Too many things in my brain right now. I pity anyone who reads this. I don’t know where this review is going but I can about guarantee that it’s ride to nowhere.
I have been sitting on this short story collection from Arthur C Clarke for quite a while now. It’s called The Sentinel, which is the title of his novella which inspired 2001. A movie in which he was so inspired that he wrote the novel (technically, he wrote the novelization along with the production of the film, so it’s not like he watched the movie and then wrote a fan-fic piece about it, although that would be funny). Then, when he starting writing sequels to 2001, he changed the details to more closely match the movie (like, for example, 2001 the novel is actually set near Saturn, not Jupiter, so in 2010 he just said, ‘Whatever, pretend the events of the last book all happened near Jupiter instead of Saturn”). So weird.
Anyway, when I found out my two main men, Stephen Baxter and Alastair Reynolds, had collaborated on a novel, after my head exploded (Stephen Baxter was THE reason I started reading Science Fiction when I discovered his novel Ring back in the very early 90’s (Vernor Vinge’s A Fire Upon the Deep is also part of this conversation of my origins as a literary SF fan and wannabe writer, but it was secondary to Baxter’s work, which was really my gateway). I talk about it in about 1 out of every 3 or 4 reviews I do (Ironic, I’ve never reviewed that book, despite reading it about 5 times over the decades). It was, no joke, Baxter’s aforementioned novel that introduced me to relativity, it lead me down a rabbit hole of discovery on physics that I’m still in the midst of 20 plus years later. I still remember, quite fondly, arguing with a friend of mine about special relativity and how it might work in some situations. He was befuddled that relativity existed at all, as was I, at first. And we spent endless hours nerding out over it. It’s sad to me that it was so late in my life that I was exposed to it at all. Public education in the rural south in the 80's wasn't that great.
Such good times. Anyway, it was, in a lot of ways, the book that introduced me to adulthood and started shaping me into the person I am now, for better or for worse. In the late 90’s Baxter started getting more fascinated by some topics that were more esoteric. He started branching out of space based SF and into more abstract things, like a trilogy about sentient Mastodons as protagonists or a novel with Evolution itself as an antagonist, I seem to recall one novel where the big idea was humans evolving into hive minds or whatever, not in the cool way that Arthur C Clarke did in Childhood’s End but in a lame, smelly, way where we burrowed underground and lost a lot of what made us human in the first place. It was creepy. With Baxter exploring these things I started looking around for someone to fill that niche in my life around the time that Reynolds’ Revelation Space novels started coming out. Before long it was him that I couldn’t get enough of. For a period of about 20 years I probably counted one of those two as my favorite author.
And now they've joined forces. Boom.
So, that collection of short stories from Clarke had a story in it called A Meeting with Medusa. This new novel is a sequel to that story. Glad I had that short story collection I mentioned earlier lying around.
Clarke’s story, written in 1971, I think, is about an explorer riding in the clouds of Jupiter in a dirigible and struggling to stay alive as he discovers that a whole ecosystem is in place. It’s a cool story. It won a lot of awards, but this theme has been carried on by so many people (I read a writer’s of the future winner a few years ago that told an eerily similar story) that it feels very uninspired as of now.
That isn’t Clarke’s fault, except that he’s been influential enough to make his work seem derivative in retrospect. That’s what happens when you’re such a giant in the field.*
Anyway, this is a rare book for me in that I personally can see a lot of ‘flaws’ in it and still think it is a masterpiece. I remind myself of the movie reviewer for my local paper that once said in a rare interview that she would never give a Star Trek movie less than 4 stars. She just couldn’t figure out a way to not enjoy watching them, even if she knew they weren’t very good by other, more conventional metrics.
So this is me saying I have a blind spot for this kind of story. Now, I do think it’s good, regardless. It’s not like I’m saying this sucks but I forgive myself for liking it because it reminds me of being a kid again, or something. No, I’m just saying that I think this was a fantastic novel, and at the same time I can see why other people might struggle with it.
It covers a lot of ground, for one. It moves from around the year 2100 to sometime close to 2900 (I actually finished this novel a few weeks ago, I can’t remember the exact dates here) and therefore each of the novels six sections covers a pretty large chunk of time. There is a central protagonist throughout, but he’s aloof and cold and not given to much emotion. This is a story of ideas, and these are two of the biggest ‘ideas’ guys around.
Anyway, I was about to wrap this thing up and all that, but I realized I didn’t actually say a word about what this is about… turns out, at the end of the Clarke short story it’s revealed that this person that flew that dirigible in the clouds of Jupiter wasn’t entirely human. He’s almost died in a horrible accident on earth years earlier. What was left of him was put in a mechanical body. It made him unique and feared. It also, the short story mentioned, a much needed mediator between the troubling times between humans and computers in the centuries ahead.
So, yeah, it’s about an AI that becomes more than its human creators intended, and how quickly it became more than humans could comprehend, let alone control.
It’s also about this guy with a metal body, and how he isn’t sure he belongs more to the humans, or the machines. It’s good stuff with some heady SF trippiness later in the book. I love it and could read a thousand other novels just like this one.
*A digression that goes beyond simple parentheticals here: Clarke was an author I discovered just as I was leaving the “B’s” of SF and started working my way through the “C’s.” I read, specifically, Rendezvous with Rama and loved it (I’ve since read it two other times, and even managed to read the less inspired sequels twice).
After seeing the SyFy mini-series of Childhood’s End late in 2015 I couldn’t help but wish it had been the Rama novel that had been adapted instead. It makes for much more of a sensible SF show in my mind. I think that Morgan Freeman has had the rights to the Rama books tied to his production company for decades now. I suppose I should be happy that anyone was making a television production out of Clarke’s works. It’s just that I didn’t particularly think that story was as compelling today as it was when it was newly told, again, it’s like the whole derivative thing we talked about earlier. It’s too clichéd now – it is around 65 years old. Wait... older that that, the short story collection I mentioned earlier has the original short story in it, written years before it was expanded into a novel, and I think it's from around WWII.