Arthur C Clarke RIP

That would be an interesting thread.

Ah shame, I loved his books as a teenager. I guess his characterisation and all that literary stuff was pretty dreadful, but that's not really what you need from him is it? Apparently he wasn't too keen on what Kubrick did with 2001.

Um, when exactly did Dangerous Visions come out?
(xpost)

are we ever going to take up these golden age sci fi dudes on their uncritical embrace of BIG SCIENCE and the aerospace industry?

I totally understand and agree with you, but I still think Clarke & co's contributions to science fiction are certainly worth a RIP.

is it uncritical?

also, are we stacking the deck by critiquing them from our POV?

yes and yes

well back then we were rewriting the end of icarus, in the real world.

it's a bit of a cheap shot, and "uncritical embrace of big science" strikes me as hilariously off the mark considering the creation of ACC's that most people are likely to remember right off the top of their head is a malfunctioning killer computer.

Apparently he wasn't too keen on what Kubrick did with 2001.

Where'd you hear that? He actually worked closely with Kubrick on the screenplay and throughout production. When I told my daughter a little while ago that he'd died, she dug out a paperback she picked up recently in a 20-for-$5 sale, The Lost Worlds of 2001. It reprints "The Sentinel" and some chapters from the novel, interwoven with some bits of memoir from Clarke about how it all went down. He was frustrated by Kubrick's perfectionism, but not unhappy with the movie, according to what I'm reading here.

yeah i've never read him saying anything bad about the movie

Ah yes I was wrong. Seems David Fincher is lined up to direct Rendezvous With Rama (if it happens). I'm not holding out much hope for it being any good.

rip

between this and the D&D dude jr. high nerdery's having a rough year

i think fincher would be great for that, personally

xx-post

Jerome Agee's "The Making of Kubrick's 2001" indicated more-or-less the same. Both SK & ACC thought the screenplay should have been credited to "Stanley Kubrick & Arthur C. Clarke" with the novel credited in reverse.

5xpost

Fincher on Rama would be THEE BOMBE.

it's a bit of a cheap shot, and "uncritical embrace of big science" strikes me as hilariously off the mark considering the creation of ACC's that most people are likely to remember right off the top of their head is a malfunctioning killer computer.

-- El Tomboto

that's sort of the point, right?

i mean, did the popularity of sci fi & popular science in the 20th century lead to any gains w/r/t The Public Understanding Of Science In America or did it do the opposite?

Clarke ain't Roddenberry.

clarke is WORSE

i'd argue that the hard science fiction dudes have been much much WORSE for TPUOSIA than almost anything else except maybe the space race dudes and America's Nobel Laureates

I don't get this at all. A lot of what I know about basic science came from Niven, Pohl, Hal Clement (ESPECIALLY Hal Clement), Clarke, a little from Asimov. They contributed heavily to TPUOSIA, even if not everyone who read their stuff became an engineer or scientist.

ok sorry, i guess i'm just ranting based on my work. public understanding of science isn't just a matter of who knows what facts about basic science, but about public ideas about what constitutes science, how science works, who is a scientist, what a scientist does, etc

in america we have some curiously prevalent ideas

1) math & science are more difficult than other subjects (humanities, business, etc)

2) science is a matter of individual inspiration, genius, what have you

3) appreciation of science is based on wide-eyed *wonder* about the natural world, and people who don't get that *wonder* are dullards

3.5) scientific activity is the natural outgrowth of this wonderment, ie, we launched space rockets because of natural human curiosity, not because of any sort of social or political concerns. and if you're not excited by the possibilities of rocketry and satellites, it's not because of social/political difference but because you're a dullard. ask carl sagan!!

4) there's an intellectual hierarchy in science, with rocket science & quantum mechanics at the top, and, i dunno, nurses and veterinarians towards the bottom.

i could go on for days about this

5) einstein was a better scientist, than, say, rachel carson

cue white men with computer hobbies - "but we ARE BETTER SCIENTISTS than FARMERS!"

r.i.p.

I did a tiny bit to help out with a carbon nanotube research project during my last year at school.

There's a lot to chew on there, vahid...

3) appreciation of science is based on wide-eyed *wonder* about the natural world, and people who don't get that *wonder* are dullards

I think that great SF supports the first part of that (and I agree with it), but not the second half. I won't argue about that heirarchy in science, but I never encountered SF promulgating it.

Mr. To Baja I don't think I believe that a lot of those curiously prevalent ideas are really the fault of some old white dudes with typewriters 50 years ago. Or even the guys with bad hair in the short-sleeved shirts and ties who were actually turning the airmen into spacemen on the teevee.

oh damn i said promulgating
xpost

I think if you start at the last word in that sentence you'd probably be closer to the mark, in fact. But then again I am a buzz-cut reactionary who spies on his fellow citizens at the behest of the government.

Ya bastid!

also I guess 50 years ago those dudes with the typewriters weren't exactly old yet

and I would not blame anybody in a non-aeronautical field for having a big chip on their shoulder wrt the space program, but I daresay the space program has made any americans - a number of americans greater than zero - less inclined or capable of Understanding Science than they would have been otherwise

so where *did* these ideas come from?

cartoons?

did you know that there american teenagers tend to view math & science as fantastically difficult endeavors? why is that?

did you know that they also tend to view math & science as not very relevant to their lives? why is that?

r.i.p.

(geez, this whole end-of-an-era angle is bogus.)

u should add

6) science's goal is the eventual complete and total understanding of the mechanisms of the universe which necessarily accompanies humanity's conquering of the same

yes

^^ there's a man what learned something in college

wait, you think kids dont like math and science because arthur c clarke wrote some books that most kids havent read because they also dont like reading?

did you know that they also tend to view math & science as not very relevant to their lives? why is that?

-- moonship journey to baja, Wednesday, March 19, 2008 4:24 AM (22 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

the novels and stories of arthur c. clarke?

not that i disagree with 1-5 but please to provide evidence that arthur c clarke & friends are responsible for that

did you know that they also tend to view math & science as not very relevant to their lives? why is that?

-- moonship journey to baja, Wednesday, March 19, 2008 4:24 AM (26 minutes ago) Bookmark Link

what school subjects do american teenagers view AS relevant to their lives? cuz i doubt it's shakespeare either.

social studies

u jealous

...of social studies teachers

is this part of obamamania? i remember social studies being a place where kids goofed off in my jr. high

Anyone else out there watch the Childhood's End miniseries?

No, saw you mention on other thread.

wtf was that baja guy on about on this thread

_Fred Pohl is still alive. Philip Jose Farmer is too, but he came a few years later._

Just realized that Jack Vance is still alive too.

I knew Vance was dead, but I was just thinking about him today. Specifically I was wondering if those two groups of fans who were arguing over whether it was spelt Wankh or Wannek had stopped yet.

I think about Vance every day tbh

I was looking at this list of the oldest living sci-fi and fantasy writers. None of the golden age writers I care about are around, but it's nice to know Ursula K. Le Guin, Gene Wolfe, and Ben Bova are still kicking. Hopefully I didn't just jinx their longevity.

Interesting. Earl Hamner, Jr. Nicholas Moseley.

Phyllis Schlafly, noted sci-fi fantasy author

Is the miniseries worth tracking down? I was interested but didn't have time that week.

sitting on my tivo, will prolly give it a shot sometime next year

Ursula K. Le Guin . . . still kicking

...and still blogging: http://www.ursulakleguin.com/Blog2015.html#New

would've been 100 yesterday; had to persuade a friend he was no longer living