Childhood's End

I read quite a few reviews before deciding to purchase this book. As surprised I was about the negative reviews, I do understand where they came from. However, that didn't stop me from giving this book 5 stars. One of the biggest complaints I saw was about the lack of character development. I think because the storyline spans well over 100 years and is told through different characters, you're really not going to get a ton of character development. Just enough to keep the storyline moving along. I think that worked well for this book but, obviously, many will disagree with me. Another criticism is that it has a dark, pessimistic view of human nature. This is very much true...at least, in the first part of the book. The Overlord, Karellen, tells humans they have "a notable incapacity for dealing with the problems of its own rather small planet." I'm a pretty pessimistic person and I agreed with every word of Karellen's speech. However, much later in the book, we discover that there is a kind of hope for the human race. The last major criticism was Clarke's incorporation of paranormal activities in the plot. I thought it was very interesting that he would throw that in there as well. It's explained much later in the book...suffice to say, science has not explained all the mysteries in life and maybe never will. At least, not in my lifetime. This book isn't for everyone. Some readers will downright hate it and understandably so. However, if you can get past these three main criticisms, I think it's definitely worth the read.

Probably my favorite SF book of all time. Written in 1953, and yet, the essential question posed by the story is still the definitive question we will face if confronted with a vastly superior life form, presenting fundamental changes to our existence. It starts out as a "strait" hard science early-SF novel, but morphs into so much more. I wish I could go into more detail, but that would be a HUGE spoiler. Read it. This is one of the VERY few SF novels that I recommend to my non-SF friends - and they have all loved it.

Early in life I read "Childhood's End" as an outstanding adventure story. Now as an old man I read it again. I believe Clark was looking for a solution to the question; "Where do we go from here?" The author was a barren atheist and socialist, like Karellen and the Overlords. Never in a million years being able to make the transition to the Overmind, or as we can call it; Servant of the Creator.As a mystic and Christian I tremble in fear of the transition. We have always known that the transition awaits us after our physical death. Some will make it to the other side but most will fall into the abyss weather they deny this or face the truth. Mystics, Christians and other religions have had their own Overlords for millennia to help them make the transition.I quote Karellen:"The origin of the universe might be forever unknown, but all that had happened since obeyed the laws of physics. ‘Yet your mystics, though they were lost in their own delusions, had seen part of the truth. There are powers of the mind, and powers beyond the mind, which your science could never have brought within its framework without shattering it entirely. All down the ages there have been countless reports of strange phenomena – poltergeists, telepathy, precognition – which you had named but never explained. At first science ignored them, even denied their existence, despite the testimony of five thousand years. But they exist, and, if it is to be complete, any theory of the universe must account for them....There is no way back, and no future for the world you know. All the hopes and dreams of your race are ended now. You have given birth to your successors, and it is your tragedy that you will never understand them"Highly recommended reading.I understand the negative reviews, this book is more of a philosophical work with a story in it and not at all a character-driven story.

I was going to read a couple chapters and go to bed. Next thing you know, its 9am and the book is finished. And I am now a different person. lol you know the feeling, its one of those. I would say this is his greatest book. Even better than the Space Odyssey books.CAREFUL, they just made a SyFy miniseries and even looking it up on IMDB blows major plot points from the pictures.

Clarke is best known for his work on 2001: A Space Odyssey. Childhood's End is not as well known but is a strong book with good science fiction concepts and hints of mysticism, exactly the combination that made 2001 worth endless midnight discussions.Aliens arrive on earth and they look sort of familiar to many humans. The question is how do humans react over time, and why are the aliens here? Along with all the standard trappings of science fiction - time and space travel, alien beings, Utopian civilization that may be too good to be true - there are plenty of biblical and apocalyptic references hurled into the mix. These elements are not suppose to work together - hard science and new age style ruminations are usually considered the opposite of one another. And yet Clarke's strong writing and good character development makes it work. A quick read but also with plenty to chew on.

The human race has taken its first tentative steps into space and is dreaming of visiting other planets, when its plans are changed forever by the arrival of alien spaceships. The aliens seem benign, although they quickly put an end to human space travel. They also end war and animal cruelty, and usher in a utopian period where no-one goes hungry and no-one has to work if they don’t want to. Known only as the Overlords, they don’t allow the humans to see them, communicating only by voice. It seems that they allow humans to organise their own affairs, but their influence over the United Nations (gradually becoming a world government) certainly steers things in the direction they want Earth to go. All the good results of their background rule mean that humanity is happy to go along, for the most part.But some people are aware that, without the struggle for survival and advancement, creativity is being destroyed and science is becoming moribund. So they set up a small colony, with the willing consent of the Overlords, where they hope to allow music, art and science to flourish. Still, however, no-one knows what the Overlords’ ultimate plan is – all they know is that they have promised to reveal themselves to humanity in fifty years...This is a book I wanted to love, but found didn’t live up to my expectations. Unfortunately most of the things that disappointed me a little will take me close to spoiler territory, so forgive any vagueness caused by my attempt to avoid that. The first and major thing is that I didn’t believe for a moment that humanity would happily submit en masse to a race of aliens who told us what to do, however apparently benign their intentions. We don’t even submit to our democratically elected governments half the time! When I said that the unelected UN was turning into a world government, did you think “oh, that’s a good idea”? No, nor me. So the fundamental premise of the book left me floundering around looking for my lost credulity before it even really got underway.The second thing is that the hidden appearance of the aliens is made much of, and when the big reveal finally happened, it made me laugh. I’m pretty sure it wasn’t supposed to! It was clearly intended to be all metaphysical and philosophical and stuff like that, but it just struck me as kinda silly, especially when Clarke attempted to explain the relevance. I understand from my friend Wikipedia that the idea originated in an earlier short story of Clarke’s, but that, although he changed all the meaning for the book, he left in all references to a different meaning from the short story. This probably explains why I found it messy and unconvincing. Plus it was signalled so far in advance that the only surprise was that it didn’t come as a surprise.The third thing may not be Clarke’s fault – the basic storyline felt as if I’d read and watched it a million times or so before. Still avoiding spoilers as much as possible, it’s the old theme of what will the end result of evolution be, and Wells was asking that question fifty years earlier. Clarke’s answer is different to Wells’ but similar to many others since then. Now maybe Clarke was the first – the book was published in 1953 – in which case I apologise to him. But it meant I wasn’t excited by it – I found it pretty predictable and it therefore felt as if it took an awful long time getting there.On the upside, it’s well written and the ending is left ambiguous, which makes it thought-provoking. With all of these how-will-humanity-end-up stories, the question has to be if it’s a future we would seek, or seek to avoid. Often authors tell us – the future is either utopian or dystopian; it’s decided for us in advance. Here that question is open, allowing the reader to use her own imagination to, effectively, write the sequel. I feel many sci-fi shows, films and books may have been trying to write that sequel for years, consciously or subconsciously. And, indeed, it’s a theme Clarke returned to himself in the later 2001: A Space Odyssey. It was after reading Childhood’s End that Stanley Kubrick invited Clarke to collaborate with him on the project that would eventually result in the book and film of Space Odyssey, and together they created a much better and more internally coherent story, in my opinion, while retaining that ambiguity which lifts this one above the average, despite my criticisms of it.Overall, then, it didn’t wow me as much as I’d hoped, but I’m still glad to have read it, partly because it’s considered a classic in its own right, and partly because I was intrigued to read the book that inspired Kubrick. The fact that Kubrick, who at that time was reading science fiction voraciously looking for inspiration, found the ideas original suggests to me that a major part of my disappointment comes from reading the book too late, after years of reading and watching other people creating variations on the theme.

The image of giant craft hanging over the cities of the world has such allure that many a Science fiction movie starts this way. Arthur C Clarke's opening may seem familiar to us now, through others over using it, but the mystery he weaves with what follows is where the magic of his story telling is unique. This version is revised (from the 1953 original) by Clarke himself; the new opening chapter and others passages put in to account for the rapid growth in space exploration in the decades after its original release and to revitalize the "dated" feel that Clarke felt it had acquired.The core of the story remains; the previously mentioned ships appearing over cities and the alien "Overlords" being initially unwilling to reveal their form to mankind.The Overlord "Supervisor" speaks only to the UN Secretary General, who is brought onto his craft for meetings in front of a blank screen. Karellen, as he is called, says that they will reveal their form only after 50 years have passed. In the mean time humanity's world is charged forever. Gone is war, famine, crime and most of the morbidity that plagues the human race. Countries become mere provinces of earth, religion virtually disappears. Mankind enters a Golden Age, Earth becoming almost a utopia.When Karellen reveals his form to the world there is initially shock, but soon it becomes accepted. There is still that nagging doubt though "Why are they here? What is their plan for mankind?"As the story unfolds, over decades, the question is always there. No single main character is followed we see the stages of the story through different eyes. The only constant is Karellen. Clarke tells an engaging and fascinating tale, full of questions about the nature of humanity. Why did the Overlords come? Are their motives as benign as they claim? Why do they share so much with humanity, giving them the gifts of peace and prosperity and advances in technology. Only to keep much from them and allow them only as far as the moon ( with strict Overload controls). Their enigmatic answer "The planets are for Man, but not the Stars" only fuels the curiosity of some.To tell more would only be a spoiler, so I would just say read it for yourself, it's wonderful. The journey it takes the reader, and indeed mankind, on is always engaging and often surprising. Clarke's ability to put incredible images onto the page then project them into the reader's head is magical.Wonderful storytelling.

Finally got around to reading this after having watched the three part TV adaptation. As ever, the book is better. Not Arthur C Clarke at his very best but still worth reading, more so considering it is over fifty years since it was first published. A seemingly benign alien invasion where war is no more, along with the end of starvation and inhumanity. The only price to pay is the end of the space race. Naturally it isn't a smooth ride for mankind. A fine addition to your sci-fi collection.Ray Smillie

It’s not surprising that this book is part of the ‘Gollancz SF Masterworks’ series. It really is a must read for all sci-fi fans as one of those early sci-fi books that set the standard for others to follow.The prophetic nature of this book, while quite nail-on-head in some ways, is quite funny at times as to how short it actually fell. For example, Arthur thought that it would take aliens to bring an end to wars, giving humanity peace ever lasting before we gave up striving to improve our lives and instead spending hours every day watching pointless programs on TV… Do you realize that every day something like five hundred hours of radio and TV pour out over the various channels? If you went without sleep and did nothing else, you could follow less than a twentieth of the entertainment that’s available at the turn of a switch! No wonder that people are becoming passive sponges — absorbing but never creating. Did you know that the average viewing time per person is now three hours a day? Soon people won’t be living their own lives any more. It will be a full-time job keeping up with the various family serials on TV!And yet here we are 60 years after this book was published and while no aliens have given us peace on earth and eternal leisure people are watching far more TV than Arthur predicted for our age of enlightenment. The 2018 veiwing figures for the UK is an average of over 4 hours a day. And that’s the average. Some people are watching far more than that as people like myself have no television at all and haven’t had for over 20 years.No it’s not taking aliens to bring an end to Homo sapiens, the wise man is doing a really good job of its own demise without any outside assistance whatsoever… ‘In a few years, it will all be over, and the human race will have divided in twain. There is no way back, and no future for the world you know. All the hopes and dreams of your race are ended now. You have given birth to your successors, and it is your tragedy that you will never understand them — will never even be able to communicate with their minds. Indeed, they will not possess minds as you know them. They will be a single entity, as you yourselves are the sums of your myriad cells. You will not think them human, and you will be right.Yes, we are becoming two separate species, with the old conservative Homo sapiens stuck in their ways, trying in vain to hold the world back while the progressive and future looking people are slowly evolving beyond the comprehension of those who cling to their ancient rights. It won’t be long now before Homo sapiens becomes extinct, because, as Arthur says, the stars are not for man.All that said, it’s a great book. Wonderfully written, thought provoking, intelligent sci-fi for progressive and future looking people who look towards the stars instead of into televisions.

I read this book in my youth, and remember how vivid and memorable some of the imagery was. The image of children round a pillar of light, that is the collective overmind has stayed with me until now.Recently I watched the TV series, and then re-read the book, as I wanted to see what had changed, and I couldn't remember the story. Whilst the TV series has the main events from the book, and some of the main characters, the flow is completely different, and the shape of the events is chronologically different, although the ending is roughly the same. A modern update.So, the book was first published in the 50s, and retains all that decades styles and attitudes. It has no modern 'realism' (or technology), and no 'action' sequences. It is largely historical/philosophical in nature, with some strong poetic imagery. Clarke dives in, on a personal level, to show people's reactions to the monumental events occurring to society. Those interactions with the characters are flawed by the dated writing, but are nonetheless not too distracting, merely giving it period feel. Like reading an HG Wells story.I still like this story. It carries the reader along, and never gets boring, even though it feels slightly old fashioned. The imagery is still inspiring, and of course, the idea of benevolent aliens is still different from the usual 'Alien/Predator' axis. For which I am very grateful!Read it yourself; it's not long, and if Science Fiction is your thing, then the ideas that Clarke creates are stunning. Well worth a read.