found out that a lot people liked his first book better so both were kept in print. As for Stapleton the only books of his that I liked in some form are Star Maker and Last and First Men. He isn't an easy read and I commend you for completing the book. Brian Aldiss is hit or miss and most of his best work is in short story form or novels putting together some of his short stories. One thing to understand when reading most SF from the 60's and 70's is that it's a time when the genre was trying to get taken more seriously and so authors did a lot of experimenting, social commentary and tried to write more controversial material. Much of it doesn't hold up today and was sketchy at times back then.
Thanks for the reviews! I didn't know much about Clarke's book besides its name. But after hearing your description, it must have definitely been an influence on _Diaspora_ by Greg Egan, one of my favorite SF novels. I can only recall that I've read one Aldiss novel, _Non-Stop_. I think it was a straightforward adventure story (on a spaceship), with an Escape from NY kind of feel. But these are just faint recollections of my then adolescent brain.
That's really interesting! Diaspora has been recommended to me a lot, and I'll have to interlibrary loan it at some point. Non-Stop by Aldiss is also an SF Masterwork, so it's on my list.
i LOVE the city & the stars. after reading against the fall of night for 23 years, i discovered clarke had expanded the novella into a novel with far more detail. fyi - the aliens that supposedly drove human beings back to earth were called the Invaders, not the Outsiders.
I gotta give you credit for reading the Masterworks, I passed on most of them before they were classics. On a related note...I was searching for a book on my bookshelves and the anthologies Galactic Empires 1 and 2 by Aldiss caught my eye. My search made me think "I'd like to talk to Rachel about the books on my shelves." We have talked about the books you own (well, you talked I listened) and I enjoy hearing your thoughts on SF old and new.
I admire how you can read so many complete novels even if you're not particularly liking them. I read some Aldiss books and I'm not sure what to make of his work, he's clearly a good writer and has a significant stylistic range, I suspect you're right that he's influenced by Freud. I think "Hothouse" was the one I liked the most, it was an intense future with a ripe & dangerous biological richness rather than technological development. Another the Malacia Tapestry which was an imaginary place near Byzantium, imaginative/experimental but not with a strong narrative and none of them do I find particularly optimistic. The Heliconia books again are intensely biological. There is pretty significant world building, Heliconia is a planet that has two suns and as it moves slowly between them goes through ice ages and warm periods. I've got to say that I'm not now drawn to read him again, I may give Hothouse another read. Aldiss has also written a history of Science Fiction "The Billion Year Spree" given the time you have put into reading sci fi that might be your best bet, you'll get to know what Aldiss values as a writer and get a survey of the field, although you'll know much of it from reading the masterworks books.
Have you read the other SF Masterworks by Olaf Stapledon? Sirius, Last and first men and Star maker. I was wondering if you enjoyed them more? Stapledon is such an influential early Scifi writer before the big Pulp magazines like "Amazing Stories" and the usual classic Scifi crowd. I feel like I have to read his stories along with HG wells 🤷♂️
I definitely plan on reading Star Maker and Sirius. Stapledon's influence on later writers is really interesting, and while I may not have loved the subject of Odd John, I did enjoy his writing and storytelling. I was really thinking while reading it that it was very similar to H.G. Wells in some ways. But apparently Stapledon didn't know he was writing SF at the time, or wasn't aware of the genre? I find that really interesting!
@@Kalanadi He was accused of being a Marxist so I think he was actually just applying communist ideas to biology. Last and first men is basically just the Boom and bust cycle of capitalism (from Marx point of view). If the writing is good I will give it a read, and just gloss over any unsavory bits. Kind of like Heinlein and his Random racist/sexist joke out of nowhere habit😋
The two other SF Masterworks by Aldis (Hellaconia and Non Stop) are excellent IMHO. I've read Hellaconia several times and there really is nothing else like it (that I've come across at least).
I've been really intrigued by Helliconia. I definitely plan to try both it and Non-Stop, though perhaps I will get them from the library first before buying, haha.
The City and the Stars definitely has my interest piqued! 🙂 I might make it my next Arthur C. Clarke. I was face-palming hard and internally going "aaaaaaaaaah" when you mentioned the psychoanalytical bs in Cryptozoic... 😆 That kind of stuff gets an instant NOPE from me lol. And all the cringey sex-women stuff, argh. I'll give that one a large pass.
Cryptozoic is NOT worth it, yeah! I so wanted it to not be dragged down by that stuff...but it was impossible to separate the sexism and psychology from the plot or the characters. The City and the Stars and A Fall of Moondust by Clarke are both ones I rank as "medium" but are still good, enjoyable stories. I can't remember if you really liked Rendezvous with Rama though? I mean, the really dated stuff about women aside, it's still my favorite by him.
@@Kalanadi I did enjoy Rendez-vous with Rama quite a bit! 🙂 And haven't read anything else by Clarke so far. At this point, I've kind of come to expect some level of cringey when it comes to women, sex and/or romance in older SF, but iirc the only really weird thing in Rendez-vous was a mention of whacky "space-boob" movements lol.
I've only read The City and The Stars of these, and I was actually looking forward to hearing you talk about it. It's kind of funny that I agree with everything that you said here, yet I think I enjoyed this book more than you. The characters are not great (I don't think they ever are with Clarke), and the story is a very straightforward hero story. But I never have a problem with that, and I just think the ideas in the book are really cool, and I like the feeling of wonder that the story gave me. And while I do enjoy a story with good characters, I find it completely acceptable to remove any dimensions to the characters and have a nice engaging plot instead. Still not as good as Rendezvous with Rama in my opinion, but I really liked it.
Would agree - I loved Rendezvous with Rama, and The City and the Stars kind of gave me that same "sense of wonder" feeling, but not as good. I think one thing that made me feel more removed from The City is the huge timescales involved. Why a billion years? That's almost inconceivable. But I'm just nit picky I suppose :-D
@@Kalanadi I actually had the same nitpick as you did with the timescales. But I guess the book didn't work as well for you as it did for me. I find it that I'm way more nit picky when I'm not really liking a book and way more forgiving when I'm really into the story. Great video as always.
Right, I'm reading odd jhon. It seems to me, as of now, very well written, with a great exploration of the characters involved. I must say I'm actually enjoying it. Yes, couple of controversial bits, but what can we say about it, we're just Sapiens. Books seems yo me a great discussion about the coming growth and end of God.
Odd John is sitting on my shelf unread. I have been struggling to find the motivation to read the older titles in the S.F. Masterworks series. As you related the plot I instantly though of the Sleepless series by Nancy Kress. In particular how in the Sleepless Series, a minority group of people who are demonstrably superior, rather than being able to dominate, are marginalised and set up their own enclave to survive. In the second book - Beggars and Choosers, - If I remember (I could be way off) - certain individuals of ‘Super Sleepless’ are such a threat that they go underground and manipulate events from shadows. Of course Kress used genetic engineering as it was emerging in the early ‘90s as the mechanism for the creation of these super humans. Implying that the evolution/revolution in human morphology had only just begun. I know there are other S.F. Books that deal to these themes. I am just interested how the assumption by Stapleton in the 1930s was that people with superior intelligence, strength, disease resistance, etc, would rise above ‘normals’ people. Social Darwinism writ large. Whereas sixty years later, we are exploring other possibilities. Including that vested interests and established powers with resist and persecute such people. Great review. I think I can pass on Odd John. I am not sure I want to read about a group of people killing off the indigenous population to appropriate their island. Terra Nullius is a shameful part of my country’s history and not something a 1930s worldview is going to offer any insight into. The City and the Stars might be the book that began the trope of a insular city bound society that has forgotten their past and where curiosity about what is ‘outside’ is forbidden or suppressed. I am thinking of the film Logan’s Run from 1976, based on that very concept. But there are many, many more in subsequent decades. No doubt you know of quite a few. You were asking about Brian Aldiss’s other works. Ironically, ‘None-Stop’, which is book 33 in the earlier numbered S.F. Masterworks editions, is a parallel trope of the insular inter-generational colony spaceship, where history and purpose is forgotten and curiosity discouraged. You might find a descent story there.
That's really interesting about the Sleepless series. I used to have a copy of Beggars in Spain and never got around to it, but I was pretty intrigued by the gene mod for sleeplessness and why people would *want* to not sleep! Non-Stop is also on my reading list. I do really enjoy generation colony ship stories, and that same premise (forgotten purpose, lack of knowledge of the outside world) is still incredibly prevalent now. I'm thinking of An Unkindness of Ghosts, for example. Probably because it's a great way of exploring human behavior and societal break down in isolation.
@@Kalanadi I laughed at your comment about why anyone wouldn’t want to sleep. If you are anything like myself and other dog lovers, you would be compelled to share you sleeping space. Ava would be outraged if she couldn’t sleep on or at your feet or on your head! Especially on cold nights. There is nothing like waking up to have had a small dog appropriate you pillow. Yes no need for sleep. What would that mean? More time for hobbies, reading, or would society evolve to demand increased work hours?
Yeah, I personally think Brian Aldiss is a bit hit or miss. I did quite like his novel Greybeard though - it was a more unusual premise. All the characters are older, and I thought there was actually a good relationship between the main character and his wife.
When I read Odd John last year I was rather curious to hear your thoughts on it as I knew, like me, you'd have issues with John and every major choice he made and the reasons for them. I'm glad I read it for the history aspect but I'm not going to be rereading it again in a hurry that's for sure. The City and the Stars I really enjoyed for the world and the grander ideas although characters were not the strength of Clarke. Saying that he managed to write Rama where that lack of character development worked in his favour extremely well. Cryptozoic was a real slog to get through due to the awful view and opinions of the characters which is extremely annoying to read. Hellaconia is on my to-read at some point.
Haven't read the other two, but I will, so I'm commenting only about Odd John. To me, John also seemed immoral. However, in my mind, his actions seem like poignant commentary on the way humans treat other animals. The book is very clear that in terms of comprehension and intelligence, John is to humans what humans are to other mammals. He justifies his treatment of them with an appeal to intelligence in the same way we do when pressed on our treatment of other sentient (feeling) beings. John, in this sense, is committing the same kind of moral blunder that most human beings already do, and I would argue the same civilizational error we have needlessly clung to since we took over the planet. He is not any worse than we are on average.
'Odd John' appeals a little bit 'cos it sounds so weird. 'The City And The Stars' might be my thing 'cos I like Arthur. I remember Brian Aldiss used to appear on British TV as a critic and a right pompous person he was too. I read 'Helliconia Spring'. Boring!!!!
@@gon8go maybe. Very dated now. All style over substance I my opinion. I am not a fan. I loved Gateway, but agree with you and a Rachel that the main character was unlikeable. I enjoyed the AI psychologist far more. There was more book set in the same universe. About five. Expanding the idea. But it has been over 20 years since I read them. And I can’t remember anything. So I am thinking that it is time for a reread, although they can’t be that memorable. I remember Gateway by none of the others in the Heechee series (I had to look it up just now).
