Re: Clarke - two questions

Matthias Warkus wrote:
> Mike Schilling schrieb:
>> "Matthias Warkus" <Warkus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>> news:frrv5c$1906$4@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Mike Stone schrieb:
>>>> "Anthony Nance" <nance@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>>> news:frrjbq$4kq$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> Today's USAToday has a very nice half-page appreciation article
>>>>> (written by Cesar G. Soriano, special for USAToday).
>>>>>
>>>>> There's an in-set box titled "1953-73: A Collection of Clarke
>>>>> Titles", and subtitled "Arthur C. Clarke's expansive body of 
>>>>> work
>>>>> includes these seminal titles:".  Listed are these five works:
>>>>>
>>>>> - Childhood's End
>>>>> - The City and the Stars
>>>>> - The Nine Billion Names of God (collected short stories, 
>>>>> 1951-56)
>>>>> - 2001: A Space Odyssey
>>>>> - Rendezvous With Rama
>>>>>
>>>>> It is not said why they stuck to 1953-73.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They were being kind - sticking to (roughly) the period when he
>>>> could still
>>>> write.
>>> For a sufficiently low value of "write". Clarke's works, when they
>>> are good, are good in spite of having been written by him, not
>>> because of it.
>>
>> That's a silly thing to say, unless you're using a very restricted
>> meaning of "write".
>>
>> "Let's see, I'd like Clarke's ideas, with Clarke's method of
>> presenting them, and Clarke's sense of humor, but use Jack Vance's
>> vocabulary."
>
> Style just wasn't his thing. His humour is heavy-handed and not very
> funny, IMHO.

Never read the Tales from the Whie Hart?