Childhood’s End in The Alternative Worlds

Dec 08, 2011 Terence rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: speculative-fiction

This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. When I was in 8th grade, I wrote a story about humans evolving and becoming “luminous beings” (similar, I suppose, to those Yoda mentions in The Empire Strikes Back), and I was reminded of this when I read the ending to Childhood’s End. Humanity’s last generation joins a vast collective intelligence that has been assimilating civilizations for countless eons, and in the process consumes the Earth and all other life on it. (As I recall, my process wasn’t quite so genocidal; in fact, it took place ...more

29 likes · Like · see review

Mar 23, 2010 Kara Babcock rated it liked it · review of another edition

Shelves: science-fiction, 2010-read, posthuman, owned, hugo-nominee

There's a reason certain science fiction authors are a Big Deal. Even if one doesn't like them, even if one hates their books or thinks they're mediocre writers, there's a reason society has accorded an author "classic" status over the decades. It has nothing to do with the ability to write or even the ability to create a coherent story. It's all about ideas.

I'm going to be honest here: Arthur C. Clarke the writer doesn't impress me much. Written while he was still impressionable about such thin ...more

15 likes · Like · see review

Jul 29, 2007 Wealhtheow rated it it was ok

Shelves: sci-fi

Arthur C Clarke cannot write a believable character, certainly not a female one.

9 likes · Like · see review

Sep 20, 2011 Daniel Roy rated it liked it

Shelves: sf, wwe-gmrc

As with many of the great SF classics, Childhood's End is chock-full of thought-provoking Great Ideas. The major fault of the novel, besides the imperfect writing and plotting, is the density of ideas, which end up overcrowding the plot and snuffing out dramatic tension.

Both Arthur C. Clarke's strengths and weaknesses are in clear display in this novel: the ideas are grand and breathtaking, while the prose and plotting are shoddy, borderline amateur.

It's easy not to mind the bad writing when the As with many of the great SF classics, Childhood's End is chock-full of thought-provoking Great Ideas. The major fault of the novel, besides the imperfect writing and plotting, is the density of ideas, which end up overcrowding the plot and snuffing out dramatic tension.

Both Arthur C. Clarke's strengths and weaknesses are in clear display in this novel: the ideas are grand and breathtaking, while the prose and plotting are shoddy, borderline amateur.

It's easy not to mind the bad writing when the narrative focuses on awe-inspiring alien ships coming to Earth to end all wars and cure diseases. Or, when the story takes a cosmic turn at the end, and reveals a startling, controversial vision of our destiny as a species. It's easy to understand why this novel launched Clarke as a writer, and why it remains an enduring classic. It represents the best of 1950s SF: deep thinking about future ideas and society-changing concepts, rooted in a firm sense of wonder.

Yet at many points in the novel, the main ideas just slip to the back, while we're being treated to things such as a Ouija session, or the exploration of a frankly boring artistic utopia. It feels like Clarke was trying to cram every idea that came to his mind, and in so doing forgot the main themes driving his story forward. It doesn't help that the characters are flat to the point of being mere sketches, and that Clarke seemed intent to pad his writing with as many useless details as he could think of.

As with any novel from the 1950s, especially SF, there are some amusing bits that date the novel. But thankfully, they are pretty minor. I definitely was puzzled when the Overlords intervene to stop racial conflict in 2000s South Africa by protecting the persecuted white minority. Really?! There was also the awkward statement that future Earth was free of racism, as exemplified by the fact that people now used the N-word openly and without malice. But the most grating idea was when the Overlords state that science was a 'gift of the Western minority' to the rest of the world. That being said, bravo to Clarke for having one of his protagonists be of mixed heritage, then dropping the issue of his skin color entirely from the rest of his narrative.

My main disappointment with the ending of the novel is (view spoiler)

Overall, "Childhood's End" is a great SF novel of ideas, and it's clear why it's a classic. It helps to abandon expectations of great plotting and writing, and instead soak in the thought experiments that Clarke has woven around his many great SF concepts. The ending of the novel is thought-provoking, controversial, and open to a lot of debate and discussion, making the mostly pleasant journey to get there worthwhile. ...more

4 likes · Like · see review

May 14, 2008 Lori rated it really liked it

I read this quite young, 11 or 12. This is the book that started my path of sf. This and Star Trek are the foundations of my hopes for the future, even more so now with the way the world is. Somebody save us!

1 like · Like · see review

Apr 02, 2012 Suz rated it liked it

Shelves: audiobook, science-fiction, award-winner, grand-masters, among-others-biblio, grand-masters-2012-challenge

I’ve been recommended this book a number of times and I just can’t get on board with it. The writing is choppy and a bit sloppy. I feel like whenever the author couldn’t flesh something out, he just let his little characters get expositiony and explain it to us (or he did) because he couldn’t think of a better way. There’s a lot of “tell, not show.”

It’s a book written in three parts: The first is pretty simple, with the USSR and USA each racing to the stars when giant spaceships appear and the I’ve been recommended this book a number of times and I just can’t get on board with it. The writing is choppy and a bit sloppy. I feel like whenever the author couldn’t flesh something out, he just let his little characters get expositiony and explain it to us (or he did) because he couldn’t think of a better way. There’s a lot of “tell, not show.”

It’s a book written in three parts: The first is pretty simple, with the USSR and USA each racing to the stars when giant spaceships appear and the planet is taken over by these “Overlords” - benevolent dictators who are protecting us from within and without. You have to do what they say, but they place few restrictions, although I do find it interesting that we can’t unnecessarily hurt animals, but the entire patriarchal society is AOK with our masters. The whole time this is going on, I felt that the story was very “Colonialism, yay!” There’s a little push-back from untrusting humans, but the Overlords promise to reveal themselves in 50 years and that put an end to that (what?!).

The next part is the Golden Age, where the Overlords (who are revealed to (view spoiler)) help us camp out and just be happy in our utopia. Proving to me that one man’s utopia is another (woman’s) dystopia. Everything is taken care of, necessities are free, and we are free to play sports, study, work, and do whatever we want. In this Utopia, there are no more religions (yay!), and yet it appears that whole social constructs of the 50s are fully in tact. Sure, you can have your flying car, but your woman better be over there and keep her mouth shut. Oh the sexism, it burns. And the entire thing is very Western civ. So yeah, we have Western civ, privileged white dude writes about the future being a western civ white dude’s utopia. Ok, just kidding... maybe... but this book is RIFE with sexism and ample western civ sensibilities. There’s a bit in here about the Overlords being curious about psychic stuff, which is interesting. A little bit more plot shenanigans.

The final part is about the future evolution of mankind, which I can’t get into very much without spoiling the whole thing (as it's the only interesting part, in my opinion), but it’s all rather depressing, or awesome, depending on how you look at it. The Overlord’s endgame is laid out and so is the future of humanity.

I just find it odd, and funny, how we can have flying cars and awesome things and talk about the next step or evolution of man, but social constructs can’t change. I found it distracting, but the book is very much a book of ideas, and I could see how it might be interesting when it was written. As for me, I wasn’t overly impressed. Great ideas were in there, I just wasn’t thrilled with the execution.

The interesting ideas expressed are the ONLY thing that bumped it from "meh" to "interesting" (or as GR calls it "liked"). ...more

Like · see review

Mar 25, 2011 Joan rated it liked it

Another adored classic of my youth downgraded upon rereading. Thoughtful story and an interesting concept (if handled properly it should be a ripping television drama). The writing...not so much. Clarke was not a stylist. He often drops out of the narrative to lecture his readers on science and other subjects; he's not alone in that, it was a recurring flaw in SF of the era. Clarke's science credentials were impeccable but his economic theories were naïve fuzzy-think and as usual in star-spannin ...more

Like · see review

Feb 27, 2011 Taueret rated it liked it

Shelves: speculative-fiction, sci-fi, audiobook

Maybe one of the first "singularity" stories? Interesting and thought provoking, but post-singularity existence still doesn't ring my bells. I like to think about it, wouldn't want to have to live it. ...more

Like · see review