James FenwickUnderstanding Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey: Representation and Interpretation

Abstract

409 BOOKS IN REVIEW engaged with the dynamics of a revived Cold War and a renewed anxiety regarding nuclear destruction. While its treatment of sf is, as noted, at times a bit hazy and decontextualized, there is little doubt that the volume makes an important contribution to the study of nuclear war in fiction and will thus be highly useful for sf scholars interested in that topic.—Rob Latham, Twentynine Palms No Human Error. James Fenwick, ed. Understanding Kubrick’s 2001:ASPACE ODYSSEY: Representation and Interpretation. Chicago: Intellect, 2018. xvii+268 pp. $93 hc. In celebration of the 50th anniversary of 2001: A Space Odyssey’s (1968), IMAX gave this canonical sf film a new life in summer 2018. So on a Tuesday afternoon in late August, I ventured to see it at the Cinéma Cineplex Forum in Montreal. I arrived just a few minutes late and, as I entered the theatre, discovered that Cineplex had foregone their usual 20-minute pre-show of car advertisements and trailers for upcoming blockbusters. Instead, the room was pitch black and György Ligeti’s Atmospheres (1961) blasted through the speakers. I used my phone-flashlight to locate my assigned seat; then, for the next two hours and 40 minutes, I sat transfixed by 2001’s sublime visuals, silences, and musical accompaniment. Exhibiting 2001 in this setting was perfect. While this was not my first viewing, given my comparatively small 40-inch TV I was seeing it here with fresh eyes. Two of the authors in Fenwick’s Understanding Kubrick’s 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY begin their respective chapters with their initial encounters of the monumental film. Fenwick recalls feeling perplexed and engrossed by “The Dawn of Man” sequence and, for Rachel Walisko, 2001 was her first truly “existential experience” (183). For many of 2001’s viewers the film is undeniably a transformative experience, whether they are watching it for the first time or the tenth time. Alongside this new era of IMAX exhibition comes a new era of scholarship to which Fenwick’s collection is a valuable contribution. Partially emerging from a 2016 conference entitled Stanley Kubrick: A Retrospective, Fenwick’s Understanding Kubrick’s 2001 builds a bridge between older methodologies and interpretations of the film and new methods and research undertaken after the opening of the Stanley Kubrick Archive (held at the University of the Arts, London and the London College of Communication) in 2007. According to Fenwick, Understanding Kubrick’s 2001 “represents a wide-ranging examination from a number of standpoints about one of the most important and influential films in cinema history” (11). The volume contains six parts and twelve chapters. The chapters detail the film’s production history and narrative, assess its representations of masculinities and technology, and outline its philosophical import. They are relatively short, similarly structured, and almost all equally engaging. Most of the contributions will appeal to a general audience, as well as to curious 2001 fans and established Kubrick scholars. 410 SCIENCE FICTION STUDIES, VOLUME 46 (2019) Fenwick begins the volume by outlining the stakes of his project and situating it within the broader field of Kubrick studies. Before each section, he provides brief overviews of its chapters and some further reading. If one were to read the book cover to cover, however, beginning at the end is advised. Filippo Ulivieri, one of the leading Kubrick scholars in Italy, provides “the first systematic attempt at reconstructing the entire chronology of Kubrick’s endeavor” (204). He starts in February 1964 and Kubrick’s lunch with Columbia Pictures’ Roger Cara—here, the director pitched the idea for a “serious science-fiction film.” Ulvieri then moves through Kubrick and Arthur C. Clarke’s collaboration on the story and Kubrick’s four years of work with dozens of crew members; he concludes with the film’s premiere and its negative reviews. While the genius behind 2001 is undeniable, Ulvieri’s chronology of the film’s production indicates that its success also hinged upon extensive and diverse collaborations. One small change to 2001 could have altered its fate entirely (e.g., Kubrick conceived several monolith designs and considered a physical alien, a prologue of scientist interviews, and a...