The Lost Worlds of 2001
Dublin Core
Title
The Lost Worlds of 2001
Subject
A companion book to 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). It outlines how Arthur C. Clarke's starkly different original drafts evolved into Kubrick's film, before documenting these drafts- the eponymous "Lost Worlds of 2001"- in multiple successive chapters.
Description
The Lost Worlds of 2001 (EXE BD 38364; 1972) is a companion book to Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), although is also a tie-in to Clarke’s novel adaptation of 2001. Published merely four years after the film’s worldwide theatrical release, it is closely linked to the film’s production, having been written by Arthur C. Clarke, co-writer of the film’s screenplay and author of the film’s concurrently written novel version. It features Clarke’s 9-page short story The Sentinel (1948) in its entirety, itself the inspiration for the film’s central narrative. As such, the text effectively serves as not only a companion piece to Kubrick’s film, but a receptacle for the film, Clarke’s novel and the story which inspired them both. As it was published merely four years after 2001’s theatrical release and written by Clarke- the creator of the original story- the text is clearly aimed at pre-existing enthusiasts for the film as opposed to a wide audience.
This is evident in both the film’s initially mixed critical reception - having been slated by Pauline Kael on release as “monumentally unimaginative” (Kael; 1969)- and the text’s layout and design. While the book contains Clarke’s personal accounts of the film’s development- comprising of diary entries and call sheets designed in Pinewood Studios within the Monoliths and Manuscripts chapter- it is never pictorial but instead prosaic. It is less preoccupied with providing an eye-popping account of the film’s technical achievements to a mainstream audience than it is with honestly conveying the “lost worlds” of its story: Initially by documenting the film’s historical context, later by outlining the often-diverging approaches of Kubrick and Clarke, and finally by offering alternative and since “lost” versions of Clarke’s narrative. When discussing how to prevent inertia within film archives, Christensen and Kuuti argue that “The intended artistic effect produced…by the moving images on a screen is augmented by the historical context and the knowledge of the carrier” (Christensen and Kuuti; 2; 2021). If we subscribe to this view, the book is elevated beyond disposable memorabilia and becomes integral to fully appreciating Kubrick’s film, as the context it outlines reveals a very different- albeit never filmed- alternative to his final cut, encapsulating the adaptability of Clarke’s narrative and accentuating the film’s unique narrative qualities within mainstream cinema.
The book’s second chapter, Son of Dr Strangelove, instantly contextualises the text and film in relation to the contemporary American zeitgeist. It discusses the film’s coinciding with the insurgence of US space exploration, explicated by the lunar landing taking place a mere year after the film’s release. Clarke discusses the need for himself and Kubrick to not create “a story which would be made obsolete- or even worse, ridiculous- by the events of the next two years” (Clarke; 18; 1972). This need would result in Clarke’s original renditions of the story becoming “lost”, confined to this paperback’s “printed word” instead of widely publicised. The story’s evolution and alterations were catalysed by Kubrick and Clarke’s mutual partnership- primarily Kubrick’s preference for visual storytelling over dialogue-driven drama- and the film’s unique relationship with its tie-in novel. The Lost Worlds of 2001 explores both factors as it progresses.
As the chapter Christmas, Shepperton highlights, Clarke’s novel and Kubrick’s film were created simultaneously and informed each other. Here, cinema and the printed word were reciprocal. Although Clarke is concerned with the novel as an “independent and self-contained work”, he admits that the novel was “created specifically as the basis for the movie” (ibid; 30). In discussing such a unique adaptive method, Clarke offers a brief history of novel to film adaptations, “This, of course, is the reverse of the usual state…Most movies are adapted from already existing novels” and, in turn, derides novelisations “Other movies are based on screenplays…and no novel version (or even- ugh!- “novelization”) ever exists”. Clarke clearly had reservations about the novel’s incongruous relationship with the film. This incongruity culminated in the altering of Clarke’s “lost worlds” explored later in this book, an alteration itself echoed by 2001’s similarly unique marketing history.
Subsequent chapters, starting from First Encounter, feature alternative drafts of 2001’s story. A mobile robot named Socrates- completely unseen in the film- features in these edits, as do swathes of additional dialogue exchanges between characters barely present in Kubrick’s film. This alternative approach is echoed in Jack Kirby’s 1976 comic adaptation of the story, which also features in this collection (EXE BD 52396). Dante A. Ciampaglia observes that the comic inserts “scads of dense text” in substitution of the film’s “silent aesthetic”, just as The Lost Worlds of 2001 does (Ciampaglia; 2018). Traces of Clarke’s “lost worlds” can also be found in other marketing ephemera. Phil Wickham observes that “Ephemera can inform our understanding of changing histories” (Wickham; 315-330; 2010), citing Vivian Sobchack’s description of history as “unstable or shifting” (Sobchack; 300-315; 200) before remarking on an “’iconic poster calendar” designed to meld the consumer’s response to one agreed canon. We see a similar “shifting” relationship occurring in 2001’s marketing strategy, with two starkly contrasting film posters successively marketed, echoing the “lost” and finalised versions respectively. Mike Kaplan- responsible for conceiving the latter- acknowledges that the original poster presented the tagline “An epic drama of adventure and exploration”, only for the film to be “unanimously misunderstood” on these grounds (Kaplan; 2007). This tagline was later substituted by Kaplan for “The ultimate trip”, a play on words signifying the film’s hallucinogenic qualities, amplified by the poster’s newly inserted image of the transcendent star-child, itself absent from Clarke’s early drafts. The “epic drama” tagline might not be applicable to Kubrick’s film, but it is applicable to The Lost Worlds of 2001, suiting Clarke’s original dialogue-driven vision. In informing its audience’s understanding of “changing histories”, the artefact echoes the “shifting” nature of 2001’s marketing pitch even without referring to it, all whilst explicating an alternative canon largely unknown to a public to whom Kubrick’s film is well-recognised.
However, the multifaceted history documented in this artefact, alongside its verbose and prosaic presentation, could explain its lack of attention within the archive. The Bill Douglas Cinema Museum’s (BDCM) online catalogue lists no description next to it, and the book has received little scholarly attention. This explicates specific difficulties within the relationship between cinema and the printed word. Firstly, as film and archiving are predominantly visual and photographic, a prose-heavy account is difficult to promote. Secondly, the text’s cover is misleadingly coupled with a caption referring to the “ultimate trip”, instead of the “epic drama” of Clarke’s “lost worlds” dominating the book. The film’s DNA effectively takes precedence where the printed word should. Although Clarke describes his early “lost” works as “self-contained” in the text, Kaplan’s revised marketing pitch looms over it. Finally, it is difficult to summarise the film’s complex evolution via photographs given that Clarke’s “lost worlds” were never filmed. These cumulative factors reveal the difficulties in conveying a film’s “shifting” history and perhaps highlight why the BDCM have yet to describe it. In the canon of film/novel tie-ins, 2001 is incongruous enough in its reciprocity between cinema and the printed word, and explaining this incongruous relationship in archival contexts is not a simple task. Yet- given the history it documents- this artefact ought not to be treated as disposable memorabilia, but instead as a revealing glimpse into a unique tie-in adaptation process. And, in turn, a glimpse into what could have resulted in a radically different film, otherwise only falsely hinted at in ephemera and marketing.
Works Cited
Clarke, Arthur C. 1972. “The Lost Worlds of 2001”. BDCM Entry 38364. Accessed 17/11/2023. https://www.bdcmuseum.org.uk/explore/item/38364/
Clarke, Arthur C. 1972. “The Lost Worlds of 2001”, Sidgwick and Jackson Ltd, First Edition, Published in Great Britain.
Dante A. Ciampaglia, 2018. “The Crazy Legacy of Jack Kirby’s Forgotten 2001: A Space Odyssey”. https://www.wired.com/story/jack-kirby-2001-space-odyssey-history/
Kael, Pauline. 1969. “Trash, Art and the Movies”; Retrieved from “Scraps from the Loft”, 2017. Accessed 7/12/2023. https://scrapsfromtheloft.com/movies/pauline-kael-on-2001-a-space-odyssey/
Kirby, Jack. 1976. “2001: A Space Odyssey”. BDCM entry 52396. Accessed 28/11/2023, https://www.bdcmuseum.org.uk/explore/item/52396/
Sobchack, Vivian. 2000. “What is film history?, or, the Riddle of the sphinxes”. In “Reinventing film studies”, edited by Gledhill, Christine and Williams, Linda, pp. 300-315. London: Arnold.
Thomas C. Christensen and Mikko Kuuti. 2021. “Digital Agenda for Film Archives”- ACE- Association des Cinémathéques Européennes. Accessed 7/12/2023 https://ace-film.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/A-Digital-Agenda-for-Film-Archives-2012.pdf
Wickham, Phil. 2010. “Scrapbooks, soap dishes and screen dreams: ephemera, everyday life and cinema history”, New Review of Film and Television Studies, 8:3, pp. 315-330, DOI: 10.1080/17400309.2010.499775
This is evident in both the film’s initially mixed critical reception - having been slated by Pauline Kael on release as “monumentally unimaginative” (Kael; 1969)- and the text’s layout and design. While the book contains Clarke’s personal accounts of the film’s development- comprising of diary entries and call sheets designed in Pinewood Studios within the Monoliths and Manuscripts chapter- it is never pictorial but instead prosaic. It is less preoccupied with providing an eye-popping account of the film’s technical achievements to a mainstream audience than it is with honestly conveying the “lost worlds” of its story: Initially by documenting the film’s historical context, later by outlining the often-diverging approaches of Kubrick and Clarke, and finally by offering alternative and since “lost” versions of Clarke’s narrative. When discussing how to prevent inertia within film archives, Christensen and Kuuti argue that “The intended artistic effect produced…by the moving images on a screen is augmented by the historical context and the knowledge of the carrier” (Christensen and Kuuti; 2; 2021). If we subscribe to this view, the book is elevated beyond disposable memorabilia and becomes integral to fully appreciating Kubrick’s film, as the context it outlines reveals a very different- albeit never filmed- alternative to his final cut, encapsulating the adaptability of Clarke’s narrative and accentuating the film’s unique narrative qualities within mainstream cinema.
The book’s second chapter, Son of Dr Strangelove, instantly contextualises the text and film in relation to the contemporary American zeitgeist. It discusses the film’s coinciding with the insurgence of US space exploration, explicated by the lunar landing taking place a mere year after the film’s release. Clarke discusses the need for himself and Kubrick to not create “a story which would be made obsolete- or even worse, ridiculous- by the events of the next two years” (Clarke; 18; 1972). This need would result in Clarke’s original renditions of the story becoming “lost”, confined to this paperback’s “printed word” instead of widely publicised. The story’s evolution and alterations were catalysed by Kubrick and Clarke’s mutual partnership- primarily Kubrick’s preference for visual storytelling over dialogue-driven drama- and the film’s unique relationship with its tie-in novel. The Lost Worlds of 2001 explores both factors as it progresses.
As the chapter Christmas, Shepperton highlights, Clarke’s novel and Kubrick’s film were created simultaneously and informed each other. Here, cinema and the printed word were reciprocal. Although Clarke is concerned with the novel as an “independent and self-contained work”, he admits that the novel was “created specifically as the basis for the movie” (ibid; 30). In discussing such a unique adaptive method, Clarke offers a brief history of novel to film adaptations, “This, of course, is the reverse of the usual state…Most movies are adapted from already existing novels” and, in turn, derides novelisations “Other movies are based on screenplays…and no novel version (or even- ugh!- “novelization”) ever exists”. Clarke clearly had reservations about the novel’s incongruous relationship with the film. This incongruity culminated in the altering of Clarke’s “lost worlds” explored later in this book, an alteration itself echoed by 2001’s similarly unique marketing history.
Subsequent chapters, starting from First Encounter, feature alternative drafts of 2001’s story. A mobile robot named Socrates- completely unseen in the film- features in these edits, as do swathes of additional dialogue exchanges between characters barely present in Kubrick’s film. This alternative approach is echoed in Jack Kirby’s 1976 comic adaptation of the story, which also features in this collection (EXE BD 52396). Dante A. Ciampaglia observes that the comic inserts “scads of dense text” in substitution of the film’s “silent aesthetic”, just as The Lost Worlds of 2001 does (Ciampaglia; 2018). Traces of Clarke’s “lost worlds” can also be found in other marketing ephemera. Phil Wickham observes that “Ephemera can inform our understanding of changing histories” (Wickham; 315-330; 2010), citing Vivian Sobchack’s description of history as “unstable or shifting” (Sobchack; 300-315; 200) before remarking on an “’iconic poster calendar” designed to meld the consumer’s response to one agreed canon. We see a similar “shifting” relationship occurring in 2001’s marketing strategy, with two starkly contrasting film posters successively marketed, echoing the “lost” and finalised versions respectively. Mike Kaplan- responsible for conceiving the latter- acknowledges that the original poster presented the tagline “An epic drama of adventure and exploration”, only for the film to be “unanimously misunderstood” on these grounds (Kaplan; 2007). This tagline was later substituted by Kaplan for “The ultimate trip”, a play on words signifying the film’s hallucinogenic qualities, amplified by the poster’s newly inserted image of the transcendent star-child, itself absent from Clarke’s early drafts. The “epic drama” tagline might not be applicable to Kubrick’s film, but it is applicable to The Lost Worlds of 2001, suiting Clarke’s original dialogue-driven vision. In informing its audience’s understanding of “changing histories”, the artefact echoes the “shifting” nature of 2001’s marketing pitch even without referring to it, all whilst explicating an alternative canon largely unknown to a public to whom Kubrick’s film is well-recognised.
However, the multifaceted history documented in this artefact, alongside its verbose and prosaic presentation, could explain its lack of attention within the archive. The Bill Douglas Cinema Museum’s (BDCM) online catalogue lists no description next to it, and the book has received little scholarly attention. This explicates specific difficulties within the relationship between cinema and the printed word. Firstly, as film and archiving are predominantly visual and photographic, a prose-heavy account is difficult to promote. Secondly, the text’s cover is misleadingly coupled with a caption referring to the “ultimate trip”, instead of the “epic drama” of Clarke’s “lost worlds” dominating the book. The film’s DNA effectively takes precedence where the printed word should. Although Clarke describes his early “lost” works as “self-contained” in the text, Kaplan’s revised marketing pitch looms over it. Finally, it is difficult to summarise the film’s complex evolution via photographs given that Clarke’s “lost worlds” were never filmed. These cumulative factors reveal the difficulties in conveying a film’s “shifting” history and perhaps highlight why the BDCM have yet to describe it. In the canon of film/novel tie-ins, 2001 is incongruous enough in its reciprocity between cinema and the printed word, and explaining this incongruous relationship in archival contexts is not a simple task. Yet- given the history it documents- this artefact ought not to be treated as disposable memorabilia, but instead as a revealing glimpse into a unique tie-in adaptation process. And, in turn, a glimpse into what could have resulted in a radically different film, otherwise only falsely hinted at in ephemera and marketing.
Works Cited
Clarke, Arthur C. 1972. “The Lost Worlds of 2001”. BDCM Entry 38364. Accessed 17/11/2023. https://www.bdcmuseum.org.uk/explore/item/38364/
Clarke, Arthur C. 1972. “The Lost Worlds of 2001”, Sidgwick and Jackson Ltd, First Edition, Published in Great Britain.
Dante A. Ciampaglia, 2018. “The Crazy Legacy of Jack Kirby’s Forgotten 2001: A Space Odyssey”. https://www.wired.com/story/jack-kirby-2001-space-odyssey-history/
Kael, Pauline. 1969. “Trash, Art and the Movies”; Retrieved from “Scraps from the Loft”, 2017. Accessed 7/12/2023. https://scrapsfromtheloft.com/movies/pauline-kael-on-2001-a-space-odyssey/
Kirby, Jack. 1976. “2001: A Space Odyssey”. BDCM entry 52396. Accessed 28/11/2023, https://www.bdcmuseum.org.uk/explore/item/52396/
Sobchack, Vivian. 2000. “What is film history?, or, the Riddle of the sphinxes”. In “Reinventing film studies”, edited by Gledhill, Christine and Williams, Linda, pp. 300-315. London: Arnold.
Thomas C. Christensen and Mikko Kuuti. 2021. “Digital Agenda for Film Archives”- ACE- Association des Cinémathéques Européennes. Accessed 7/12/2023 https://ace-film.eu/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/A-Digital-Agenda-for-Film-Archives-2012.pdf
Wickham, Phil. 2010. “Scrapbooks, soap dishes and screen dreams: ephemera, everyday life and cinema history”, New Review of Film and Television Studies, 8:3, pp. 315-330, DOI: 10.1080/17400309.2010.499775
Creator
Arthur C. Clarke
Source
The Sentinel (short story; Clarke; 1948).
2001: A Space Odyssey (film; Kubrick; 1968)
2001: A Space Odyssey (novel; Clarke; 1968)
2001: A Space Odyssey (film; Kubrick; 1968)
2001: A Space Odyssey (novel; Clarke; 1968)
Publisher
Sidgwick and Jackson Limited
Date
First Published in Great Britain in 1972
Contributor
Ruben Martin-Ward
Rights
Copyright © 1972 by Arthur C. Clarke
The Sentinel copyright © by Arthur C. Clarke
This book is sold subject to the conditions that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser.
The Sentinel copyright © by Arthur C. Clarke
This book is sold subject to the conditions that it shall not, by way of trade or otherwise, be lent, re-sold, hired out or otherwise circulated without the publisher’s prior consent in any form of binding or cover other than that in which it is published and without a similar condition including this condition being imposed on the subsequent purchaser.
Format
Book 17.78 x 2.54 x 12.7 cm
Language
English
Type
A companion book
Identifier
ISBN 0283979038
Coverage
The production of 2001: A Space Odyssey: 1964-1968, Shepperton Studios (then Pinewood Studios).
Artefact published in 1972, London.
Artefact published in 1972, London.
Text Item Type Metadata
Text
240 Pages
Original Format
Paper
Files
Collection
Citation
Arthur C. Clarke, “The Lost Worlds of 2001,” Archival Encounters: Digital Exhibitions form the Bill Douglas Cinema Museum, accessed December 28, 2024, https://humanities-research.exeter.ac.uk/archivalencounters/items/show/27.