Rendezvous with Rama
discussion
What do you think the author meant with the last line of the book -
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Johny
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Apr 04, 2011 02:33AM
The Ramans do everything in threes.
reply
|
flag
I'm with Gerd. The Ramans would have sent out three ships. (Not necessarily through our solar system, of course, but maybe they did.)
If I'm not mistaken, he explained what he meant in the foreword to the sequel. I think he just thought it was clever ending line at the time.
I tend to agree - this is a clever way to end up the book, and it is a a plausible hint of the possible sequel. And yes, there more things to come for the people of Earth. 'There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy'
He wasn't intending on writing another three books when he wrote that line, it was just a typical open ending.
Well as it turned out in the sequels, its good he left it open with that. Besides, it does fit in as everything on the first ship was done in threes.
I think given the excitement that the character is feeling, I would side with the theory that another Raman craft was coming through the solar system.
He said it was almost an afterthought to add it in but I like it. It does what all good fiction should, it sparks your own imagination to fill in the rest. After we all finished Rama I bet we all had a good idea of where it could have went and I bet alot of those ideas were really different. That's the beauty of the last line.Now if only he hand't given Gentry Lee rights to ruin what could have been the most epic sci-fi trilogy ever written.
Darren wrote: "Now if only he hand't given Gentry Lee rights to ruin what could have been the most epic sci-fi trilogy ever written."Amen to that!
I liked the sequels- I could tell, however, what was written by Lee and what words were from Clarke- so it was not exactly a seamless collaboration. IMHO
That there were two more coming, which is precisely what the follow up books were about. Have you not heard of Rama II or Garden of Rama?
The books in the series following Rendezvous With Rama weren't nearly as good. Gentry Lee is a good writer, but not like Clarke.
i read the Rama series years ago and remember really enjoying it but i think its time for a re-read to see if they still stand up to what i remember.I read Rama again last week and its brilliant. Everytime i read or re-read clarke i love them.
The problem with the sequel isn't the writing. Lee is an okay writer. The problem lies in the plot, characters, world creation, incoherence and general lack of ideas. There seems to be nothing of Clarke in them except his name. On the other hand, Clarke was involved in worthwhile projects so undoubtedly he put the money to good use.
Marian wrote: "The problem with the sequel isn't the writing. Lee is an okay writer. The problem lies in the plot, characters, world creation, incoherence and general lack of ideas.Isn't that what writing is, plot, character, world creation, etc.? So in other words, the problem is in Lee's writing.
I read both books many years ago, it only took a couple chapters to see Lee's writing skill was not up to Clarke's standard. Mediocre at best.
Rama II is the book I finally learned to quit picking up "collaborative effort" novels. It was apparent early on that Clarke had little involvement. Even if the last line of Rendezvous had meant there would be three novels, Rama II killed it for me.
Gerd wrote: "Darren wrote: "Now if only he hand't given Gentry Lee rights to ruin what could have been the most epic sci-fi trilogy ever written."Amen to that!"
I agree wholeheartedly with that thought. I thought I was the only one who felt that way.
Oh no, Sameerah, I think it is probably fair to say that the majority of people who liked/loved Rama felt at least much less enthused with the sequels. I have only read Rama II and was inspired to read the third.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic


