Art from 2001: A Space Odyssey by Robert McCall.
It is virtually a necessity for those who claim to be human spaceflight supporters to embrace the message of the famous 1968 film by Stanley Kubrick, 2001: A Space Odyssey. I remember when I first saw it as a teenager in the latter 1960s and how mesmerized I was by its complex, sometimes surreal story. I watched transfixed its depiction of the human journey beyond Earth. I was puzzled by the film’s message of human evolution and its possible relationship to extraterrestrial intelligence. Watching it again, despite the fact that it is now more than forty years old, I must say that the film holds-up extremely well. Its message of humankind’s destiny to explore the universe still rings true for me today.
At the same time, I was struck by four concepts that I came away with after viewing this film anew.
First, it is amazing how much our culture has changed since the 1960s when this movie was made. Most important, the Cold War that was so much a part of the subtext of the film is gone, and along with it the sense of humanity teetering on the brink of self-destruction through nuclear annihilation. We might yet destroy ourselves with nuclear weapons, but self-destruction more likely will come through environmental degradation or some other threat. This new reality is something I doubt Stanley Kubrick or Sir Arthur C. Clarke imagined in 1968.
Humanity is better off for this transformation in the geopolitical landscape. Today, the United States and the former Soviet Union have joined to make a reality the long-held vision of a space station orbiting Earth. Anticipated in this movie, neither Kubrick nor Clarke realized at the time of this movie’s creation that it would result from the combined efforts of many nations. Ironically, the International Space Station became a reality just ahead of the 2001 timeline when the first crew set-up residence aboard the outpost at the beginning of the new millennium.
With this accomplishment, the space-faring nations of the Earth intend that no future generation will ever know a time when there is not some human presence in space.
Second, I was struck by how easy access to space and low-Earth orbit was in 2001: A Space Odyssey. I wish it were that easy in reality! Unfortunately, we have not yet been able to get around the reality of physics to attain the vision of easy access depicted in the film. We certainly cannot get on the PanAm space shuttle today and zip to the International Space Station.
One might argue that the single greatest obstacle preventing humans from branching out into our Solar System is the high cost of reliable access to low-Earth orbit. Clearly, as the Space Shuttle is retired and replaced with a successor human spaceflight system we must reduces costs, increase safety and reliability, and enhance overall ease of operations.
As Arthur C. Clarke said in a 1993 interview, “You can’t make much of a case for man in space until you’ve got efficient and reliable propulsion systems. Once we’ve got that, everything else will follow automatically.”
It seems to me that if space is ever to open for widespread operations, we must make two radical improvements in our launch capabilities. One is significantly improving our propulsion capabilities, and the other is significantly reducing the weight of the system and payload.
Third, the film brought to my mind something not envisioned. The convergence of advanced biotechnology, nanotechnology, and information technologies has altered the nature of so many aspects of our existence, including opportunities for space exploration. Research in artificial intelligence, based on microchips and semiconductors, is so far ahead of the HAL 9000 robot that it pains one to consider this aspect of the film.
Scientists are beginning to realize these three pursuits with the creation of thinking machines that are exceptionally small and have the ability to self-heal. They are building systems that even operate more like living organisms than machines, having distributed sensory systems that enable control of every function.
Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick on the Set of "2001: A Space Odyssey."
Finally, Kubrick and Clarke envisioned in this film a true odyssey, a long and heroic voyage marked by numerous changes of fortune leading to a fundamental change at the end. I used to believe humanity was also on such a space odyssey, but I am less certain today.
Not since 1972 has any human being been beyond low-Earth orbit and it appears that no one will go beyond for the foreseeable future. NASA intends to remain in low-Earth orbit operating the International Space Station until at least 2020. As important as that activity is, I look forward to the time when we will venture beyond this realm to explore other bodies in the Solar System. Until this happens I will be concerned that our own space odyssey will remain stunted.
Roger Launius's Blog 
Roger:
2001: A Space Odyssey was a turning point in my young life. I saw it in the theater at age 6, during its first run, and it turned me on to spaceflight, science fiction, and classical music. In 1993, I saw it in Denver as it was meant to be seen, on a big Cinerama screen. The level of set and costume detail was astonishing. I’m sure that I’d never seen it so clearly before.
My favorite part of 2001 is not the spaceships; it’s the mystery and magnificence it conveys. And a big queston for me now is, what if HAL had succeeded in killing off Dave Bowman and had gone through the Stargate? What then would the Starchild displayed at the film’s climax have been like?
David
LikeLike
The images would have likely been more conceptual had HAL been the first component of the Starchild rather than the second. However, the physical forms used for interaction with humanity might have been defined by whoever ended up becoming the second component.
LikeLike
Thanks for these comments. I agree. Roger
LikeLike
Roger, Much has been said and written about the year 1968. Assassinations, the Chicago riots, the return of Richard Nixon, the turning-point in Vietnam, Soviet aggression in Czechoslovakia, etc.
It was said that the December triumph of Apollo 8 “saved” 1968, but I always felt that the April debut of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY was perhaps the first hopeful glimmer of light at the end of what seemed like a long, dark tunnel of turmoil and doubt. However, there was a significant warning message neatly wrapped into this story of a space-faring future for my generation.
April 1968- I had put on my best black slacks, a yellow Arrow shirt that my brother-in-law had won in a poker game at the University of Alabama and a pair of brown tasseled loafers, as I prepared to go see 2001. I was only 14, but this was going to be my first “date” night. My mother drove my date and another 8th-grade couple downtown where we got out of the car and walked into a slightly reeking, dilapidated movie palace that later fell to the wrecking ball. Having heard that this movie was “visually stunning”, we took our seats way up close to the screen.
The four of us were “space fans”, but 2001 was an experience not unlike being suddenly dumped into an Olympic-sized pool of ice water. That beautiful movie was not at all what we had anticipated. First, there was no weird, theramin music or highly modulated, wavering electric guitar themes during the action sequences.
“What kind of music was that?”
“Isn’t that some long-hair symphony we’re hearing?”
“And what were those monkeys about?”
The middle part of the movie was closer to normal. No problem.
Then, the weirdness meter pegged-out as the bizarre, apparently LSD-inspired light show began.
“I’m not sure what that was, but it sure looked cool!”
As I walked out of the theater, I realized that this movie had awakened an entirely new appreciation of the potential of science-fiction. I did not realize that I had stepped into the new realm of “hard science-fiction”. The STAR TREK television series came close to the place where 2001 brought us, but the medium-res, small screen of 1968 could not possibly create the kind of powerful shock-wave that this big screen epic did.
At 14, I was already aware of the value of science-fiction as an early-warning system for society. Legendary sci-fi stories like “1984”, “Dr. Strangelove” and “Fahrenheit 451” occasionally remind us of the never-ending struggle between liberty and tyranny. Kubrick seemed to be telling us that both the birth and fate of humanity were entwined with technology, and that technology was born of the need to survive through domination and killing. In 2001, the first act of technological man- the character Moonwatcher- was killing. Later, the final fate of mankind was framed when technology -HAL 9000- murderously turned on humanity. What a movie!
LikeLike
That’s a great set of comments. I really appreciate your sharing it.
LikeLike
Try Leonard Wheat’s 2000 book,Kubrick’s 2001;A Triple Allegory,showing how all events come from Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke zarathustra-which also opens at dawn,ending with the hero’s interrupted last supper!-and Homer’s Odyssey,so HAL=God,made in our image,and the murderous Cyclops.Or read his online essays,from Blurred Horizon Press,Misconceptions about 2001 and Fresh insights into 2001.A really fascinating read,I reckon he;s right!
LikeLike