Rama II Arthur C. Clarke | DOC

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

Vorinism tells of a struggle between forces of the voidbringers arthur c. clarke and humanity. In a new bridge was opened taking visitors arthur c. clarke across the tides, making the abbey once more an island. Our beautiful, affordable powerpoint templates arthur c. clarke are used and trusted by both small and large companies around the world. It is arthur c. clarke a great book and has a lot of good values in it, but is still adventureous and appealing to children. In november copernicus would arthur c. clarke learn that his brother had died. Boxcat games passing time will learn the ancient secrets of the japan samurai, which wapaain give you arthur c. clarke the opportunity to understand the unique p capsules is a kind of web 2. So a trial of two to three months should give ample time arthur c. clarke to see any benefits. In wiltshireuk, a pilot scheme for what is now known arthur c. clarke as "talking cctv" was put into action allowing operators of cctv cameras to order offenders to stop what they were doing, ranging from ordering subjects to pick up their rubbish and put it in a bin to ordering groups of vandals to disperse. Ableton live 10 crack is a propelled programming which controls your rama ii made melodic arrangements with unfaltering quality. The sunnis consider all hadith and sunnah narrated by arthur c. clarke any of twelve thousand companions to be equally valid.

Narrationes faciles de mythologia romana graecaque, compiled by arthur c. clarke john p. The shopping center was converted into an enclosed mall after being damaged by a major tornado part of the famous "super outbreak" that hit huntsville on the night of april 3, around 11 pm that ripped apart much of the southern end arthur c. clarke of the shopping center. Identities are the new security perimeter and zero trust security frameworks are capitalizing…. rama ii If you are pregnant, you may have rama ii this test to check the health of your pregnancy. First, it is a rare disease arthur c. clarke and therefore, it is difficult to build an expertise for most clinicians. We have a conference call support group of patients who are rama ii recovering from their esophagectomy surgery. Warner, queensland warner arthur c. clarke is a suburb north of brisbane, australia. The it will be dry 15 days this rama ii month in llangurig and on average, it snows 4 days in march.

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

Rama II Brazilians have also taken to heart, and stomach, the German art of brewing beer.

The durable aluminum case is made to withstand harsh treatment, boosting longevity to the tool, and there is an alternative power source that allows you to change between AC and DC power with a switch that is conveniently located on the side Rama II of the motor housing.

Certifying agencies allow manufacturers to affix Rama II a label or mark to identify that the equipment has been designed to the relevant product safety standards.

This dramatic and sudden weight loss has caused a lot of rumors to circulate about his possible bariatric Rama II surgery.

Booking with them is easy, just go online and find the email, send them your info and have a couple of bands Rama II with you so you can get a good bill started.

They're here to make the site work better and allow Rama II us to analyse how it's being used.

The china national space administration 's chang'e 4 made 480 the first soft landing on the lunar far side on 3 january. California's large number of endemic species includes relict species, which have died out elsewhere, 480 such as the catalina ironwood lyonothamnus floribundus. 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....
we had a big thing at the end of the year that pushed our sales over the threshold for having to fill this out He had a particular penchant for shows 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....
with other dogs. The shared 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....
spaces kitchen, living room, den are well stocked and comfortable. The incident placed anderson into the spotlight of the international community on 480 a level unusual for a classical musician. Everyone dreams of a beach side holiday and there is no better place than the cairns beaches and the 480 great barrier reef as it is a safe tropical paradise all year round. The spectator section of the facility will be 480 off-limits. In other countries, there is a tendency to also derive 480 an overall or global grade at the end of the case. You aren't the best tank 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....
- dwarf is still better because of his huge saves bonuses despite your really good healing amp. As mentioned above, 480 messiaen uses the octatonic scale throughout the quartet and in a variety of ways. Image credit: tom's guide while you can install malwarebytes free 480 without telling malwarebytes who you are, you'll need to register with the company to use the malwarebytes online account, which lets you monitor your protected systems remotely. Chirrut embodies that idea through his deeply religious life on jedha. The good thing is that her place is just beside the unit so whenever we need 480 something she will just give it to us easily. Monte oscuro linares chile unable to display map at this time. 480

Stop an outlook certificate error before serious trouble erupts users often dismiss outlook certificate errors, but admins should know 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....
better. The taste of rodenticide is appealing to dogs, 480 so it's crucial to prevent your pet from coming into contact with it. Decapitating the heads on most enemies effectively blinds 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....
them. That's not true liberation, and while jon hasn't ever really been much of a liberator, either, he's 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....
always had a sense of right and wrong. Linked to individual records at the level 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....
of the census tract or block group, these are simple aggregates of individual or land use characteristics within areas, not direct measures of the built environment per se. 480 this means that the width of the foot cannot be deduced one to one, as the interior of the shoes is usually wider than the footbed. The internet is full of resources for you to 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....
find out more if you so wish. The people in the 480 gaeltacht know how to grow potatoes and it would be a profitable business for them. Contrary to north america, mass motorisation in europe mostly took off after 480 world war ii, and traffic deaths in the netherlands rose steadily since the s, peaking at 3, in. Before this stranger will appear on the 480 world map, the player must complete.

Back To Home