Contact (Mass Market Paperback)

The science was interesting -- particularly the mode of travel described -- and I found the use of messages buried in irrational numbers to be an imaginative concept that I've never seen before. As a sci-fi story, I would compare this favorably with some of Arthur C. Clarke's best work, including "2001" and "Rendezvous With Rama," in terms of the scope and majesty of the universe he creates.

My only problem with the story, in fact, is that it is a little bit too derivative of Clarke; the space/dimensional traveling sequence seems to be imitative of "2001," and there are other similarities to Clarke novels, such as "Childhood's End," that were a little distracting (that's why, on a scale of 1-10, Contact would get a 9, rather than the full 10 rating). Nonetheless, I found this a very moving story that has more genuine feeling in it than almost any S-F story I've read.

This is a novel that is visionary and almost religious in its awe of the universe -- the movie was also enjoyable, but as is almost always the case, it can't capture the numinous feeling that the book has, despite a great performance from Jodie Foster.

Don't let some of the religious nuts' reactions scare you away from this book -- it has more genuine spirituality in it than a whole room full of Baptists and 700 Club members.

"Contact" (the film) is NOT an adaptation. Carl Sagan died in the midst of production, but up until that point, he was on the set working with actors, directors, and prior to that with writer James V. Hart every single day. Sagan and Druyan initially planned Contact as a film, but the idea was EXPANDED in the book. The book spans many, many years and has multiple perspectives. Although it would be possible to do the same with the medium of film (and in a select few instances, Zemeckis chooses this approach), it's a much riskier approach and, if you know your Contact history, not what Sagan and Druyan originally intended.

The main theme (as evidenced by its placement in the book's resolution) in the book is Ellie's isolation. As for science and religion, it's less about conflict and more about faith: Sagan notes (as others have, though less eloquently) that faith is no less necessary for science than for religion.

As for Ellie...brilliant! What's unique about Sagan's characterization of a woman in science is the exploration of her faults: her stubbornness, her self-absorption, her inability to truly connect, her own xenophobia...the list goes on. So few authors can present a character in a balanced manner without suggesting that she will somehow be punished for her humanity. In the end, the only judgment that comes to Ellie is her own--despite her self-absorption, Ellie has little sense of her SELF. All her confidence--all her strength--has roots that Ellie herself has been unwilling to recognize. The film does not, in my estimation, present Ellie as a "sanctimonious whiner," but there are certain limitations of the medium, especially considering that the book is written with Ellie's THOUGHTS in mind while maintaining the distance of a 3rd person narrative. How do you bring what is on the inside out?

To the reader who said he or she "bought the book the next day and will never bother with another film adaptation of Sagan ever again (and will be hard pressed to justify seeing anything made by those who defiled Sagan in this movie)," I remind you that Sagan was among those filmmakers. See the film. Read the book. Make up your own mind as to how you will treat them. That, after all, is the point.