Scan barcode
jonwood's review against another edition
adventurous
funny
tense
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
4.0
This was a solid read, it's "The Martian" before "The Martian" was a book. Written by Clarke before the real life moon landing, this bool chronicles scientists efforts to keep people alive who are trapped on the moon. I appreciated the science details used without being overly dried or technical. I was wearily of reading another novel by Clark after reading all the Space Odyssey novels, with the exception of 2001, I found them all a bit too brief and dryly technical at times, but "A Fall of Moondust" proved to be a well paced adventure, with humor and science used as a way to inject realism, peril, without over powering the narrative.
barbtrek's review
5.0
I love Arthur C. Clarke. To me, his books are just pure, wholesome Science Fiction. There are no explicit sex scenes or gory murder scenes, just a bunch of awesome ideas and a great story.
ppetropoulakis's review against another edition
4.0
A fall of moondust is the 'Martian' novel of 1961. Set in a crisis situation on the lunar surface, a group of people need to survive hard vacuum and a catastrophic event. What's interesting about this book is the idea of the lunar surface being a quicksand powder. That was before man even stepped on the moon. Arthur Clarke later accepted that the novel was wrong about the lunar conditions but anyways the novel is a great suspenseful read even if wrong on the hard science.
modernviking's review against another edition
4.0
Love reading these old classic sci-fi novels, where they were so careful to work within the best known science of the times (deep lunar 'seas' of fine dust that would swallow anything on them) in ways that seem so wrong now. Can't wait to read novels of today in 50 years to see the same.
feanor451's review against another edition
adventurous
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? Yes
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.5
abibliophagist's review against another edition
3.0
During a break from my Hugo read-through, I found this at a HPB, the 1974 Signet cover is just so great it set my little illustrators heart a flutter and I had to have it.
I had never read Arthur C. Clarke before, it was published the same year as the last book I had read (and nominated the year I'm about to read), and the back sounded interesting and compelling. Add this all up with a love of hard SciFi and it's beautiful cover and you've got yourself a cocktail of excitement.
Unfortunately I hyped myself up a little too much for this book. I feel it really didn't age well, was weirdly paced, and employed a plot device that I really, really dislike. I've read many older science-fiction books, so it was hard for me to write off certain things to when it was written. The interactions of everyone on the Selene didn't feel like the future at all, it felt like his time period. It was like he didn't even try and consider what other options there may be. I found myself thinking " this is Arthur C. Clarke, he's as my BF calls it ' one of the big ones' how could I not be liking this". He split his time between the characters in a way to develop none past a paragraph introduction, and to keep neither interesting cause time was either spent way to long on other things or not enough at all.
But honestly I could forgive most of this, I could look past it and still really enjoy the book if it wasn't for one major, book ruining aspect that drives me crazy. Every potentially exciting thing, every major twist, every time you should feel scared or excited or worried, he warned you. I want to be surprised, I want raw feeling when I don't know what's going to happen. I want to not know until it happens. So when the author says " If only they knew what was about to happen" "If only they knew the the sea of thirst wasn't done with them" and even "Little did they know that this this and this were going to happen and ruin things again" I can't feel anything for the situation. I can't. Maybe it's me but I then brace myself and no longer illicit a proper, raw response. This takes me out of it completely. It makes it not exciting. I feel like I'm watching a movie with someone that whispers "Oh and this blah happens" right before it happens. I can't stand it.
So end of my rant. I feel like all the elements were here, the characters were interesting enough, the concept was solid and had it been paced better and had the author not been spoiling his own book along the way it could have been really really good. I also think it was unfortunate that I read Andy Weir's the Martian this year. He had weak characters but such a good story and delivery they could be forgiven.
I won't lie I'm disappointed, I don't know if it's in this book or in myself for not liking it. I wanted too, " He's one of the greats"
It just didn't do it for me.
I had never read Arthur C. Clarke before, it was published the same year as the last book I had read (and nominated the year I'm about to read), and the back sounded interesting and compelling. Add this all up with a love of hard SciFi and it's beautiful cover and you've got yourself a cocktail of excitement.
Unfortunately I hyped myself up a little too much for this book. I feel it really didn't age well, was weirdly paced, and employed a plot device that I really, really dislike. I've read many older science-fiction books, so it was hard for me to write off certain things to when it was written. The interactions of everyone on the Selene didn't feel like the future at all, it felt like his time period. It was like he didn't even try and consider what other options there may be. I found myself thinking " this is Arthur C. Clarke, he's as my BF calls it ' one of the big ones' how could I not be liking this". He split his time between the characters in a way to develop none past a paragraph introduction, and to keep neither interesting cause time was either spent way to long on other things or not enough at all.
But honestly I could forgive most of this, I could look past it and still really enjoy the book if it wasn't for one major, book ruining aspect that drives me crazy. Every potentially exciting thing, every major twist, every time you should feel scared or excited or worried, he warned you. I want to be surprised, I want raw feeling when I don't know what's going to happen. I want to not know until it happens. So when the author says " If only they knew what was about to happen" "If only they knew the the sea of thirst wasn't done with them" and even "Little did they know that this this and this were going to happen and ruin things again" I can't feel anything for the situation. I can't. Maybe it's me but I then brace myself and no longer illicit a proper, raw response. This takes me out of it completely. It makes it not exciting. I feel like I'm watching a movie with someone that whispers "Oh and this blah happens" right before it happens. I can't stand it.
So end of my rant. I feel like all the elements were here, the characters were interesting enough, the concept was solid and had it been paced better and had the author not been spoiling his own book along the way it could have been really really good. I also think it was unfortunate that I read Andy Weir's the Martian this year. He had weak characters but such a good story and delivery they could be forgiven.
I won't lie I'm disappointed, I don't know if it's in this book or in myself for not liking it. I wanted too, " He's one of the greats"
It just didn't do it for me.
iamleeg's review against another edition
3.0
There are some good ideas and story points in this book, but the continual reinforcement of the peril is wearing. There is an overall sense of urgency that's tempered by artificial "hey, this is a cliffhanger" messages.
johnnyforeign's review against another edition
3.0
I've read a number of books by Clarke, and I'd have to say this is my least favorite. It's basically a rescue story that pretty much could have been set anywhere. I've always liked Clarke's books because they take up grand themes, whereas this one merely presents a technical problem. Moreover, the book is filled with sexist stereotypes. (That's not entirely Clarke's fault. He is, like all of us, a product of his time.) In any case, you will learn a lot about life on the moon, which can be interesting, and the book is a quick, easy read; but I really couldn't wait to finish it and get on to something more intellectually stimulating.
kaine_'s review against another edition
adventurous
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? It's complicated
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.5
katzielonko's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? No
2.5