7

But why is Saturn's moon Mimas a moon of Jupiter in the book?

"Leonov hurtled past the orbits of Io and tiny Mimas"

I know Saturn was in the original 2001 and not Jupiter, but was this intentional?

6
  • 1
    Interestingly, this wikipedia user claims that their copy has a correction - "My copy says "the orbits of Io and tiny Amalthea", which would be correct. If there was a misprint it's been corrected. 14:04, 12 March 2006 (AEDT)" but I've checked the most recent ebook version and it still says Mimas.
    – Valorum
    Jan 15, 2022 at 16:12
  • I've edited to match the title question and removed a couple of unrelated questions. If you want to know multiple things about the same book, you should ask them as separate questions.
    – Valorum
    Jan 15, 2022 at 16:14
  • 1
    I don't have time to write up an answer now, but in brief: the novel and movie of 2001 were developed in parallel, but the location of the latter was switched from Saturn to Jupiter; when 2010 was written it was based on the movie rather than the book. More details here.
    – DavidW
    Jan 15, 2022 at 16:16
  • @DavidW I hope you find the time soon.
    – Spencer
    Jan 15, 2022 at 16:43
  • In 2010, is the monolith freely orbiting Jupiter along with Discovery and not embedded in a moon? Jan 15, 2022 at 19:44

1 Answer 1

7

This appears to either have been an error or a (very odd) misprint. My paperback copy reads:

Leonov hurtled past the orbits of Io and tiny Amalthea.

This was a 1997 printing by Voyager.

5
  • 2
    The original editions from the '80s all say Mimas; I've checked the Del Rey (US/International) paperback (1984 and following printings, in this case 5th printing 1989) and the 1983 Granada (UK) paperback.
    – DavidW
    Jan 15, 2022 at 16:41
  • 2
    Seems like an odd mistake for Clarke to have made - but a very improbable misprint. Lapse by Clarke or an error by an editor?
    – Michael
    Jan 15, 2022 at 16:50
  • 4
    @Michael - Interestingly my 2010 'anniversary' ebook edition has the same error.
    – Valorum
    Jan 15, 2022 at 17:07
  • 2
    @Valorum Presumably a direct reproduction of the original, including any later corrected errors? My edition doesn't specifically mention any significant reworking and I can't find any readily accessible list of changes between editions.
    – Michael
    Jan 15, 2022 at 17:13
  • 1
    Thank you guys for the info! That makes much more sense that it was some kind of mistake.......my neurons can rest now! Jan 15, 2022 at 19:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.