On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:34:31 -0700, Ron Wanttaja wrote:

My personal opinion is that Clarke fall excelled in the extrapolation of
technology and predicting what the scientific/human impacts would be. However,
the *people* in his novels always seemed pretty stiff. Heinlein was better with
characterization; inventing interesting people to interact with the technology.

Reading Clarke, in the early 60s I thought that was the way the
advanced, scientific community, ultimately the populace, was to be.
Focused, time concerned, mission oriented. When I watched 2001 (1970?),
the characters were wooden, almost unreal. The emotional star was a
computer, I took from these characterizations that this was the world I
would grow old and accustomed. Analytical and godless.

The earliest Clarke novel I remember reading is "A Fall of Moondust," as a
Reader's Digest Condensed book back in the '50s or '60s. Though I read it many
times and remember the plot real well, I remember little about the characters.
But I can see a Heinlein title and say, "That's the one with the guy who...."

Ron Wanttaja

My first Clarke was a RD and it set RD apart from all other subscription
magazines at the time.

From then to here, RD jokes and articles to email, globalization of
communication. I know for a fact that my own fascination with the
future, and interest in technologies, spawned directly from the works of
Clarke and those like him.
--