A review by billymac1962
2010: Odyssey Two by Arthur C. Clarke

5.0

The first time I read 2010 was around 1987. I know this because that was the year that 2061: Odyssey Three was published in hardcover, and upon finishing 2010, I raced out and bought the new hardcover to read next.

1987 was the time when I began a serious deep dive into science fiction, and reading in general for that matter. I was just out of a relationship that stopped just short of the altar, and my beloved grandparents had just passed away. Reading became an escape for me (it still is, whether things are good or otherwise), and after a colleague had turned me onto a couple of sci-fi favourites, I was severely hooked on the sense of wonderment that the genre could promise.

This series stands out as one of those, and one of my retirement plans was to revisit it. 2001: A Space Odyssey lost nothing over 40 years for me. The sense of wonderment was there in living colour, and I understood the book and movie much better than I had before.

Ditto for 2010. Something I found interesting, but had forgotten about, was the forward where Clarke explains that this book was a sequel to the movie, rather than his novel. Therefore, Saturn was out of the picture. This installment of the series focuses primarily on Jupiter, which now, is something that really enhances the story for me.
You see, I'm a bit obsessed with Jupiter. Always have been. But when the Juno spacecraft sent back mind-blowing photos of the gas giant a few years ago, I became a lot obsessed with it.

Arthur C. Clarke's vision of Jupiter's clouds and storms is of course dated, being 1982 when he wrote this, but despite that, the imagery and imagination he portrays here was something that easily fell in mind with what we now know about it. It's unfortunate that he is no longer with us. I can only imagine the picture he could paint with what those incredible photos show. Regardless, he paints some amazing pictures.
This is what I love about Clarke. I read sci-fi, as I mentioned for a sense of wonderment. But, there are authors out there who are so overly descriptive that it's difficult to get the scope and imagery in your mind before you glaze over. Clarke always had a gift of descriptiveness with a relative economy of words, and would use perfect analogies
that paints a perfect picture and a sense of awe. There have been many nights while in a Clarke novel that I have lain awake visualizing his scenes, particularly from this series and of course, Rendezvous With Rama.

There are still many books of his I haven't read. I have read all of his best, probably, but I believe I will dip into more of his stuff.
But, they will have to wait for my re-read of 2061!

Five stars for the second time.