Solaris
by Stanisław Lem
|
|
Sign in to Goodreads to see your friends' reviews of Solaris.
discuss this book
friend reviews (0)
To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up.
lists with this book
other reviews (showing 1-20 of 954)
Read in May, 2006
No son prejuicios, pero me cuesta digerir las obras de género. No me va ni la ciencia ficción, ni el fantástico, ni el terror, ni el western, ni los musicales, ni el cine negro. Si me sacan del drama y la comedia ya estoy agotada antes de que la cosa empiece. Me encantan las mezclas de géneros y las relecturas de género, pero el género puro y duro no es para mí. Aún así me leí 'Solaris'. Tampoco está tan mal. Sé que el género es sólo el envoltorio, que lo que importa es lo que se c...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
There are 3 different versions of Solaris. There is the 2002 American film starring George Clooney which I never saw (which is where this particular book cover is derived). There is the 1972 Russian film which is almost 3 hours long and is considered by some to be a work of genius (I have seen this version of the film and despite the gruelingly slow pace would agree that it is a masterpiece in the art of film). And there is the book released in 1961 by the world famous Polish author Stanislaw...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Read in August, 2008
recommended to Inder by:
Mike (Krishna's)
This was very, very interesting, at times quite profound, but a bit uneven overall.
The narrator's voice ranges between that of a cowboy or noir detective and a philosopher or theologian, and neither is quite convincing. The scientific descriptions of the intelligent ocean are long and skim-worthy. The characters are one-dimensional. It's carelessly sexist - Kelvin's wife has no personality beyond being submissive and suicidally depressed, and yet, with little explanation, he loves her? That...more
The narrator's voice ranges between that of a cowboy or noir detective and a philosopher or theologian, and neither is quite convincing. The scientific descriptions of the intelligent ocean are long and skim-worthy. The characters are one-dimensional. It's carelessly sexist - Kelvin's wife has no personality beyond being submissive and suicidally depressed, and yet, with little explanation, he loves her? That...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Has a copy to sell/swap
—
Read in December, 2007
I've seen the two movies made from this book, but the book seems to have an entirely different sensibility. It's the story of human attempts to comprehend the nature of the planet Solaris and its plasmic, seemingly alive oceans. Another phenomenon "visitors," physically real phantoms from the crew's memories/subconscious, appear inexplicably--do they represent an attempt by the planet to explore their guests or is there no intelligence/will to it at all? Kris Kelvin, the narrator, m...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Read in October, 2007
Despite my inhibitions at being seen on the NYC subway reading a book whose cover bears a picture of George Clooney making smoochie with some woman, I soldiered through this interesting but somewhat cold novel with a curiosity mainly for the ideas, less so for the characters and their predicament.
The story of a scientist who has joined with two others at an observation satellite orbiting the planet Solaris, whose ocean is a form of intelligent life, the book is full of long and (to my tast...more
The story of a scientist who has joined with two others at an observation satellite orbiting the planet Solaris, whose ocean is a form of intelligent life, the book is full of long and (to my tast...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Read in October, 2005
recommends it for:
People with wandering spirits
I went into the book never having seen the movie (seen it now and I like it - but we're talkin apples and oranges here). To continue my fruit metaphor, the story, once the tough skin was peeled away, was juicy and pleasing (especially with some chilly powder, go figure). Whereas the movie you could bite right into, possibly losing dentures, but ce la vie.
Okay, shut up with the fruit.
I was impressed that a science fiction author could have such tight, pretty sentences (most SF authors...more
Okay, shut up with the fruit.
I was impressed that a science fiction author could have such tight, pretty sentences (most SF authors...more
Like this review?
yes
(1 person liked it)
add a comment
Read in December, 1998
It's The Turn of the Screw in space.
This is the best of Lem's novels dealing with first contact, all of which are marked by a thoroughgoing pessimism of the human capacity to assimilate reality into its understanding. Lem does this by thrusting his cosmonauts into encounters with alien entities (life? intelligences? already the words you might naturally think to use are inadequate) and showing the worlds of the human and the alien...more
This is the best of Lem's novels dealing with first contact, all of which are marked by a thoroughgoing pessimism of the human capacity to assimilate reality into its understanding. Lem does this by thrusting his cosmonauts into encounters with alien entities (life? intelligences? already the words you might naturally think to use are inadequate) and showing the worlds of the human and the alien...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
It is unfortunate that Lem is labeled as an author of "science fiction", but really only because of what the american traditions for that genre have imprinted on our culture. Solaris is a deeply philosophical look at the notion of "otherness", a meditation on the hard limits at the edges of human cognition, and science's inability to look outside of problems that science can describe.
Read this book instead of watching either of the films derived from it. Tarkovsky's Sola...more
Read this book instead of watching either of the films derived from it. Tarkovsky's Sola...more
Like this review?
yes
(1 person liked it)
add a comment
Read in April, 2007
This is a very creepy book, with philosophical content that is both substantive and well done artistically. In a lot of ways, it's about a breakdown between the scientific project and the natural world it is supposed to study: the biggest scientific debate of the day is over the alleged sentience of a large, planet sized ocean on a world called Solaris. Hopefully, you put the book down unsure of whether you think the ocean is actually alive or not. (And then proceed to feel skeptical of the n...more
Like this review?
yes
(1 person liked it)
add a comment
Probably the best sci-fi novel I've ever read. Seriously.
In Solaris humankind encounters not just something unknown, but something truly unknowable. And it turns out, after traversing the long abyss of space, we didn't have to look very far, did we? No, we just had to look at ourselves.
Most seductive to me was this novel's setting/main character, a vast intelligent ocean. What if you could see pure thought? What shape would it be? How would it move? What would brainstorming look like? Ho...more
In Solaris humankind encounters not just something unknown, but something truly unknowable. And it turns out, after traversing the long abyss of space, we didn't have to look very far, did we? No, we just had to look at ourselves.
Most seductive to me was this novel's setting/main character, a vast intelligent ocean. What if you could see pure thought? What shape would it be? How would it move? What would brainstorming look like? Ho...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Read in January, 2004
recommends it for:
fans of hard sci-fi, human psychology
A psychologist is sent to investigate when contact is lost with a space station orbiting an alien planet. He discovers that the men have been driven mad by physical manifestations of their innermost demons. Although the setting is sci-fi, the book is more of a psychological study of how humans react when they are confronted with their deepest-held fears and buried memories.
Adapted twice into movies by Andrei Tarkovsky and Steven Soderbergh which remain relatively faithful to the novel, k...more
Adapted twice into movies by Andrei Tarkovsky and Steven Soderbergh which remain relatively faithful to the novel, k...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Wow. I have no idea what to rate this book. Fantastic. Yet... IT is constructed so strangely. A compelling story, which suddenly gets sidetracked by overwhelming amounts of historical data. Which seemed really weird to me, until I saw that as part of the point: In the face of the unknowable, humans bury themselves in their collectiove knowledge, rather than in their unique experience. Or something like that. Anyway, just a facinating premise, a 23 trillion tonne ocean/brain floating in space, an...more
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Read in July, 2004
recommends it for:
science fiction and mystery fans
Interesing read. Lem is a legendary science fiction writer from Russia and the writing exemplifies this. Creating a slow crescendo of events leading to the very face of a mysterious anomaly, Lem encourages us to focus our thoughts very keenly on simple things. It is not necessary to think too out of the box on this one although the mystery seems far out of reach. As a friend once told me when I asked him what it all means: "Solaris is a great parable. You do not need to know everything.&quo
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
I think i enjoyed this book overall. I quite liked the philosophical discussion going on here, but... Being no fan of sci-fi, i found this book quite boring in places. There are several chapters that are so tedious I had to struggle very hard not to skip (the ones describing the physical parameters of the planet etc.... well you know which ones) . And having finished the book and looking back, I might have quite easily done it without ruining the experience.
Like this review?
yes
(1 person liked it)
add a comment
Read in January, 2003
recommends it for:
Pople who have seen either filmed version.
I saw the Tarkovsky original many years ago; I've seen it at least twice and I've seen Soderbergh's version twice, all before I broke down and read the book which didn't cut it for me at all. The thing is, it does fill in a lot of the blanks in both filmed versions and I was grateful for that but the damage had been done.
If you get the chance to see Tarkovsky's film do but be warned 165 minutes of Russian sci-fi is not for the feint-hearted.
If you get the chance to see Tarkovsky's film do but be warned 165 minutes of Russian sci-fi is not for the feint-hearted.
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
I started reading this around 9pm one evening and stayed up till 5am to finish it. I think this book works best that way. I actually haven't seen the Tartovsky or Soderbergh films so I can't say much about that, but the book is quite evocative and within in it's narrative holds one of the most interesting critiques of the cultural assumption that Science can provide answers to the most mysterious and fundamental questions.
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Read in February, 2008
Much more of a slog than I expected. I don't know whether to blame Lem or the translation, but I think it's the former. It's a fascinating premise, of course, but the endless exposition and pages upon pages of what amounts to the protagonist reading textbooks to us was a bit more than I could take. Took me about four weeks to get through the last 50 pages.
I'll still give Lem another go, though.
I'll still give Lem another go, though.
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Don't judge the Steven Soderbergh film as a basis for what this book is about. The love story IS a portion of the story but the overall arc is more about the interaction with the members of the space station and the planet itself. Some really gorgeous and bizarre descriptions of the activities on the planet that gets completely ignored in the Soderbergh film. This one made me a Lem fan.
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
This is one of my favorite sci-fi books to date. Like all good sci-fi, the genre is just a backdrop for the exploration of the themes that the book tackles. I picked it up after seeing the George Clooney version of the film which doesn't (surprise!) do the book that much justice. I have yet to see the Tarkovsky film of the book, which I've heard is leaps and bounds better.
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
Read in September, 2006
In 1983, a critic wrote in the Philadelphia Inquirer that, "If [Stanislaw Lem] isn't considered for a Nobel Prize by the end of the century, it will be because someone told the judges that he writes science fiction." That's the truth, and this book is one of his best. Unfortunately, this edition has one on the stupidest looking covers that I have ever seen.
Like this review?
yes
add a comment
