Beyond the Fall of Night

by Arthur C. Clarke, Gregory Benford

Diaspar è l'ultima città rimasta sulla terra. Circondata da altissime mura la città-fantasma ospita gli ultimi rappresentanti del genere umano che con- ducono un'esistenza drammaticamente monotona, dominati dai robot e tormentati dal ricordo del loro remoto passato. Uno solo di essi Alvin, avverte l'ormai sconosciuta ansia di conoscere, aspira a uscire dal buio che lo opprime. Riu- scirà nel suo intento, la sua iniziativa che comporterà il sacrificio della sua vita, avvierà il riscatto e la rinascita per il genere umano.

Genres: Science Fiction, Fiction, Science Fiction Fantasy, Speculative Fiction, Ebooks, Collections, Amazon

298 pages, Hardcover

First published July 17, 1990

About the author

Stories, works of noted British writer, scientist, and underwater explorer Sir Arthur Charles Clarke, include 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968).

This most important and influential figure in 20th century fiction spent the first half of his life in England and served in World War II as a radar operator before migrating to Ceylon in 1956. He co-created his best known novel and movie with the assistance of Stanley Kubrick.

Clarke, a graduate of King's College, London, obtained first class honours in physics and mathematics. He served as past chairman of the interplanetary society and as a member of the academy of astronautics, the royal astronomical society, and many other organizations.

He authored more than fifty books and won his numerous awards: the Kalinga prize of 1961, the American association for the advancement Westinghouse prize, the Bradford Washburn award, and the John W. Campbell award for his novel Rendezvous with Rama. Clarke also won the nebula award of the fiction of America in 1972, 1974 and 1979, the Hugo award of the world fiction convention in 1974 and 1980. In 1986, he stood as grand master of the fiction of America. The queen knighted him as the commander of the British Empire in 1989.

Reviews

[Stewart Tame · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is more about ideas than action.

We open in the far future. What’s left of humanity is confined to a single, magnificent city: Diaspar. The rest of the world seems to be a vast desert. Alvin--only a boy when the book begins--dreams of exploring the world beyond the city, but society frowns upon such dreams. It's not even certain how one could exit the city. There seems to be no break in the walls that enclose it. There are hints of some sort of ancient battle fought against alien forces known simply as “the Invaders. “ But, as with leaving the city, the very subject seems to be taboo …

I don't think it's revealing too much to say that Alvin does eventually leave Diaspar, and his actions eventually have dire consequences that are explored in Gregory Benford’s portion of the book. The entire book is essentially a travelogue, first of Alvin’s journey, and then of Cley, a genetically engineered Ur-human who ventures off-planet in an attempt to escape from … but you’ll have to read the book for that.

Of the two halves of the book, I think I enjoyed Clarke's original novella the best. Alvin’s journey is a classic SF tale, well told. If it has any faults it is that it's rather smoothly linear--what propels the reader through the story is not anxiety over what's going to happen to Alvin, but rather curiosity over what he's going to find next. There are very few conflicts along the way; he just kind of goes places and does stuff. This is not a thrill ride.

In Benford’s portion of the book, we once again have a journey, this one a bit more thrilling since Cley’s on the run. But he seems to be going out of his way to keep hitting the reader with Mind-Blowing Concepts. I can picture him in my mind’s eye telling Clarke, “Right, old man. This is how we science fiction nowadays!” (I'm exaggerating to make a point here. Nothing I can glean from this book suggests that Clarke and Benford had anything other than a deep respect for each others talents.) The effect is somewhat akin to going from a folk acoustic number to a heavy metal version of the same song.

On the whole, this wasn't a bad book, just not a terribly memorable one. I know Clarke has written better, and I rather suspect Benford has as well. Do check it out if you're a fan of either’s work, but it's probably best not to expect too much.

[Stephen Collings · Rating 1 out of 5]

Mr. Benford spent several very boring pages in his sequel describing this fantastical ecosystem on the moon. Unfortunately, the moon was BLOWN UP in the first book. Disintegrated. Death Star to the head.

Does Benford even read the novels he tries to write sequels to? Honestly?

[Mark Yashar · Rating 4 out of 5]

The first half of this novel is Aurthur C. Clarke's classic "Against the Fall of Night"; the second half is a sequel written mostly by Benford, I believe; incredible imaginations; an inspiring vision of a galaxy filled with bizaare biological organisms, structures and forms the size of planets in some cases (!)

[Tomislav · Rating 3 out of 5]

Arthur C. Clarke’s Against the Fall of Night first appeared as a novella in Startling Stories November 1948. In 1953, that was expanded and published in book form. But by 1956, Clarke had substantially rewritten the novel, and published it with the new title of The City and the Stars, intending it to replace the earlier versions. But the original remained popular. In 1990, with Clarke’s permission, Gregory Benford wrote a sequel to the original entitled Beyond the Fall of Night. And in case that wasn’t enough, in 2004, Gregory Benford rewrote that as a new novel titled Beyond Infinity. These versions are all substantially different. This review is for 1990 Beyond the Fall of Night.

Part I of Beyond the Fall of Night is the entirety of Arthur C. Clarke’s 1953 Against The Fall of Night. I had just finished The City and the Stars, and was continuously comparing the two. Many specific events and characters are quite different, while other passages are identical. In this older version, the young perspective character Alvin, is portrayed as a boy rather than a young man born into a mature body, and the culture of the last city on Earth, Diaspar, is without the speculations necessary to make that sort of person possible. However, the overall plot arc is the same, as something in Alvin drives him to challenge the barriers that have confined humanity for over a billion years. . When the true deep future history of humanity is revealed abruptly to Alvin and to the reader in the final chapter, important aspects of the cosmological situation are found to be unresolved - a set-up that calls for a sequel.

Part II of Beyond the Fall of Night is a newer (1990) follow-up novella by Gregory Benford. You know you are no longer in a 1950s Clarke novel when the opening sentence is “The naked woman seemed to be dead.” Cley is the last surviving wild-living Ur-Human after an attack on her tribe that is nearly incomprehensible to her. It is an Earth only a few centuries after the close of Part I. Under the supervision of the Supras, Earth is undergoing a biological rejuvenation. The Supras being the advanced humans of which Alvin is one; the Ur-Humans being a genetically reborn species of human only somewhat more advanced than us. Add to that Seeker of Patterns, an advanced being which appears to be an intelligent distant descendant of racoons. Cley is key to the resolution of a cosmic conflict between non-material intelligences dating back to the Ur-Humans before the founding of Diaspar, billions of years ago. Reader, please understand, a billion years is a long, long time. This novella, while re-using a couple of character names and situations introduced near the end of Clarke’s original, is disjoint from it. It takes place in a more multifaceted universe in a more hyperbolicly developed deep future. Notably, Benford has a biologically populated and evolved Moon, while Clarke had previously obliterated it. It would probably be better to describe this novella as “based on” rather than “sequel to” After The Fall of Night.

I read this because it is mentioned in Lecture 4 “Evolution and Deep Time in Science Fiction” of Gary Wolfe’s video lecture series How Great Science Fiction Works. Unless one is consciously studying this topic, I would recommend reading either The City and the Stars or Beyond the Fall of Night, but not both like I did.

[Raja99 · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not sure how to rate this one. If I remember correctly, the American edition has deceptive cover blurbs implying that it's a novel-length collaboration between Gregory Benford and Arthur C. Clarke; in reality, it's an omnibus pairing Clarke's sublime first novel, Against the Fall of Night , with Benford's not-nearly-as-good sequel written 37 years later. (The UK editions referred to the same book as Against the Fall of Night / Beyond the Fall of Night .)

Though I haven't read it in decades, I loved Against the Fall of Night, and it's one of the two books (along with Bradbury's The Halloween Tree ) that made me a lifelong reader in general, and a lifelong reader of SF in particular. In terms of the goodreads rating scale, "It was amazing."

Beyond the Fall of Night was rather less to my tastes. It didn't feel like it really fit as a sequel to Against the Fall of Night in style, scope, content, or characters. Clarke's novel is about a naive young boy, told in a way that appeals almost perfectly to naive young boys (as I was when I first read it). The setting and prose are austere, and dominated by elegant machine-based technology that largely gets out of the way. Benford's sequel is about a slightly shell-shocked young woman in a lush, riotous setting where biology dominates. In any case, that's my recollection; which may be wrong--frankly, I didn't find the book all that memorable, and I'm in no hurry to reread it. From what I'd recall, I'd give it a rating of "It was ok" on the goodreads scale--or maybe even less than that.

One thing I do recall clearly--and really disliked--in Benford's sequel was a huge contradiction between one of the features of his setting and Clarke's. The contradiction clearly showed that the two stories could not be set in the same universe--it knocked me out of the story, and made me wonder if anyone had bothered to read the stories back to back before publishing them. My wife was bothered by the same contradiction when she read the book years later.

[Tom Kiefer · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fascinating 1953 Arthur Clarke novella with an odd 1990 Greg Benford sequel.

Clark's original Against the Fall of Night novella: 4 stars.

Benford's sequel "Part 2" story: 2.5 stars.

[Mace Reynr · Rating 2 out of 5]

I guess I'm just not an Arthur Clarke fan.

Most reviews of this books extoll the value of Clarke's original story and pan the poor execution of Benford's sequel. I found it to be more or less the opposite.

Clarke's original chapter was the kind of science fiction that really wears on me; a slow, tedious journey into seemingly nothing. I mean, hundreds of pages to tell a simple tale of a child leaving a city and discovering more to what he once perceived of the world.

Benford's part on the other hand is infinitely vaster, stretching far beyond the constrains of Earth into essentially the discovery of a new God.

So, Clarke's part I found kind of boring, but at least he had set up a template for Benford to work with. Benford on the other hand I found confusingly transcendent for most of the time. Once the travelers first move from Earth to Space at the hands of the colossal pinwheel, I was struck by irritated disbelief for a long time before my mind adapted to the grand scheme of things again.

The ending was sudden, but apropos for the scope Benford was going for.

Overall, this was just okay. I would not be seeking out something like it again however.

[Skylar · Rating 2 out of 5]

I really want to rate this higher, and I would if it were published separately. Unfortunately, while the actual Beyond the Fall of Night plot is quite interesting and engaging (Benford clearly let his creative imagination and humor run wild), there are some critical flaws:

First, the synopsis implies this was a collaboration between Clarke and Benford. As far as I can tell, it's not; rather, it's a re-publishing of Against the Fall of Night (Clarke) coupled with Beyond the Fall of Night (Benford).


Second, the inconsistencies between the Against and Beyond make the latter come off more like fan fiction than a sequel. According to legend in Against, the moon was destroyed long ago by the Invaders, yet it's intact (without explanation) in Beyond, and plays a pivotal part in the plot. In other legend in Against, the Mad Mind was trapped in a "black sun" at the edge of the galaxy, but that was rewritten (with barely more explanation than the moon's existence) to be in the center of the galaxy.


I was certainly entertained by Beyond, but simply can't get beyond the flaws in Benford's plot.

[Angela Randall]

We really own this as an omnibus: Against the Fall of Night/Beyond the Fall of Night

[Mike S · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is a great read: an intriguing mix of science and a possible future that is immensely imaginative.

[tim · Rating 3 out of 5]

i give this 4 stars for the part I, Clarke's original story "Against the Fall of Night", but give part II, Gregory Benford's sequel to the original story, 1 star.

[Craig MacKinnon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Arthur C. Clarke was the man who popularised the term "the technology of an advanced culture will be indistinguishable from magic." The best science fantasy writers know this - George Lucas and Asimov make no attempt to explain lightsabres or positronic brains. And Clarke, of course, makes no attempt to explain the technology of an isolated Earth city 2 billion (or thereabouts) years into the future. Instead, the first half of this book gives us an entertaining and light voyage through a society stagnated by immortality and robot-assisted ease. When Alvin, the first child born in thousands of years, rebels against this society, we are taken along for the ride. He learns that his city of Diaspar is not the only community left on the planet, and he makes further discoveries that are fun to read about.

This part of the book is a reprint of Clarke's Against the Fall of Night, which was written early in his career and shows it. It is fast paced (perhaps to a fault), and we're surprised at the naivete of all the characters at one time or another. However, it's fun for a light read and recommended. The second half, written by Benford, is supposed to be a sequel, but bears absolutely no resemblance to Clarke's work. There are a number problems. Firstly, only 2 characters from Clarke's work survive, and they are relegated to supporting roles. Secondly, Benford makes the mistake of focussing on technology that is built 2 billion years in the future. This technology is used to fight the superbeing known as the Mad Mind, an energy-based species without physical form, but it's inherently silly to pit airplanes against a mental force. Finally, the "good" mentalic creature, Vanamonde, is ignored, even though its purpose from the first story is to fight the Mad Mind.

As a sequel, Benford's work is a disaster. Unfortunately, read on its own merits, it is no better. The main character is chased around and exposed to situations she doesn't understand, and she grows angry and frustrated at her experiences. We, as readers, share her anger and frustration. In the end, all that happens to her is a tour through the solar system. It's a whirlwind tour, however, so we are simply bombarded with images and it becomes boring.

I can generally rate books based on how long it takes to read them. The first half took a few days. The second half took a few weeks. Even television was more interesting!

[John Lockwood · Rating 3 out of 5]

I bought a copy of The Lion of Comarre and Against the Fall of Night many, many years ago. Against the Fall of Night was so good that I struggle to remember the plot of the other story so involved was I in Against the Fall of Night. I later bought the expanded City and the Stars version.

I thought I later bought Beyond the Fall of Night but it looks like it was a library copy I remember reading. I must say I was disappointed with it, even ignoring the glaring mistake of resurrecting the moon, it simply did not give the same feel as the original and hence was a disappointment.

Interestingly, in the introduction, Arthur C. Clarke reveals that at the same time Gregory Benford asked to write this sequel another author Damien Broderick also wrote asking if he could write a sequel. In the introduction Arthur C. Clarke wrote …perhaps in another decade…

It would be interesting to see if Damien would still be interested in doing so, and perhaps also writing some prequels e.g. the story of the fall of the moon and its destruction by Shalmirane.

Unfortunately I could not find a website or contact details for Damien Broderick otherwise I might write to him suggesting this.

Whilst others may feel sequels written by different authors are always going to be a disappointment I did find Null-A Continuum by John C. Wright a worthy sequel to the series written by A. E. van Vogt.

[Dan · Rating 2 out of 5]

The first half of this book, written by Clarke, is at best a mediocre sci-fi story taking place far enough into the future to make Sagan blush. Little direction, puzzling exposition, and an uninspired ending; 'it was ok'.

Not to be outdone, the second half of the book, written by the then-UCIrvine physics prof Gregory Benford, takes the cake. If his goal was to diminish Clarke's already lackluster work, then mission accomplished. I get the feeling Benford was immensely proud of himself for coming up with such an outlandish and vaguely-scientifically grounded mishmash of ideas and concepts; as if the author did not know what he wanted the story to be, he just wanted to write the story and cram it full of all the pseudo-scientific Gnostic beliefs one would expect of a late-twentieth century secular academic. The final battle is at its core a DMT trip, and is arguably the strongest part of his contribution to the whole text.

Special mention: tentacle rape. Also, in all my years of reading I had so far never come upon a book that said 'fart' five times; thanks, Benford.

[Ed Tinkertoy · Rating 1 out of 5]

As I was reading the book "Against the Fall Of Night" I had the impression that I had read the book, or a similar story before. So I moved on to "Beyond the Fall of Night" and I was really confused because the book seemed to repeat, not exactly verbatim but close enough, the previous book. So I checked my Goodreads listing of books I have read and found that about 10 years ago I read the book, "City and Stars" which is just about the exact SAME story. So I have been hood-winked. The author has sold me the same story in three different books. So when I finished part one of this book I quit. The realization that I have been reading the same story over and over again just took away all of my enthusiasm for the book.

Plus, I found it difficult to transition from part one to part two. The authors could have made this a better book, and a much shorter book, by simply devoting a chapter or maybe two to the back story and then moving on to what is described in the book as Part Two.

[Ryan Shoemaker · Rating 3 out of 5]

The opening part is Clarke's Against the Fall of Night, and is 5 Star brilliance. The second part was frankly completely unenjoyable.

Latching on to the barest of threads and characters from the first, and telling a story that had little connection to that opening. It was in fact so bad that I'll likely avoid any Benford works in the future. 160 pages of buildup to a climax that lasts barely a moment and doesn't bring much satisfaction.

Most glaringly Benford spends a significant amount of time describing the new biosphere on the moon, which would be interesting if said moon hadn't been destroyed utterly in Part I. How do you make that sort of error? Do yourself a favor and read Part 1, then grab something else.

[Hannah · Rating 2 out of 5]

As another reviewer put it, the first half was compelling to read. The second half is an absolute struggle.

The second half: The style of writing is hard to parse, so you read it several times to try and understand what he’s describing. I struggled to imagine the (huge and impressive) world being described due to esoteric, flowery language which meant I was detached from the story. I ended up DNF when I realised I wasn’t enjoying it and had other books I was looking forward to more.

Also, how the heck do you write about only a particular species being hunted and at no logical point does the main character ask why?

[Robin · Rating 2 out of 5]

Diametrically opposite to Clarke’s original in style and tone, featuring borderline purple prose most of the time, this is an unusual book. It has an interesting focus on biological world building and a promising opening, but is ultimately almost entirely bereft of plot (especially in the second act). There are only a few characters, and none of them undergo any particularly meaningful journey. It’s just a jaunt through Benford’s admittedly fecund imagination. Not recommended for fans of the original, as it squanders most of the promise there in favour of very 90s biopunk stuff.

[Science and Fiction · Rating 1 out of 5]

Clarke’s original novella of this title was a C+ effort at best, written in 1956. I was hoping Benford would update it and take it in a more rational direction, but no, he uses the far-fetched ideas as a springboard for the most ludicrous ideas I’ve ever read in science fiction: giant flotillas of living forest in space, cosmic sharks, humans riding in giant spermatozoa and pissing on an egg to escape, a raccoon-like creature who turns out to be God itself. Somebody must have been on f-ing drugs!

[Terry Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Phew - that was exhausting! Much more than I was expecting, given the relatively straightforward plot of "Against the FoN".

One day I will have to read this again as I'm sure many of its details and subtleties passed me by. The characters of Cley and Seeker and quite sympathetic while that of Alvin is not; at least, compared to the first volume.

The breadth of thinking of how the species and the system might evolve in the distant future is quite breathtaking. This appears to go far beyond the usual SF scenario of, essentially, today's world but with FTL transportation.

[Wole Talabi · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoyed this book for what it was. An interesting novella set 1 billion years in the future and a follow up that was more interested in exploring the parts of the universe ignored by the first novella - namely, the biology of the far future, than in continuing the story of the first novella. 'Beyond the fall of night' is more a response to the 'against the fall of night', than a sequel, but enjoyable in its way.

[Peter Morell · Rating 1 out of 5]

Jeg kom kun igennem de første 8 (ud af 18) kapitler. Så smed jeg bogen ud. Det er noget af det værste usorterede sludder, som jeg nogensinde har læst.
Af en eller anden grund så forbindes Arthur C Clarke til denne bog, men det virker ikke til, at han har haft nogen som helst indflydelse på den.
Gregory Benford - hvem han så end er - har forsøgt at skrive videre på en Arthur C Clarke bog - det er der ikke kommet noget godt eller brugbart ud af…

[Christian Kern · Rating 3 out of 5]

Loved Clarke's beginning. Benford's continuation lacked action and was stuffed full of forced existential conversations trying to prove way too many points. His new protagonist was also irritably defiant (to a fault), underdeveloped, and makes no attempt to develop an ability that is somehow learned by the end of the novel.

[Phaedrav · Rating 4 out of 5]

More rewrite than expansion.
This story bothered me at first, because it has changed the original in several conflicting and incompatible ways. On reflection, most of the changes were improvements.

Read only this one instead of Against the Fall of Night, unless you want to read both as a literary exercise in comparison and a study of writing.

[Kataprofesor · Rating 1 out of 5]

Empecé a leerlo porque era un libro de Artur Clarke, y resulta que Arthur Clarke solo ha escrito el principio. El resto del libro es de otro y vaya si se nota, no hay por donde cogerlo. Es una segunda versión de otro libro de Arthur Clarke, la ciudad y las Estrellas. Ese si es bueno.

[Roger Burk · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a version of Clarke's "The City and the Stars," which enchanted me as a youngster, with an imaginative flight into a far future of interstellar minds uneasily grafted on. The second part reminded me of Stapleton's "Star Maker."

[George · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well at first it wasn’t clear that Beyond was actually After the Fall and THEN THE SEQUEL.

But it was good to refresh my memory on After.

Beyond though was a major disappointment, convoluted, and really just not very interesting

[Fabian · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fun fast read

Kept me on the dge of my seat kinda ad the the plt thickens if you are an aware person there's language here that points to what God is n how to connect with it what we all are

[Steve · Rating 3 out of 5]

Only three stars because of the sequel included with this. It just doesn't have the same feel as the first book. I know that it is another author, but it is too great a difference. Otherwise Against the Fall of night would be 4 stars.

[Sean · Rating 2 out of 5]

Regrettably I DNFed this at around 150 pages. The premise is quite interesting but the execution felt somewhat childish and I struggled to care about anything happening in the second half. Perhaps the original novella without the additional material from this expanded version is better.