Solaris, Stanislaw Lem, Harvest Books, 1970, 204 pp.
[Translation note: Solaris was written in Polish and published in Poland in 1961. The Harvest edition of 1970 was translated from the French by Joanna Kilmartin and Steve Cox. Stanislaw Lem pronounced the French translation "poor." In 2011, Bill Johnston published the first and only translation direct from the Polish to English.]
Solaris is the third of three books I read in February that have a Polish connection. The first was the historical novel Poland by James Michener. The second was Drive Your Plow Over the Bones of the Dead by Olga Tokarczuk, set in a 21st century Polish village. Solaris is by a Polish author but is set in space. This little challenge left me giddy.
I read Solaris because it is an iconic sci fi novel published in 1961 just as the space race was taking off. I read the "poor" Kilmartin/Cox translation mentioned above, not knowing until the other day that there was a better one. That may explain some oddities I noticed.
If you are interested here are two links with more about Stanislaw Lem and the two translations.
Even so, it is an amazing tale about a station on Polaris, a planet orbiting two suns and covered mainly by an ocean, possibly a sentient body of something similar to water. This ocean functions as a sort of massive brain with the power to create psychological changes in the Earth scientists who come to study it.
The novel opens with the arrival of Kris Kelvin, a trained psychologist and astronaut, who finds the station in disarray with two of the remaining astronauts acting quite deranged and a third dead. Kris is a strong, no nonsense character, brave and deliberate. Soon enough he too begins to suffer from what may be hallucinations but may be something else.
I did enjoy and admire the story. It dawns on any reader who has read much science fiction that Lem did not write a standard sci fi tale compared to American works. His book is also allegorical, humanistic instead of militaristic, and satirical about the whole space project as it is playing out on Earth. He seems to be making an examination of what may lie beneath man's quest to find life on other planets.
Each character has brought his personal psychological baggage to space. The ocean on Solaris appears to have the purpose of revealing the suppressed emotional darkness of that baggage to the spacemen, causing what appear to be hallucinations of people from each one's past.
So very creepy and disconcerting but also exciting. You wonder who will succumb and who will survive. Kris Kelvin tells this story of how he came to penetrate the purposes of the ocean. Did he? Or did he go insane? The end of the story is a somewhat murky yet somehow satisfying conclusion.
Two movies have been made from this translation. One in 1972 by Andrei Tarkovsky and one in 2002 by Stephen Soderberg, starring George Clooney. I saw one of them, not sure which, several years ago and came away not understanding what I had just watched. I have requested the 1972 movie from Netflix.
Now tell me of your Solaris encounters, if you have any.
v perceptive post... this is definitely one of Lem's murkier productions; most of his others are quite straight forward, if a bit bizarre... well, now that i think about it, the Papers found in a bathtub one is very neo, and the Hospital one was negative for some reason... Lem was a brilliant person with many facets to his character...
ReplyDeleteThanks, mudpuddle. I will try more of his fiction someday.
DeleteMortal Engines, if you like robots, lol
DeleteI am ok with robots. I read somewhere that Lem was critical of the Asimov version of robots. I wonder what he would think of AI, were he around today.
DeleteI loved this book. It was so original and creative.
ReplyDeleteI also thought that the Tarkovsky film was brilliant but it was even stranger then the book.
I wonder what I will think of the film now that I have read the book.
DeleteGreat review. As you know, I have read Solaris with my online book club last year and have been waiting for this post.
ReplyDeleteI really did like the book (as did the other readers) and its approach to extra-terrestrial life.
I'm glad you liked it, as well. It gives us a lot of food for thought.
I remember your review. You were one of several who made me want to read it!
DeleteThat's nice that I encouraged you to read the book and that you liked it. That's the main reason I like blogging. Meeting people like you because I've found so many books thanks to you.
DeleteGreat review, so glad you discovered Solaris!
ReplyDeleteI have had 3 encounters! I was totally awed by the book, and I watched both movies. See my thoughts here: https://wordsandpeace.com/2019/10/03/book-reviews-classic-science-fiction/
Thank you, Emma. I am glad I read it. It is surely worthy of being called a classic.
DeleteWhat an interesting review. I have no Solaris encounters of either written word or film to report, but you have made me curious.
ReplyDeleteI wonder, I really do, what you would make of this book.
DeleteI've seen neither the of the movies, nor read the translations. Quite a concept though, thanks for the review!
ReplyDeleteSure thing!
DeleteI love it when a book from a genre I usually pass on has me curious enough to consider it. Sounds interesting and your review made me smile at times - nice job Judy.
ReplyDeleteWhat more can I ask? Thanks, Diane!
DeleteI saw the Clooney film with friends when it came out and really enjoyed it. I've watched it several times since on DVD and enjoyed it each time. I was very impressed on multiple levels.
ReplyDeleteSo far I have found the earlier movie available from Netflix. I will track down the other one somehow.
DeleteJust found and requested it from my library. Sometimes I forget they have movies too.
DeleteI vaguely remember the Clooney movie. Might have to find a copy at the library!
DeleteNo experience with Solaris, but your review makes me want to read the novel despite the fact that I am not a huge science fiction fan.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good thing, right?
DeleteI think I missed this Clooney movie - but I will find it to watch - my husband says it was scary /unsettling. The 1972 trailer of the movie is pretty over the top -- that music score! good grief - I'll stick with 2002.
ReplyDeleteWell, now I have both of them coming. I will report back.
Delete