Of course, 2001. My mom took my brother and me to see it when it first came to theaters. I was eight, my brother was seven, and my mom's grasp of English was still a bit tenuous. So the three of us related to it mainly on a visual level. For many years, all I remembered was the prologue with the ape-men, and the light show at the end - everything between was lost due to my being too young to grasp all the high-tech science and lack of action. There was nothing for me to connect with, yet I never forgot the feeling of sitting in that theater and trying to understand. As a lifelong reader, who started diving in adult literature at a very early age, that sense of striving has always been one of the prime rewards of reading. (It's also why I view the kinds of books deemed "appropriate" for kids with such a contemptuous eye. Kids rise to the level that's expected of them; expect them to have pudding for brains and that's exactly what they'll have.)

My second encounter with Clarke was reading Rendezvous with Rama as a teenager. Again I was challenged, this time by a book that was both very concerned with technical issues (as all of Clarke's writing tends to be; "hard science fiction" was the term at the time) and also strangely unresolved. It was the first fiction book I'd ever come across in which, ultimately, nothing happened. They spend huge amounts of money and scientific talent building a craft to rendezvous with the approaching ship, finally get there, open it up, go in and - nothing. There's no one there, no clue as to who sent it or what the hell happened. Eventually it goes on past Earth and...that's it. Nothing really happens. It threw me for a loop, and it took a couple of days of thinking about it before I decided I liked the book. It was a new experience for me, and taught me that there are different ways to write books, and different ways to read them. A valuable lesson for someone just getting started in the world of grown-up things.

My third encounter (and fondest Clarke association) was the great short story The Nine Billion Names of God. That one tickled me (and still does) because not only is it sharp, insightful, and well-written, it's damn funny. I didn't often laugh out loud when reading science fiction (don't hardly read it at all anymore), but Clarke's little tale of the unexpected power of humanity once again came along at just the right time to set some of my attitudes about science and religion, and the places where the twain meet.

So long, Mr. Clarke, and thanks for all the fish.

Only an idiot would watch TV in this country and expect to get truthful news broadcasting. I stopped paying attention to TV at least ten years ago.

You're SAD that the public has grown tired of lipsmacking and schadenfreude? The indication that maybe Americans are no longer quite so fond of pissiness, judgementalism and bigotry somehow bums you out? Gods, what a trash can you must have for a mind, Rebecca.

But then, considering the kinds of articles you've written here over the last couple of years, that hardly comes as a surprise.

That's funny. I was just thinking the same thing about YOU. What with your snide remark about "unmedicated readers" and Chinese food being invented by Mexicans and all.

It's pointless to engage in PC hand-wringing over this kind of comedy. Like beauty, funny is in the eye of the beholder. What you find hilarious will make someone else shrug his shoulders in puzzlement. What use is there in saying something is "wrong" or "bad" just because you yourself don't laugh? If somebody is laughing, then obviously it's funny to them.

Some people may think that laughing "at" someone can be trained out of humans, but unfortunately that really isn't possible. Cross-dressing humor strikes people as funny simply because a man in women's clothes crosses the boundary of what is considered "normal" for most people. Weird things will always make some people laugh, no matter how accepted they may be to others. If I died my hair green purple and orange, and stuck a toy monkey in it, people would laugh. Not because there's anything wrong with it, but because it looks strange to them. Laughter is one of the ways we deal with things we find odd, and it's not always meant unkindly. Combine something odd with a genuine comedic talent, like the mimicry that performers like Tyler and Murphy are so good at, and you're guaranteed to get laughter - which is, after all, the business those guys are in. Like the man said, "It's funny. In my business, you don't cut funny."

As for the whole "emasculation" thing, I can only say, oh please. Nobody is after your jewels, guys, so you can let go of them now.

The guy's a manipulative, controlling asshole. You can't see that? It's one thing to want one's space private, but to require you to shape your life so that he and he alone has control over your access to your own property...honey, the guy's trash. Next thing you know, he'll start bashing you in the mouth for not getting his dinner on time.

Dump him and find yourself a decent man. One who won't mind you having your own place, or will understand what's involved in sharing a space.

It looks like the last paragraph on the first page of this article has been cut off. Please take a look and fix this.

Not to mention how America behaved against the original inhabitants of this country. But then, such behavior has been seen in every world power. Hardly a new thing.