Rama II Arthur C. Clarke | PDF

Arthur C. Clarke

So. Two stars. That’s a really low rating for me. Normally, if I really don’t like a book, I just move on with my life. But this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

Sorry, I realize that I was just speaking Midwestern Understatement. What I meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

Is this an awful book? No.

Did I enjoy it? No. It frustrated me from the first page. From *before* the first page, actually. More than that, even. This book made me angry.

But is it a bad book in itself? No. Which is why I’m writing a review of it. To explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

First and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

For those of you who haven't read my review of the first Rama book, here's a link. This review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

For those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, I liked the first book. It's a very lean, tight piece of what I'd consider "Classical hard sci-fi" by which I mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

This sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: Gentry Lee. From what I've gathered, I think it's safe to say that Clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while Lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


What went wrong:

Ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to Rendezvous with Rama.

1. Enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

This book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. The structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

Now I don't mean to say that Gentry's writing is unpleasant. Honestly, his style is much more like mine than Clarke's is. So I can't throw stones.

The problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything Clarke did in the first book. Clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. And as I mentioned in my previous review, Clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (Almost).

The result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (Which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. Huge shift in tone.

In the first book, Clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. And by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

It’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. The story was optimistic and full of heroes. This makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

In the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which I mean they’re motivated by self-interest. There are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. A world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

The other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. In the first book, the characters are really clever. When investigating the alien ship, the Astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. They’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. They treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

For example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. But then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (Which has shown itself to be automated.) Also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. Because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

In the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. And when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “Holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

Well, everyone who read the first book, I’m guessing. And probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. Huge focal shift from the first book.

The first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. There were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. But all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

The sequel focuses on the characters themselves. There are twice as many, and nearly every character is a POV character at some point. And they all have backstories. And flashbacks. And ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

The odd thing is that I actually *like* this kind of book more. Character stuff is my bread and butter. But that's not why I started reading this book. I started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. But honestly? This book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

And if you think I'm just being pissy, consider this:

The original Rama was 243 pages long. But in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

But ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. It turns out Clarke wrote Rendezvous with Rama as a stand-alone novel.

He mentioned this in his introduction. And when I read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. As the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, Rendezvous with Rama was a great book. But as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. Half *dry* hand job. By a dumpster behind gas station.

Now this might seem a little harsh. But it really isn't. There's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. The main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

This is what I mean when I said this book disappointed me from before the first page. What I found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for Clarke as an author. I’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. I’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

But he didn't. And that is a betrayal of trust. It makes me go back and resent the book that I'd previously enjoyed. It actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (And I may. I'm not sure...)

This is also what I was referring to when I mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. It's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. It can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

And yeah. That's a spooky thing to me. And it lets me know that I'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

I actually bought the third book of the series. But I'm not going to read it. It's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. But I feel ill-used by Clarke. And there are many other books to read....

480

Greenhouse gas emissions calculations are courtesy of the united states environmental protection arthur c. clarke agency. Airplane boeing rama ii avianca with 2 classes and seats on board. Reporting, commissioning and billing tools are a significant rama ii time saver. A musical variety show featuring the biggest acts in arthur c. clarke rock-n-roll performing their latest hits. When ray hot wires the truck at the appliance store he puts arthur c. clarke two wires together, they spark, he twists them together and the truck starts. Shop our collection of custom, handcrafted succulent gardens a great no-fail gift ideaor stock up on a variety of small potted succulents rama ii to create your own. Proper post-mortem estate tax planning and preparation can help avoid audit problems and save significant tax liabilities arthur c. clarke in many instances. Local legend holds that the pillar is a rama ii piece of incense given by a deity to the ingenious tujia people. This string uses arthur c. clarke the powershell expression language syntax. Love — overly used, love still manages to be an rama ii excellent pet name. Do you hate the idea rama ii of being exposed to hacking and losing control over personal photos, video? Email entries for competitions should be rama ii sent to competitions timeout. He gave interviews to writer piers paul read, persuading him to write in arthur c. clarke his book the train robbers that the robbery was led by german commando otto skorzeny, and that edwards was the person responsible for hitting jack mills.

A living will or dnr rama ii allows you to make decisions for yourself in advance. Which is why the sleeper chair is such a great invention. rama ii The deadliest cage in the world is actually in my arthur c. clarke heart. Based on the data obtained, we examined rama ii the changes in salivary 5-fu levels associated with the administration of 5-fu and compared the data with those for blood and urinary levels. The control of the meeting was of the ones of conte, that arrived several times with danger arthur c. clarke before stefano sensi marked the in the minute. I watch afd members chomp cigars and clink cocktail glasses and shout anti-gay slurs at the crowd below. arthur c. clarke Hostels in bariloche hostels arthur c. clarke in bariloche can be a little pricey, but some of them are worth every peso. There are loads of quick jobs in rama ii the game as well that allow the players to deliver goods while being hired by a cargo company. rama ii users in the office and corporate settings will have to refrain from using windows 7 activator for their systems because the standard channels of information interchange between transactions and documentation require proper licenses. The dust deputy works well dealing with larger volumes since it separates the dust out into the bucket and it's quick and easy arthur c. clarke to dump the bucket out.

Format: pdf, epub, fb2, txt,audiobook
Download ebook:
Rama II.pdf
Rama II.txt
Rama II.epub
Rama II.fb2
Download audiobook:
Rama II.mp3

Rama II book

Vector illustration Rama II of a geometric tattoo front view of a bear s head and moon phases.

I do thank you for the link describing the different types of artichokes and to the Rama II mercato in Cagliari.

Tassello che non tiene Come risolvere il problema - Duration:. Rama II

Nearby, an energetic Rama II goat placed its hooves on an iron rail and craned its neck toward a photographer like a supermodel flirting with the camera.

I'm almost certain that I'm going to Rama II have to invest in one just to have a spare kicking around in the event my automatic goes belly up.

Gac travels to jefferson city, missouri to investigate the missouri state penitentiary, a prison which has seen suicides, riots, murders and brutal attacks which now are all kept as residual energy within the walls of the old penitentiary. Accessories a full range 480 of accessories to assist you in your door access projects. 480 pulsative sensation: in ulcers on female sexual organs. 480 this simple spreadsheet was designed at the request of an individual looking for an easy way to track daily business mileage so that they could report the information to their employer for reimbursement. When we experience an internal conflict, it is easy to identify the so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
opposing parts. Instead of a slice of pizza every friday from joe's on my street corner, i treated myself only once in the whole 30 days to the greasy delicious slice. so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
But both groups of participants were similarly so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
active and mobile by the end of the studies. In her so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
second season, morris guided ohio to the mac championship game for the first time since, compiling a overall record and finishing second in the conference. Made live ball hitting instruction popular with members looking so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
for steady improvement. Heidelberg vineyard "sunny side upon the bridge" vineyard "the sunny side upon the bridge" is our historical heidelberg vineyard, 480 home to a range of local wines, and stunning castle view. The nureyev mccann creates is a street urchin, a peasant-shrewd opportunist poised to grab anything that comes within reach. so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
The oil originated on the island of taihiti, in the south seas. Prior to joining the dubliners, he had spent a 480 few months in the chieftains. We should contact at midnight the person 480 in charge to ask internet password.

All orders ship express and usually arrive so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
within days from the shipping date. Brandon smith started acting at the 480 tender age of 8 years old. According to the latest us guidelines, cc screening should be carried out in all patients from the age of 21 years, with 480 conventional or liquid phase cytology, every 3 years. The iconic 480 street is famous for its own fashion revolution: punk rock. The best outcome you can hope for is 24hrs depending 480 on the area dispatching from and the remoteness of the recipient can add 24—48 hrs to that in the uk. The york and lancaster regiment was a line infantry so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
regiment of the british army that existed from until. Components of the lymphatic system lymphatic capillaries, relationship of lymphatic capillaries to tissue cells and blood capillaries lymphatic capillaries, details of lymphatic capillary routes for drainage of lymph from lymph trunks into thoracic and right lymphatic ducts, overall anterior view schematic diagram showing the relationship of the lymphatic system to the cadiovascular system thymus gland, 480 thymus gland of adolescent structure of lymph node, partially sectioned lymph node structure of the spleen, visceral surface structure of the spleen, internal structure. With so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
bigg boss 12 all set to kickstart next week, colors has decided to make some major programming changes. Turn on the camera connect the camera with so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
a network router using an ethernet cable. I know people in new haven who 480 would slap you upside the head, if they hear you say crap like that people would knock you silly. Another way to ensure integrity would be for alice to remember the mac of each so. two stars. that’s a really low rating for me. normally, if i really don’t like a book, i just move on with my life. but this one had elements that hit close to home for me.

sorry, i realize that i was just speaking midwestern understatement. what i meant to say was that this book is a tangible manifestation of my nightmares.

is this an awful book? no.

did i enjoy it? no. it frustrated me from the first page. from *before* the first page, actually. more than that, even. this book made me angry.

but is it a bad book in itself? no. which is why i’m writing a review of it. to explain this strange situation and to talk about the danger of sequels.

***

first and foremost, you need to know that this is a review of a sequel.

for those of you who haven't read my review of the first rama book, here's a link. this review will probably make better sense if you’ve read that.

https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...

for those of you who are too lazy to read and/or have a bizarre fear of clicking, i liked the first book. it's a very lean, tight piece of what i'd consider "classical hard sci-fi" by which i mean there's a focus on the science, and an emphasis of plot over character.

this sequel was written more than 15 years later in collaboration with a different author: gentry lee. from what i've gathered, i think it's safe to say that clarke provided some ideas for this sequel, while lee is the one who actually wrote the book.


what went wrong:

ultimately, everything that made me dislike this book stems from the fact that it’s a sequel to rendezvous with rama.

1. enormous stylistic shift from the first book.

this book was much longer (more than twice as long) and much more descriptive than the first book. the structure itself was much more meandering, and non-linear.

now i don't mean to say that gentry's writing is unpleasant. honestly, his style is much more like mine than clarke's is. so i can't throw stones.

the problem is that it’s almost the opposite of everything clarke did in the first book. clarke’s description is lean to the point of austerity. and as i mentioned in my previous review, clarke’s pacing and structure is so tight that it almost doesn’t allow room for tension. (almost).

the result is that this sequel doesn’t just feel entirely different. (which would be a big enough issue by itself) it’s that when held up against the first book, this one feels huge, loose, ponderous, and slow.

2. huge shift in tone.

in the first book, clark tells a story of humanity coming together and working against incredible odds to investigate a mystery. and by extension, improve the sum total of human knowledge.

it’s true that some people in the book react with fear, but wiser heads prevail. the story was optimistic and full of heroes. this makes it a book that’s hopeful about the future of humanity.

in the sequel, pretty much everyone is a bastard, by which i mean they’re motivated by self-interest. there are a few people that stand up to them… but that leads to an entirely different kind of story. a world where everyone’s a bastard except for 3 people isn’t an optimistic book.

the other huge change in character deals with the cleverness of the characters. in the first book, the characters are really clever. when investigating the alien ship, the astronauts move with great deliberation and forethought. they’re painfully aware of the fact that they don’t know what’s going on. they treat the alien ship with reverence, and are careful… well… not to be total dickbags when interacting with the ship.

for example, when investigating the ship, they talk about cutting through walls so they can see the inner working of the ship or the contents of some of the structures…. but then they don’t, because they realize that that could be viewed as aggressive by the ship (which has shown itself to be automated.) also, when they encounter creatures on the ship, they decide *not* to try and capture and/or kill them. because again, that would probably be seen as aggressive/destructive.

in the sequel, when they get onto the ship, almost the very *first* thing they do is try to attack/capture one of the creatures they see. and when it goes wrong a lot of the folks are like, “holy shit, who ever thought it would come to this?!?”

well, everyone who read the first book, i’m guessing. and probably anyone who wasn’t a total self-interested bastard, too.

3. huge focal shift from the first book.

the first book of the series was focused primarily on the ship itself. there were was some backstory to the world, and there was some information on the characters, too. but all of that was in service to the center of the story, which was about the aliens and the mystery of their ship.

the sequel focuses on the characters themselves. there are twice as many, and nearly every character is a pov character at some point. and they all have backstories. and flashbacks. and ulterior motives that have nothing to do with unraveling the mystery of the ship.

the odd thing is that i actually *like* this kind of book more. character stuff is my bread and butter. but that's not why i started reading this book. i started reading this book for answers to the mysteries that were brought up in the first book. but honestly? this book kinda didn't give a shit about the previously established mysteries at all.

and if you think i'm just being pissy, consider this:

the original rama was 243 pages long. but in this second book, the crew doesn't even get to the ship until page 170 or so.

but ultimately, here's the real dealbreaker for me....

4. it turns out clarke wrote rendezvous with rama as a stand-alone novel.

he mentioned this in his introduction. and when i read that piece of information, my initial reaction was genuine anger and disgust. as the opening to a three-part series that slowly unravels mysteries about a spaceship(s) and the alien race that created it, rendezvous with rama was a great book. but as a stand alone novel it has all the appeal of half a hand job. half *dry* hand job. by a dumpster behind gas station.

now this might seem a little harsh. but it really isn't. there's an enormous difference between a story that doesn't give you all the answers (either because of subtlety in the storytelling or because the answers will be coming in future books) and a story that has no answers to give. the main difference is that the latter story is utter bullshit.

this is what i mean when i said this book disappointed me from before the first page. what i found out in the introduction to this book actually made revise my opinion of the previous book, and lose respect for clarke as an author. i’d assumed he was teasing us with a mystery. i’d assumed he had answers he was going to give us eventually.

but he didn't. and that is a betrayal of trust. it makes me go back and resent the book that i'd previously enjoyed. it actually makes me want to go back in and change my rating of the book here on goodreads. (and i may. i'm not sure...)

this is also what i was referring to when i mentioned that this book is my worst nightmare. it's proof that a sequel can be more than a disappointment. it can retroactively ruin a book you had previously enjoyed.

and yeah. that's a spooky thing to me. and it lets me know that i'm right to be careful with my own sequels.

i actually bought the third book of the series. but i'm not going to read it. it's a rare thing for me to give up on a series like this. but i feel ill-used by clarke. and there are many other books to read....
file but then a hash would do just as well in this particular scenario. Strickland, a colonel who is in charge of the project to study the 480 asset ie: the amphibian man is a workaholic who is distant with his wife and children.

Back To Home