Customer Reviews

2010: Odyssey Two

5 star:		(44)
4 star:		(27)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

If you were left baffled by 2001 this is worth a read. You might not get all your answers, but it will help shed some light on some of the mysteries surrounding the monoliths. The conclusion is pretty huge and worth the read.

With this sequel to "2001", Arthur C. Clarke proves, yet again, why he is at the top of his game. This work, bringing back Heywood Floyd, along with a group of new characters, along with the evolved Dave Bowman and the monolith once again catapults us into the fantastic. This book is on my shelf along with: Stranger in a Strange Land", "Puppet Masters", "Foundation", "2001", "2010", "Rendezvous with Rama", "Ringworld", all the "Star Trek" and "Star Wars" books, as well as books as new to the genre as "Advent of the Corps" and others.

In this case, I'd say that the film is better than the book. I have a few complaints about the book. It bothers me that Clarke caved to the plot of the movie, 2001, and removed the whole bit about going to Saturn from Jupiter. It leaves his first book standing alone. Books and movies diverge all the time and he should have just stuck to his original storyline for the sequels.

My second complaint: what's up with the EPCOT retirement home? It's a completely hokey idea and distracting from the overall flow of the story.

Although, it is part of a sequel, anyone could read it in the beginning.

It's a great story and very well-written.

And the ending is superb - with a philosophical touch.

A MUST read for any reader.

=====>

This 1982 book (that consists of 55 chapters plus an epilog), by Sir Arthur C. Clarke (who "said for years that [a sequel] was clearly impossible"), is really a hybrid book since it attempts not only to be a sequel to his previous novel ("2001: A Space Odyssey," published in 1968) but also attempts to be a sequel to the 1968 movie (also called "2001: A Space Odyssey").

In this novel, a joint Russian-American space mission is sent to the planet Jupiter (on the spaceship called "Cosmonaut Alexei Leonov") to try and discover what happened to the previous American spaceship (called "Discovery") that was sent previously in 2001. As well, Leonov's crew is "to locate the alien artifact [also called the monolith] encountered by Discovery, and to investigate it to the maximum extent possible."

Because this book attempts to be a sequel to the previous novel and the 1968 movie, it appeals to four different types of readers:

(i) those who have not read the previous novel and have not seen the 1968 movie
(ii) those who have read the previous novel only
(iii) those who have seen the 1968 movie only and
(iv) those who have read the previous novel and have seen the 1968 movie (as I have).

Each of these four types of readers will probably rate this book as follows:

(1) Those who have not read the previous movie or have not seen the 1968 movie will enjoy this novel. Reading the previous novel or seeing the 1968 movie is not needed to understand this novel. There is good character interaction and there is both known and speculative space science throughout. (Examples of speculative science include the idea that gas giant planets such as Jupiter may have diamond cores and there may be aerial life forms in Jupiter's atmosphere.) There are excellent descriptions of Jupiter and its moons (especially of the moons Io and Europa). As well, this novel's climax (that occurs in chapter 52) is exciting and unexpected.

These readers will probably give the novel a 5 star rating.

(Note that these positive comments will apply to the other types of readers indicated below.)

(2) The reader who has read the previous novel only will notice some differences that interfere with the continuity from the previous novel. For example, Discovery is no longer orbiting one of planet Saturn's moons but is now orbiting one of Jupiter's moons. (No explanation for this is given.) Instead of the monolith being on one of Saturn's moons, it is now in orbit around one of Jupiter's moons. (Again, no explanation for this is given.) As well, the mystery and awe of the previous novel is replaced with the straightforwardness of this novel. Many of the questions left open in the previous novel are now answered.

These readers might give this novel 3 1/2 stars.

(3) Fans of the 1968 movie will have a stronger sense of continuity after reading this book than those who have only read the previous novel. However, they may not recognize some of the dialogue that was said to exist (since it appeared in the previous novel only.) The overwhelming mystery and awe of the movie is replaced with the straightforwardness of this novel. However, many of the questions left open in the movie are now answered.

These readers will perhaps give this novel 4 stars.

(4) Those who have read the previous novel and have seen the 1968 movie might be a bit confused since they have to contend with what has been said in (2) and (3) above. But with some reflection, they should be able to sort out this confusion.

Possible rating by these readers: 4 stars.

As mentioned in (1) above, there is quite a bit of true and speculative space science throughout this book. Thus, this book would have different appeal to yet two more types of readers:

(5) Those without space knowledge. Such readers, I believe, would find this novel fascinating.

These readers would probably give the novel 5 stars.

(6) Those with some space knowledge. These readers would also be intrigued with the novel especially the speculative space science. However, they would be very dissappointed with the novel's climax (in chapter 52). For this climax to occur, there would have to be sufficient mass (which there isn't). Further, if this does occur (and it does in the novel), the novel would have to abruptly end since the spaceships (Discovery and Leonov) and Jupiter's moons would be instantly incinerated.

Possible rating by these readers: 3 stars.

The average of the above six ratings is 4 stars.

Finally, there is the 1984 movie called "2010: The Year We Make Contact." It is a straightforward, traditional science fiction movie. You don't have to read this book to understand this movie.

In conclusion, this novel as Carl Sagan says is "a worthy successor to 2001." It appeals in different ways to different people.

<=====>

This book was much better than 2001! It did take saturn out of the storyline, but that actually made it more interesting. It starts out with Heywood Floyd finding out that the Russians are going to make it to discovery before the Americans can build discoveryII. So the Russians allow Heywood to board their ship,the Leonov, and start on the journey to Jupiter to discover the mystery of the monolith and of Hals malfunction...

I have read 2001: A Space Odyssey and, of course, had to read the sequel. This book was written like 15 or so years after its prequel and its not the same.

This book is not as mind boggling as 2001: A Space Odyssey. There is very cool technology, many things are explained, and you finally see whats really going on. The science in the book is very intriguing and you dont need to be proficient in nuclear physics to understand it. The main character as well as secondary characters are very interesting and easy to emphasize with.

I say that this book isnt as "mind boggling" as the first one and its important that I explain why. I dont think it should be a reason for you not to read this.

The first book (2001) was written by Arthur C. Clarke AFTER the 2001 the movie was made. He coroborated with Stanley Kubrick before writing a novel, which means that a lot of imagery and suspense in 2001: A Space Odyssey book were taken from the movie.

This book is very consistent with the style of other Arthur C. Clarke writing. Succint, right to the point, appropriate for all ages, no foul language, simply brilliant.

Action - 3/5
English - 5/5
Plot - 5/5
Erotic Aspect - 1/5
Foul Language - 0/5
Technology/Aliens - 4/5
Hard Science - 5/5
Overall Satisfaction - 4/5 (Becasuse there is a sequel)

Despite the introduction of new material and mind-boggling imaginings there is no way this sequel can top the original. Once the idea, the plot, the germ of the story has been let out of the bag, it is extremely difficult to capture that initial excitement and even euphoria.

The ideas of our "new" sun, the further adventures of Bowman, the exploration of life elsewhere in the Solar System - all of these are developed well. Of course, as in all Clarke books, it is the lack of character development that is crucial. In order to overcome this shortcoming the story itself must be dazzling as it was in 2001. 2010, though, could only exist on the shoulders of 2001 and for that reason deserves a '4' instead of a '5'.

After reading 2001, the greatest science fiction master piece ever, I was afraid of not having my expectations fulfilled in this sequel. But 2010 eventually did it. Many of the mysteries from the previous book were well answered in this book, such as the role of the star-child Bowman, acting as an interface between Earth and the superior civilization. There were also some new interesting concepts introduced, such as the von-neumann machine. Furthermore, the fact that this book was written about 15 years after 2001, allowed Clarke to make an outstanding description of the Jovian Galilean satellites.
The end of 2010 made me rush to buy 2061 to see how Europa would become habitable and what happened to HAL, but unfortunately, this time my expectations were not 100% fulfilled.

2010 is one of the rare cases where the sequel is almost as good as the original - in some ways it is even better.

There are some quibbles of course. In building on 2001, Clarke chose to follow the movie rather than the book (hence Jupiter instead of Saturn, the recap of Bowman's conflict with Hal gives the movie dialog and so on). Also, 2001 was almost austere in its simplicity. Dialog and character development were skeletal. The reader was positioned as an external observer - in that sense, 2001 was a challenge to the reader. 2010 is dumbed down in a sense. Character development (never a Clarke strength) is marginally better than 2001 but the dialog is plentiful, making it a far easier read. Not a criticism, one just misses the simplicity and elegance of 2001.

Having said that, 2010 can easily claim to be one of the landmarks of science fiction. Imagination has always been Clarke's forte and the way he comes up with the various ideas of primitive life on Europa, the proto-sun of Lucifer and so on are nothing short of brilliant. The story line builds on 2001 and takes us further down the road, telling us more about David Bowman, the monolith and the intelligence behind it. All with a very human touch to it - witness the fate of the Tsien.

And as always, Clarke uses his trademark sly humor and simple analogies to make technical concepts easy to understand. Language has always been Clarke's second strength and he paints superb pictures with words, describing the spacescape, the flight of the two ships, the exploration of Jupiter, Io and Europa (in fact fans of Clarke will recognize the Jupiter descriptions from his earlier short story classic "A Meeting with Medusa"). A very good book.