anansi reviewed on
Helpful Score: 2
Upon his death - I sought out the most recommended books of Mr. Clarke. This one was repeatedly listed as a favorite by some authors.
I did not like it, however. In the forward, Clarke practically says he made a mistake in writing it - because for a brief time a stage magician named Uri Gellar had convinced him that physic phenomenon was possible. Since that time, Clarke learned how Gellar did his tricks, and Gellar stopped calling himself a psychic. The book was embraced by C.S. Lewis because it makes a case for science being of limited scope, and the use of science being dangerous to our spiritual evolution. I may have enjoyed the book more if such thinking wasn't responsible for so many problems in the US - resulting in our culture's general disdain for science and preference for the supernatural.
In short - Clarke, as a science-based writer, was right to apologize. Its an irresponsible premise, and runs counter to understanding the human condition. I'm a bit bewildered at its being recommended by some respectable writers - I can only assume its because they were also fascinated with, and taken in by, spoon benders and other such characters, in their youth.
Also - there is plenty of his customary 'star child' theme - the man was apparently driven to distraction by the idea of humanity turning into magical star creatures. This makes for a good story once or twice - then becomes overly familiar to the reader.
two stars from me (of 5)
I did not like it, however. In the forward, Clarke practically says he made a mistake in writing it - because for a brief time a stage magician named Uri Gellar had convinced him that physic phenomenon was possible. Since that time, Clarke learned how Gellar did his tricks, and Gellar stopped calling himself a psychic. The book was embraced by C.S. Lewis because it makes a case for science being of limited scope, and the use of science being dangerous to our spiritual evolution. I may have enjoyed the book more if such thinking wasn't responsible for so many problems in the US - resulting in our culture's general disdain for science and preference for the supernatural.
In short - Clarke, as a science-based writer, was right to apologize. Its an irresponsible premise, and runs counter to understanding the human condition. I'm a bit bewildered at its being recommended by some respectable writers - I can only assume its because they were also fascinated with, and taken in by, spoon benders and other such characters, in their youth.
Also - there is plenty of his customary 'star child' theme - the man was apparently driven to distraction by the idea of humanity turning into magical star creatures. This makes for a good story once or twice - then becomes overly familiar to the reader.
two stars from me (of 5)
