Thanks. Arthur C Clarke. I enjoyed the film 2001 but was always slightly uneasy about the cave men looking like men dressed up as apes, the rest of the film I enjoyed immensely. On the strength of this I bought the dvd of Childhood's End. I dislike this film intensely & the ideas apparently behind it. It seemed like a Puritanical 'I told you so' rant thinly disguised as science-fiction. Distinct from this, Lem's point seems to be that IF there is other intelligent life within the universe it may have developed along quite different lines to the way primates have developed on earth, to the extent that we might not even recognise alien life or, if we did, we wouldn't be able to communicate with it because there would be no common ground between us and them. Or, bluntly, the alien life form may simply refuse communication - as is the case in Fiasco. The life form is fundamentally aggressive, that is its nature. What if life on earth had developed along insect lines, what if the highest life form on earth had developed from that of the termite? There are parallels, termites are highly social and live in chaotic mound-cities, many ant-forms farm other animals & exploit plants; but there the common ground ends. I find that interesting to think about. Clarke's philosophy - as much as I could discern from the film - I found banal. That's just my personal view, I am not knocking Clarke as an author, we all have out likes & dislikes.