A British scientist creates a dog of human intelligence, and the scientist and his wife raise the dog as another one of their children. The story centers on the relationship between Sirius the dog and his human sister Plaxy. There are interesting details about how being a dog is different from being a human, but essentially this is a story about basic human issues of acceptance, love, identity, purpose, happiness, meaning--issues that are especially difficult for Sirius, as the only one of his kind.

"Sirius" is out of print as a separate novel but is in print paired with another Stapledon novel as "Odd John and Sirius."

"Sirius" and Stapledon's "Last and First Men" are two of the best science fiction books I've ever read. I wonder why Stapledon's work isn't better known.

Isolated among us, Sirius is the archetype of alienation and is at the same time a more human protagonist than most. He is an intelligent dog, a singular creature resulting from an experiment. He faces his limitations, the physiologically limited form lacking hands, the lonlieness of a singular existance, without peers, serparated by species from the human society around him, separated by his sentience from the species from which he sprang. Yet he is no Frankenstein's monster, his life is not a remonstration of man's quest for knowledge, it is instead directed to understanding himself and the world around him. He studies humankind's best and faces mankinds worst and ultimately the reader realizes that his struggle is also our own

A story about a superintelligent talking dog? It sounds terrible, like something out of a twee Disney film, but in actual fact Stapledon manages to avoid anything like that, and has written an incredible, touching story. It reminds me of "Call of the Wild" and "White Fang", and doesn't avoid the dark side of Sirius' nature... there are a couple of particularly savage passages where Sirius kills a sadistic farmer, and also "murders" a horse just to indulge his canine instincts.

Sirius ends up seeing the full range of human life, from bad to good, and more. He is also not a true dog, and finds himself not only alienated from human beings who cannot accept him fully (with a handful of exceptions), but other dogs who are like cretins to him especially his "lovers" (as the book puts it). Despite having difficulty speaking and writing (he devises ways to get around that), Sirius has an advantage over other dogs through his intelligence, and over humans in his hearing, sense of smell etc. What we get is not only a satire on English life during WWII, but an almost autistic view of the world, seeing everything but not able to integrate oneself into it.

Of course some of the writing is dated, and Stapledon at times takes a very colonial view of the Welsh and their language (Sirius is originally brought up on a Welsh farm by English academics). Some of the style is very dry and typical of the period (for example when Sirius spots a holy roller farmboy pleasuring himself, Stapledon calls it "something unspeakable". Fortunately Victorian hangovers like these are not common).

Never before have I read such a book that encompasses so much, in such a wonderful way. I've only read the second half of the volume, the strange, coldly scientific fairy tale of Sirius. After what I've read there, I'm not quite sure I'm ready to read Odd John. In due time I shall, but for now, I'll have to be contented with mulling over the life of Sirius, sitting, thinking, reflecting on its harsh mysticism.

Never before have I read such a book that encompasses so much, in such a wonderful way. I've only read the second half of the volume, the strange, coldly scientific fairy tale of Sirius. After what I've read there, I'm not quite sure I'm ready to read Odd John. In due time I shall, but for now, I'll have to be contented with mulling over the life of Sirius, sitting, thinking, reflecting on its harsh mysticism.

I started this book in a Science Fiction class at Florida International University. I finished this book because I wanted to pass.

First of all, there are no characters in this book. Character is what most readers look for when reading a novel, but you won't find a character to identify with here. Plot is another reason people read; it's hazy here at best. Finally, the most importan reason poeple read is for story. You definitely won't find one of those here.

If this was slotted under the "Imaginative Philosophy" section, I might have held the book in higher regard. That's pretty much what "Star Maker" is, a philosophical mind trip through entire universes. I was reminded many times of Plato's _Republic_ while reading this, and indeed it seems like Stapleton was extending his philosophical exercise to cover an entire universe.

So, if you want to tackle philosophical issues, this book is okay. If you're looking for a novel (like I was), with a story and characters--and entertainment, damnit!--then run as fast as you cn from this one.

Olaf Stapledon's Star Maker is a sequel of sorts to his earlier book Last & First Men. Whereas L&FM dealt with the fate and evolution of humankind, Star Maker concerns the fate and evolution of the universe. The unnamed narrator passes through time and space in an out of body experience, discovering the history of the universe both past and future, with the ultimate goal of understanding the nature of the Prime Creator- The Star Maker.
Like L&FM Star Maker is a book that is easily admired yet difficult to enjoy. The scope of Stapledon's imagination is astonishing. Yet because of its broad scope (literally billions of years of time and billions of light-years in space) it is by its very nature general, with little detail and much philosophy. This makes for tedious reading. And the philosophy espoused by Stapledon is Socialism. The theme running through the book is that only when the workers overcome their capitalist masters and control the means of production will a society be able to evolve a world mind -the next stage in galactic evolution. Those societies which do not will be consigned to the dustbin of history.
This attitude is not surprising given when the book was written. WWI demonstrated the failure of monarchy, the Depression the failure of liberal democracy and capitalism. The choice seemed to many in the 1930's, a choice between fascism and communism. And Stapledon chose Lenin; to quote 'we were amazed to find that in a truly awakened world even a dictatorship could be in essence democratic' (Chp 9.1)That would be the Dictatorship of the Proletariat comrade.
Politics aside, it is a seminal work in the history of the genre. It is an amazing work of imagination, even if it does take a great deal of effort to wade through.

"Who are we?", "Why are we here?" and "What's it all for?" are questions most of us have probably asked at some point, whether we're going through times of doubt, uncertainty or philosophical musing. Destiny and fate are fuzzy topics that make for deep intellectual discussion, providing much stimulation and irritation for those who like to ponder such matters. "Star Maker" attempts to answer the above questions by taking the reader on an epic voyage spanning the cosmos.

The human protagonist becomes a disembodied psychic presence travelling across the immense gulf of space and time, visiting numerous worlds, some of which, like Earth, spawn conflicting cultures and religions. We see evolving star systems and witness the birth and death of countless species before meeting the creator of it all, the enigmatic Star Maker.

On our own miniscule speck of a planet (where the book begins) we go about our daily business, struggling to make sense of a senseless existence, living in a world that seems to punish the innocent and reward the wicked. As we soon discover, it's like this throughout the universe. We witness acts of barbarism and atrocity, noble races are wiped out, unwilling (even if able) to defend themselves against less civilised, but no less talented aggressors. Other worlds are simply destroyed by freak twists of fate. All this is of complete indifference to the Star Maker. (How many of us feel grief when we accidentally step on a bug?)

On meeting the Star Maker we find that our cosmos is merely one of a series of artistic experiments churned out over the aeons, as the Star Maker strives to create something that meets his satisfaction. Like any artist on an endless quest for perfection, he has to go through several failures in his "immature" phase. Our cosmos is produced in his "mature" phase. Yet it still fails to satisfy him, and even stranger, more incomprehensible creations are brought into being.

I suspect John Wyndham got his inspiration for "Chocky" from reading this book, the way the narrator becomes an observer who can inhabit the minds of various hosts. I know Wyndham had read "Odd John". In "Star Maker" there's a lot to take in, even the narrator had trouble understanding a lot of it. 100 billion years of birth and death, hope and despair, good and evil are covered in 253 pages. I read "Last and First Men" two years ago. Even though "Star Maker" is an interesting book which I finished more quickly, I still prefer the former.

"Again and again, over a vast span of time, humanity waxes and wanes, flourishes and is nearly extinguished, sinks to barbarism and rediscovers a religion of selfless love"? Except for the "religion of selfless love" bit, the late Sir Fred Hoyle has this sort of thing in at least two of his science fiction novels, "October the First is Too Late" and "Andromeda Breakthrough". It occurred to Professor Hoyle, however, to SUMMARIZE briefly the waxing and waning, to ruminate on it philosophically, and to incorporate it into actual NOVELS with actual STORIES. (Professor Hoyle's waning, by the bye, has mostly to do with irresponsible dissemination of technology and overpopulation.)

(I don't know where people come up with such stuff as "Olaf Stapledon, Oxford philosophy department head". Mr. Stapledon was never head of any department, never taught at Oxford or any college, and never taught philosphy anywhere. Before he came into his inheritence he worked a variety of odd jobs, including a short stint as a public grade school teacher. His "occasional ad hoc lectures" were public lectures about socialism given under the auspices of a socialist society, in other words, they were more a matter of politics than of education. That's it.)

"If you can get past Stapledon's somewhat stilted prose (he was, after all, an Oxford philosophy professor by profession, so I cut him some slack here)...."

Not quite. Mr. Stapledon did earn a degree in philosophy, but he lived off an inheritance and, aside from an occasional ad hoc lecture here and there, did not teach. Early on he contributed a few articles to philosophical journals, but he mostly occupied himself writing science-fiction novels which sold very
modestly.

I only read the first of the two included in this volume, "The First and Last Men", and my star-rating and review refer to this novel only. It has been praised for "containing enough material for hundreds of conventional science-fiction stories". I only wish there were at least one--conventional or other--science-fiction story in it. For this is a novel with no plot and no characters. We might call it a fictional history, but a history of England, for example, has largely to do with kings and queens and Cromwells--characters--, as a history of physics has largely to do with Newton, Einstein, and Bohr--characters. To a certain extent, the early part of the book tries to make up for this lack by anthropomorphizing nations-nations behave as if they were persons. (Of course, you can get away with saying anything you like about nations this way, zzzzzzzzzzz.)

Wherefore no characters? It appears that this novel espouses an extreme form of anti-individualism, such that it seems to me a sort of reductio ad absurdum inadvertent argument in FAVOR of individualism. (By the bye, the novel itself calls capitalist exploitation of the masses "individualism", whereas I call
capitalist exploitation of the masses "corporate collectivism", rather the opposite.)

"The First and Last Men" was originally published in 1930 (or 1931; I can't remember), but its fictional history starts immediately after World War I, which is to say, the first part of its fictional history ought NOT to be fictional. The extent to which it misreads its own time is surprising and mystifying.
Compare it to Hermann Hesse's "Steppenwolf", which accurately predicts the rise of Nazi-ism and a second world war, and was originally published in the mid-1920's. For that matter, compare it to Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World", which was originally published in 1932 and remains very much on target.

In short, it seems to me, judged by any reasonable standard, this novel is simply awful. I'm guessing it has avoided excoriation only because it is fairly obscure. Read Stanislaw Lem instead.

I have never read a writer who was able to convey the vastness of the universe and the infinitely complex possibilities of sentient life forms over evolutionary stretches of time. The first of the two novels in this publication, Last and First Men, Olaf Stapledon describes the spiritual, intellectual and biological evolution of the human species from our modern era to its last residence on Neptune. The slowly changing forces of our planets and the sun force humans to adapt and change, and Olaf Stapledon documents these adaptations and the adaptations humans impose on their environments. Illustrating the unimaginably long time required for this evolution is Stapledon's unique talent. The theme of the story is human's destiny - to achieve a collective conciousness. It is a fitting introduction for the next novel in this collection - Star Maker. In his novel Star Maker Olaf Stapledon builds a pyramid based on intricate descriptions of the galaxy's sentient beings and illustrates the spiritual journey of all sentient beings toward a unification into a galactic consciousness, with the ultimate goal of meeting the creator of the universe. He applies his clear knowledge of modern biological and cultural evolution and their interactions with their environments to illustrate this journey of countless species, societies and individuals toward this galactic destiny. Along the way are a few twists, which are too exciting in their intricacy to give away here! The end finds our universal being finally able to glimpse its creator. At the time of this writing I know little of Olaf Stapledon, except that he was a philospher as well as a science fiction writer. These two novels are the best science fiction I have ever read. They deal with current issues and ideas in sociology, anthropology, biological evolution, and philosophy in a vivid storytelling style. Although I know little of philosophy, his point of view is strongly deterministic. Although Olaf Stapledon is a product of his time, he was one of his time who was looking toward the future with an imaginatino more focused than any other I have read.

"The First and Last Men" has been praised for "containing enough material for hundreds of conventional science-fiction stories". I only wish there were at least one--conventional or other--science-fiction story in it. For this is a novel with no plot and no characters. We might call it a fictional history, but a history of England, for example, has largely to do with kings and queens and Cromwells--characters--, as a history of physics has largely to do with Newton, Einstein, and Bohr--characters. To a certain extent, the early part of the book tries to make up for this lack by
anthropomorphizing nations--nations behave as if they were persons. (Of course, you can get away with saying anything you like about nations this way, zzzzzzzzzzz.)

Wherefore no characters? It appears that this novel espouses an extreme form of anti-individualism, such that it seems to me a sort of reductio ad absurdum inadvertent argument in FAVOR of individualism. (By the bye, the novel itself calls capitalist exploitation of the masses "individualism", whereas I call
capitalist exploitation of the masses "corporate collectivism", rather the opposite.)

"The First and Last Men" was originally published in 1930 (or 1931; I can't remember), but its fictional history starts immediately after World War I, which is to say, the first part of its fictional history ought NOT to be fictional. The extent to which it misreads its own time is surprising and mystifying. Compare it to Hermann Hesse's "Steppenwolf", which accurately predicts the rise of Nazi-ism and a second world war, and was originally published in the mid-1920's. For that matter, compare it to Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World", which was originally published in 1932 and remains very much on target.

In short, it seems to me, judged by any reasonable standard, this novel is simply awful. I'm guessing it has avoided excoriation only because it is fairly obscure. Read Stanislaw Lem instead.

Olaf Stapleton has made a novel, not just of science fiction, but of philosophy and the future of mankind. From the first man to the last, we follow mankind, how it develops, the problems it faces, not only in their changing environments, but also their social problems and the problems within mankind's mind. Sometimes Mr. Stapleton only hints at the details and problems as he takes us across history in leaps of thousands and, sometimes, millions of years. I take a point away for his use of 'telepathic' powers within the story and the fact that he seems to think that man needs millions of years to change cultures or even invent such things as rocket flight! But rememeber that this man's works effected later generations of thinkers, sci-fi writers and scientists.

If you liked this book, you might wish to try getting 'Star Maker' by the same author.

Wow! Stapledon is an excellent sci fi writer and an excellent philosopher of the human condition.

There are no ordinary characters in this story. The protagonist is humanity, and this is humanity's autobiography. Or perhaps the story is better understood as a family saga, with each succeeding race of humanity as a new character, from the First Men (that's us) through the Last Men in the way far future.

Again and again, over a vast span of time, humanity waxes and wanes, flourishes and is nearly extinguished, sinks to barbarism and rediscovers a religion of selfless love. Humanity takes on new forms and moves to new planets. In the moments when humanity is capable of philosophical and spiritual reflection, it is plagued by recurring issues--in particular, by the tension between two of its greatest spiritual attainments: (1) a deep love for and identification with all life and the passionate desire for all life to continue and to be free of suffering, and (2) a dispassionate aesthetic appreciation of fate, a mystical awe at the beauty of the drama of the cosmos, including individual and racial suffering and extinction.

The story is engaging, and I was awed by how clearly articulated and how deeply explored is this basic paradox of spirituality. Like two of my favorite authors, Nancy Mairs and Annie Dillard, Stapledon takes a clear and unflinching look at the pain and angst of life in this universe and manages to find hope and beauty. Just two small gripes: it gets a little too pedantic at the very end, and the editor should have deleted about 90% of the occurrences of the word "extravagant." If you like science fiction with deep ideas, or if you like spiritual or philosophical reflection and think you can at least tolerate the sci fi genre, I highly recommend this book.