Exploring new worlds: Jules Verne vs. Arthur C. Clarke
- Carla Ra
- 3 days ago
- 5 min read
Exploration is at the root of science fiction. The genre is built upon the dissecting of ideas, concepts, possibilities, or the unknown. Not by chance, there is a whole subgenre dedicated to the exploration of new territories in which we follow adventurous expeditions sent to investigate uncharted worlds, to uncover the mysteries they hide.
Two of the greatest stories ever told in this particular subgenre are Jules Verne’s Journey to the Center of the Earth and Arthur C. Clarke’s Rendezvous with Rama. Verne and Clarke are masterful storytellers, and the worlds they created in these novels became classics of the science fiction genre.
In both stories, worldbuilding is at the core of the narrative, but Verne and Clarke approach the theme of exploration very differently, and we can grasp their styles best by comparing these two classics.
So, let’s take a look at the path to the center of the Earth, and the otherworldly Rama for clues to the minds of these two acclaimed authors.
There will be SPOILERS.
Verne’s world vs. Clarke’s world
If you are not familiar with French author Jules Verne, I would advise you to stop anything you are doing and go pick up one of his novels.
Before Clarke, before Asimov, before Wells, there was Verne. The author of Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea and Around the World in Eighty Days had a knack for adventures. And arguably the wildest world he created was the one from his 1864 novel Journey to the Center of the Earth.
A German Professor Otto Lidenbrock and his assistant (and nephew) Axel set off to explore an Icelandic volcano after finding a note from a 16th-century alchemist saying that they could find the entrance gate to reach the center of the Earth there. And, let’s be honest, which scientist could resist such a call to action?
Exploring this Icelandic cave, they encounter a subterranean ecosystem filled with natural dangers: from tornadoes to underground oceans, and primitive creatures. It is nothing like the cold Reykjavik. It is, effectively, a trip to prehistoric Earth.
Journey to the Center of the Earth is an isekai story before isekai was a thing!
Arthur C. Clarke, on the other hand, is better known to modern audiences. He is part of the Big Three of science fiction — a select group of influential authors from the golden age of science fiction — alongside Isaac Asimov and Robert Heinlein.
However, the author of Childhood’s End and 2001: A Space Odyssey has cited Jules Verne as one of his inspirations, and I can spot Verne’s influence in Clarke’s 1973 novel Rendezvous with Rama.
Rendezvous with Rama is, as the name suggests, an encounter with an uncrewed spaceship nicknamed Rama. A big alien object is crossing the Solar System, and a team of experts is sent to probe this cylindrical world with 50km of extension and 20km of radius.
Rama fits the idea of the Big Dumb Object trope so familiar to sci-fi enthusiasts: an enigmatic wonder of unknown origin (probably alien), with the plot revolving around uncovering its mysteries. Throughout the novel, we get to learn very little about the Ramans, the designers of Rama, except that they like to do things threefold.
If from the outside Rama was nothing but a giant black cylinder, on the inside it was a whole world, with breathable atmosphere, cities, and even an ocean. Rama’s rotation granted artificial gravity to its internal surface, allowing the team to explore this environment almost as easily as they would if it were a place on Earth. Although, this was nothing like Earth or any other planet that humans had colonized. The cylindrical topology was mind-boggling.
In their exploration, the team of scientists also face dangerous ‘natural’ phenomena, like tornadoes, thunderstorms, a deadly ocean, and robot creatures… You see where I’m going with this?
Despite different settings, the explorers faced similar dilemmas and dangers in both Journey to the Center of the Earth and Rendezvous with Rama. And yet, they feel so different! Why?
Let me try to answer this question by comparing Verne’s and Clarke’s styles.
Adrenaline vs. Wonder
To put it simply: Jules Verne is an adventurous spirit, and Arthur C. Clarke is a contemplative soul.
Verne’s exploring style is one of excitement. In terms of storytelling, he wrote tales with the pacing and thrill of an adventure. The stakes are really high; each new corner we turn could have a life-threatening menace. It is dramatic; it is stimulating, and it makes our blood pump in our veins in anticipation of danger.
In Journey to the Center of the Earth, we embark on this exciting mission already afraid of the unknown. Axel Lidenbrock is our cautious narrator, acting as foil to his adrenaline-fueled uncle. Professor Lindebrock shows us the marvels of this underground world, while Axel very wisely points to its precariousness, creating the right balance of impulse and hesitation that builds up the suspense.
In contrast, Clarke leans on the spectacle of the situation at hand. He guides us through the journey with inspired descriptions and an analytical eye. Even though the explorers encounter dangers, the hurdles are more fascinating than anxiety-inducing. The story’s stake is not losing the life of any particular character but missing the opportunity of interacting with the world itself.
In Rendezvous with Rama, the fantastic cylindrical world is indeed breath-taking. And each new phenomena that exposes the crew’s vulnerability is analyzed with the lenses of a curious mind searching for a grounded explanation.
Falling victim of these wouldn’t feel shameful; rather, it would be an indication of the character’s limited understanding of how the phenomena could unfold. Death was almost fated to happen. We expect them to happen.
Perhaps the difference between Verne and Clarke is better represented in the part of the journey when both expeditions explore the new-found ocean.
Sailing through the ocean in Journey to the Center of the Earth has the same appeal as the great European navigation of the Age of Discovery, a conquest of the sea. The perils are the same: violent storms, sea monsters, unknown destinations.
Meanwhile, Rama’s ocean seems to defy gravity. Our focus is on its topography and composition, figuring out how to cross it. The crises encountered are a consequence of miscalculations and unforeseen events.
In terms of style, I would categorize Jules Verne as more ‘beginner-friendly’ than Arthur C. Clarke. But I might be biased here, because I grew up reading Verne’s books; they are responsible for my passion for science fiction.
###
As an author, I must agree with Ray Bradbury when he said, “We are all, in one way or another, the children of Jules Verne.”
Maybe because I have a hard time creating images inside my mind, the contemplative nature of Clarke’s Rama felt a bit bleak. Pairing this with nostalgia, I would say that Journey to the Center of the Earth is more dear to me.
What about you? Which is your favorite story? Let me know in the comments!
See you next post,
Ra
Carla Ra is a scientist by day, sci-fi writer by night.
You can check out her FREE stories here.
Comments