Revisiting 2001: A Queer Odyssey?
The glbt possibilities in Arthur C. Clarke's most famous series of books
© 2002 by Stephen Stonewall
Reinterpretation of any novel in light of a new world can demonstrate the dangers of literary criticism and analysis. The generation which read (or viewed) the original "2001" in 1968 is still alive, as is its author (though, sadly, the film director, Stanley Kubrick, did not live to see the year he made famous).
It is possible to reinterpret the novels in ways that were unintended by the author - and he is still alive to potentially say so. (This begs the question of how a novel might be reinterpreted in a century or two. But we digress.)
In examining the worlds of "2001" through the eyes of glbt people, it is therefore necessary to begin with a disclaimer - this interpretation is the opinion only of one reviewer and does not necessarily reflect the aims/intentions of the author, etc. etc. It is also necessary to consider the social and literary context of the times when "2001" was originally written.
In the early 1960s, the world was in the midst of an arms race and space race. In response to US shame at being beaten into space by the godless communists, the US President had promised to land an American "man" on the Moon before the end of the decade. Non-military (though politically motivated) science was enjoying its greatest "Manhattan Project" in history. The dreams of Jules Verne and HG Wells looked like coming true within a few short years. Exciting times! Astronauts were chosen - a men's-only club of macho types who exuded "the right stuff" from their pores. We were soon to have massive amounts of testosterone in space.
Science fiction had also enjoyed a burst of popularity since the 1950s. The golden age of literary SF authors had preceded a decade of movies such as "Forbidden Planet", "The Day the Earth Stood Still" and a plethora of flying saucer movies which echoed contemporary American paranoia about communists.
Interestingly, these movies (and books) frequently featured a predominantly male crew, testimony to the "boys only" stereotyping of the genre and also - presumably - intended to eliminate any possibility of space ship crews getting up to hanky panky during those long star flights (Gene Roddenberry once spoke of his attempt to have the United Star Ship Enterprise originally filled with a 50% male and 50% female crew, apparently vetoed by Studio executives who felt that this would lead to impure thoughts amongst viewers, whereas a 70% male crew would naturally eliminate any such thoughts. If only!)
Against this social standard, "2001" (the book and the movie - as they were created simultaneously and released concurrently in 1968) featured a predominantly male cast, from the apes and astronauts through to the star child. Women were rarely used as anything more than minimal set dressing (and they were good at losing cashmere sweaters). After all, this was a story about astronauts and aliens and journeys into the rugged final frontier. Women were not welcome here because - at that time - viewers (or readers) would not have felt female astronauts to be credible characters. Even the spaceship "Discovery" (one reviewer suggested that the spaceship could be compared to a giant space spermatozoa) and the computer "HAL" were male by design and implication.
Therefore, our three main characters were male - Dave Bowman, Frank Poole and HAL 9000 (the computer). The story oh-so-nicely avoided any references as to how those boys kept themselves warm during that loooong flight to Jupiter (even a generation later, with mixed gender and multi-racial crews, NASA and other space agencies still pointedly avoid the topic of sex in spaceflight). From our vantage point of hindsight, is it possible to ask whether Frank and Dave dabbled in what might be termed "institutional homosexuality"? After all, they were stuck together for months in a solitary spaceship and made no references to girlfriends left behind at home.
It is also possible (perhaps with a hint of tongue planted firmly in cheek) to ask what was the real reason why HAL sabotaged the mission and attempted to kill the astronauts - was there a love triangle here? Did HAL feel jealous of a relationship that he could observe (he had his camera "eye" in every room of the space ship and was shown explicitly lip reading their private conversations) but never fulfil? Some people might feel that such an interpretation is silly and flippant, possibly even offensive to suggest that the men (and/or computer) were gay. 
I cannot agree - a gay reinterpretation of this relationship triangle, and the inclusion of a gay sub-text, adds further depth to HAL's cybernetic personality, it enhances the tragedy of his disconnection at the hands of his unrequited lover, and it remains true to the known facts of the story.
Whether such reinterpretation of the novel/film can be valid (or fair) can probably only be answered by future literary analysts with the hindsight of another century. But it must be accepted that the social morés of the time required an all-male crew, and permitted the existence of such a crew to be seen as both a realistic and symbolic indication of non-sexual behaviour. The author was so constrained in his creativity, and any further interpretation of the novel/film might be seen as historical reconstructionism at its worst. However, it must be pointed out that various forms of interdependence between man and machine were highlighted by both the movie and the book, and hints of this symbiosis date back as far as the original short story, "The Sentinel", upon which the plot is based. It would not be unfair to say that the story of "2001" suggests that relationships between organic and cybernetic life will become increasingly blurred and entwined in the future. How much of this might be deemed "queer" is a matter of interpretation. Problems regarding creative constraint were less of an issue for the other books in this series. "2010" appeared over a decade later, well into the era of civil rights activism, when women were more equal and gay issues were less hidden in society. Clarke not only included women aboard space ships in "2010" (published in 1982) but one woman was even a space ship captain. Others were scientists and astronauts in their own right.
HAL turned out to have a human father (!) who spent much of the novel agonising over his apparently doomed cybernetic child. Given the context of this relationship - telling us that life and parenthood will not be confined to strictly human or biological terms in the future - this has to be seen as some type of message warning us to expand our view of what constitutes "family" in the future.
"2010" also features the main character, Dr Heywood Floyd, delicately asking engineer Walter Curnow to more discretely handle his relationship with a male cosmonaut, in light of the fact that one of the female crew has also clearly fallen in love with that same cosmonaut. It is only a brief conversation, but it establishes unambiguously that Curnow is a highly respected, popular crewmember whose sexuality is clearly no secret.
The film of this novel, not surprisingly, focussed on the more traditional, heterosexual aspects of a mixed-gender crew.
Clarke's next novel in the series, "2061" (published in 1988), featured George and Jerry as an openly-gay, married couple who were best friends to Dr. Heywood Floyd. At times, they even camped it up in their best stereotypical fashion: "...what a ghastly advertisement for us feys!" and referred to a number of infamous gays from history. In this light, the novel particularly referred to Shaka the Great, infamous Zulu tyrant. One cannot help wondering if "2061" has never been filmed (at least partly) because of the existence of these secondary characters.
The novel, "3001" (published in 1997), was the last in this series, and featured astronaut Frank Poole arriving, like Buck Rogers, in a future which threatened to overwhelm him with bouts of culture shock and technological change. Feeling out of place, not fitting in with others around you - this is a major theme of the novel and could easily be seen as a gay metaphor for someone coming to terms with being "different". Uncomfortable on this future Earth, Poole flees back into space and seeks to complete his unfinished business at Jupiter. There, he is encouraged by the crew of his space ship to meet their non-gender specific Significant Others when they arrive at Ganymede.
Other characters from the "2001" epic to be reunited with Frank in this novel are Dave Bowman and Hal, who share a symbiotic inter-relationship within the monolith that had previously absorbed them. This unusual relationship seems even more significant if one considers my previous suggestion of a love triangle between Hal and this astronaut duo - although Poole's heterosexuality in this final novel would appear to make the relationship more likely to have been some form of bisexual "marriage of convenience".
"3001" also features a brief mention of AIDS as one of the "natural nightmares" (along with smallpox and the Black Death) which had been eliminated by the end of the 21st century. The gay community - as well as all other groups of AIDS-affected peoples around the world - would undoubtedly appreciate this acknowledgement of a plague and its hope for a cure within our lifetime.
Clarke's inclusion of queer characters and issues in this set of four novels might be seen by some readers to be minimalist, but it is still significant given the definitive nature of Clarke's status as an author - and of the status of this series of books. He can be forgiven for assigning relatively minor roles to openly queer issues and characters when imagining the possible constraints which might have been placed upon his artistic licence by publishers, or by marketing and Studio executives who held some form of financial or controlling interest in the "2001" franchise. (See Clarke's other, unrelated novel, "Imperial Earth", for a credible portrayal of a futuristic and major queer character created by this definitive SF author).
Significantly, the series of "2001" novels featured a whole host of transformed characters - Moon Walker, humanity, Dave Bowman, HAL, Frank Poole, the Europans, even planet Jupiter, who were helped towards their own personal destiny through growth and change. On one level, this could be interpreted as a metaphor for issues faced by the transgendered or wider queer community in their learning to live outside of the constraints of their social environment. On a wider level, these transformations can be seen as a call to all 
of humanity that we should welcome change and diversity as a major trigger for growth and evolution as a species if we wish to progress from Moon Walker to Star Child.
Clarke was not the first SF author to feature unconventional - and even gay characters - but he was certainly one of the most famous SF authors to do so. As such, he deserves recognition as a pioneer of a different frontier.
Most of all, "2001" spoke of the wondrous, unimagined and unimaginable future that awaits our species as we reach for the stars (as evidenced by the message in the original short story, "The Sentinel"). "2001" challenged us to pause and consider the wonders of the Universe and of our individual place as part of that creation. Most media and film commentators missed those messages when they wrote their "2001" retrospectives last year (they instead focussed on trivial items like Hilton Hotels floating in space).
The "2001" novels still challenge us to strive for the stars, in whatever context (queer or otherwise), wherever and whenever we can do so. The future is calling us, and we must be prepared to meet its challenges. To paraphrase the great author himself, we are all masters of our world, and are not quite sure of what to do next - but we can surely think of something.
Related Biblio/Filmography:
"The Sentinel," the original short story by Arthur C Clarke, 1950, reprinted in various collections.
"2001: A Space Odyssey," by Arthur C Clarke, 1968.
"2001: A Space Odyssey," directed by Stanley Kubrick, 1968, available on MGM video and DVD.
"The Making of Kubrick's 2001" edited by Jerome Agel, 1970.
"The Lost Worlds of 2001" by Arthur C. Clarke,1972.
"2010: Odyssey Two," by Arthur C. Clarke, 1982.
"2010," directed by Peter Hyams, 1984, available on MGM video and DVD.
"2061: Odyssey Three," by Arthur C. Clarke, 1988.
"Odyssey: The Authorised Biography of Arthur C. Clarke," by Neil McAleer, 1992.
"3001: The Final Odyssey," by Arthur C. Clarke, 1997.
"Greetings, Carbon-Based Bipeds!" by Arthur C. Clarke, 1999.
"Moon Watcher's Memoir: A Diary of 2001: A Space Odyssey" by Dan Richter, 2002.
(Stephen Stonewall remembers the original film's reissue in the early 1970s, when he watched it avidly as a very young teenager. He avidly studied the contemporary and abovementioned books on the making and background of the film, and wrote a school essay on the symbolism involved. If memory serves him correctly, his teacher rejected the essay due to disbelief that a science fiction film could contain such symbolism.)