SCIENCEFICTION

ACOLLECTIONOFCRITICALESSAYS

EditedbyMarkRose

Scanned & Proofed By MadMaxAU

****

Contents
Introduction byMarkRose

1. Backgrounds
StartingPoints byKingsleyAmis ScienceFictionandLiterature byRobertConquest TheRootsofScienceFiction byRobertScholes

2. Theory
OnthePoeticsoftheScienceFictionGenre byDarkoSuvin TheTimeTravelStoryandRelatedMattersofSFStructuring byStanislawLem GenreCriticism: ScienceFictionandtheFantastic byEricS.Rabkin

3. Approaches
OnScienceFiction byC.S.Lewis TheImaginationofDisaster bySusanSontag

 HowtoPlayUtopia: SomeBriefNotesontheDistinctivenessofUtopianFiction byMichaelHolquist TheApocalypticImagination,ScienceFiction,andAmerican Literature byDavidKetterer ScienceFictionandtheFuture byJohnHuntington NotesontheEditorandContributors SelectedBibliography ****

Introduction

byMarkRose
Thelastdecadeorsohasseenashiftinliterarytasteawayfromthe meticulouspsychologicalrealismof,say,GoodbyeColumbustothebrilliant extravagancesofPortnoysComplaint.ThenovelsofBarth,Heller,Pynchon,and Vonnegutaresymptomaticofthisshift,asisthepopularityofTolkiensepic fantasy,TheLordoftheRings.EvensoconservativeagroupasRenaissance scholarshasfelttheeffectsoftheshiftintasteastheintensecriticalinterestin SpensersFaerieQueeneandShakespeareslateromances,TheWintersTaleand TheTempest,bearswitness.Mostpeoplehaveahealthyloveofwonderand melodrama,butformanyyearstheacceptedcanonsoftaste,committedto rathernarrowidealsofrealismandanArnoldianconceptionofhigh seriousness,rejectedthebasicstuffofromanceaschildish.Now,however,ithas becomepossibleforseriouscriticstoreexamineareasofliteraturethatformerly wereignored,andsciencefiction,whichisperhapsthecharacteristicromance formofthescientificage,hasbeendiscovered.Wedonotexpectromancesto providesubtlepsychologicalportraitsorfullyrenderedimagesoftheworldaswe knowit.Rather,weexpecttohearofmarvelsandadventuresinstrangeplaces populatedbysuchpreternaturalcreaturesasgiantsanddragons.Theessential aestheticeffectofromanceiswonder,andwehaveonlytoconsiderthetitlesof someofthesciencefictionmagazinessuchasAmazingStories,ThrillingWonder Stories,orAstoundingScienceFictiontoperceivehowstronglytheoldhungerfor themarvelouspersists.Callyourmagicaspacewarporamattertransformer, yourenchantedislandtheplanetEinsteinnamed,ofcourse,forthatquaint twentiethcenturyphysicistwhothoughtitimpossibletotravelfasterthanlight callyourgiantsanddragonsextraterrestrials,andwhatyouhaveismerelythe contemporaryformofoneofthemostancientliterarykinds. Anunderstandingthatsciencefictionisaromanceformisperhapsthe necessaryprerequisitetoseriousdiscussionofthegenre,forsciencefictionis rootedinsuchromancetraditionsastheimaginaryvoyageGulliversTravelsis perhapsthemostfamiliaroftheseinEnglishanditclearlywillnotdoto

considerworksofthissortinthesametermsaspsychologicalnovels. 1Romance, asarule,movesfreelytowardsymbolismandallegory,atendencythat contributestooneofitsmajorliterarystrengths,theabilitytotreatbroadand oftenexplicitlyphilosophicalissuesinfictionalform.Intheprefaceto Frankenstein,thegothicromancewhichmanywouldclaimasthefirstscience fictionnovel,MaryShelleyexplainsthatsheisnotinterestedinmerelyweaving aseriesofsupernaturalterrorsbuthaschosentowriteaspecialkindoffantastic tale,onethataffordsapointofviewtotheimaginationforthedelineatingof humanpassionsmorecomprehensiveandcommandingthananywhichthe ordinaryrelationsofexistingeventscanyield.Amorecomprehensiveand commandingpointofviewthancanbeachievedbyanarrativeofexisting eventsthisiswhatsciencefictiontypicallyseeks,anditgenerallyachievesitby oneoranotheroftheliterarystrategiesofwhatDarkoSuvin,inhisimportant essayinthisvolume,callsestrangement.Thesciencefictionwritermay,inthe fashionofMaryShelley,provideuswithananalyticimageofourworld,as,say, KarelCapekdoesinR.U.R.,wherethetendencyofanindustrialsocietyto transformpeopleintomachinesisliterallyrealizedinthemanufactureofhuman machines.Alternatively,hemayprovideuswithsomeformofuncommon perspectiveonourworld,perhapsbyprojectingthestoryintothefuturesothat ourowntimeisseeninabroadercontextthanisusualorperhapsbyallowingus toviewourselvesfromthepointofviewof,say,thesupermenofW.Olaf StapledonsOddJohnorthealiensofRobertSheckleysSpecialist.Science fictionsharesthegenericabilityofromancetotreatlargethemes,andfromH.G. WellssearlycosmologicaltalessuchasTheTimeMachineandTheWarofthe WorldstoStanislawLemsepistemologicalfable,Solaris,ithasbeenoneofthe fewcontemporaryfictionalformsthatcandealdirectlywithbroadphilosophical issues. Beingageneralizingmode,romancetendstouserepresentativerather thanindividualizedcharacterstheknightversustheevilmagicianor,inscience fiction,thescientistversusthereligiousfanaticandsuchmattersasdepthand consistencyofcharacterportrayalarenormallybesidethepoint.Ifthenarrative followsthequestromancepattern,asmostsciencefictionstoriesdo,thenthe
1

FordiscussionsofromancewhichareparticularlyapplicabletosciencefictionseeRichardChase,TheAmerican NovelandItsTradition(GardenCity,N.Y.:Doubleday&Company,Inc.,AnchorPress,1957),especiallychapter1, andNorthropFrye,AnatomyofCriticism(Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversityPress,1957),especiallypp.186206, TheMythosofSummer:Romance.

figuresinthetaletendtobecharacterizedprincipallybytheirideological relationshiptothequest.Putsimply,charactersareeitherfororagainstthe quest:thegoodorenlightenedassistit,thebadorignorantobstructit.In readingasciencefictionstory,then,wewanttowatchlessforpsychologythan forthewayvariouscharactertypesareorganizedinaconfigurationthatis ultimatelyanexpressionofvalues.Tochooseasimpleexample,inUniverse, RobertHeinleinsstoryofastarshipgoneastray,theobjectofthequestis truth,conceivedasamaterialisticperceptionofthenaturalworld.Generations havepassedsincethestarshipslaunchingandthebenighteddescendantsofthe originalcrewhavecometobelievethattheirshipistheuniverseandthatsuch notionsastheTriparetobeunderstoodinareligioussense.Theconflictinthe storyisastrugglebetweentheshipsrulingpriestlyclasscalled,ironically, scientistsandthemoreopenmindedherowhomakeshiswaytothelong forgottenMainControlRoomwherehediscoversthestarsandrecognizesthat theuniverseisvasterthananyonehadsupposed.HeinleinsUniverseasserts materialisticagainstreligiousvalues,andyetthecrucialrevelationofthestarsis presentedlessasamomentofcoolintellectualtriumphthanoneofquasi religiousecstasy.Thereisperhapsacontradictionherebetweenthestorys assertedvaluesandtheemotionalresponseitattemptstoevoke,but,ifso,itisa contradictionthatiscommonplaceinsciencefiction,whichrepeatedlystrivesfor justsuchaquasireligiousmoodofawe,andperhapsithelpstoexplainthe appealofsciencefictiontoanagethatisfundamentallymaterialisticinethosand yetnotwithoutahungerforreligiousemotion. ThestarryepiphanyinUniverseisaparticularlyclearexampleofthe generaltendencyofsciencefictionstoriestomovetowardmomentsof apocalypticrevelation,eitherecstaticor,perhapsmorefrequently,horrific,as befitsagenrestronglyinfluencedbythegothicnovel.InIsaacAsimovs Nightfall,forinstance,averysimilarrevelationofthestarsbringsuniversal madnessandthecollapseofcivilization:heretheindifferentsplendorofthe cosmosispicturedastooterribleforthehumanmindtoabsorb.Revelationssuch asthese,strikingmomentsinwhichthetranscendentandthemundane interpenetrate,areanotherelementwhichassociatessciencefictionwiththe romancetradition,wheresuchepiphaniesasRedcrosssvisionoftheNew JerusaleminBookIofTheFaerieQueenearefrequent.Theabilityofromanceto embracethetranscendentmadeitasuitablevehicleforreligiousexpressioninan earlierperiod.Andperhaps,asRobertScholesnotesbelowinTheRootsof

ScienceFiction,weshouldnotbetoosurprisedtofindsciencefictionemploying thesamevehicleasreligion,forscience,too,emphasizesthatthereismoretothe worldthanmeetstheeye.Telescopes,microscopes,evenchalkonblackboard theseareinstrumentsofprophecyoftheunseenandsometimesunseeable worldsuponwhichscientificknowledgeisfounded. ProbablythechiefinterestinHeinleinsUniversecomeslessfromthe epiphanyorevenfromtheplotthanfromthesetting,thedescriptionofthelittle universeoftheship.Inrealisticfiction,settingtendstobeprimarilyacontextfor theportrayalofcharacter;inromanceforms,settingtypicallyreceivesmuchmore emphasis.Indeed,sometimesthesettingofaromancewillbemorealive,will havemorepersonality,thananyofthecharacters.InTheFaerieQueene,for instance,themostmemorableandoftenthemostdramaticpartsofthepoem tendtobethedescriptionsofsuchcruciallocalesasLuciferaspalaceinBookIor theGardenofAdonisinBookIII.Thephenomenonoflandscapeasherois particularlycommoninsciencefiction,wherethetrulyactiveelementofthestory isfrequentlyneithercharacternorplotbuttheworldthewritercreates,asinHal ClementsdescriptionofMesklin,theimaginaryJoviantypeplanetofMissionof Gravity.Indeed,sometimesinsciencefictionthesettingliterallycomesalive,asin ArthurClarkesRendezvouswithRama,wherethemysteriouslyemptyspaceship whichthehumanprotagonistsareinvestigatingsuddenlybeginstoproduce biologicalrobots.Frequentlythesettingsinsciencefictionstoriesareliteralan allegoricalreadingofClementsMesklinwouldmerelybesillybutsometimes sciencefictionalsettingsdotendtowardthesymbolic,asinUniverse,where thestarshipisinterestingbothinitsownrightandasametaphorforourworld.1 Appreciationofthefactthatsciencefictionisaromanceformisnecessary topreventcertainfundamentallyimproperexpectationsofthegenre,butitalone doesnotprovideasimplekeytocriticism.Inthediscussionofsciencefictionas ofanyotherkindofliteraturethereisfinallynosubstituteforsensitivityand criticaltact.Moreover,thatsciencefictionisaformofromanceshouldnotblind ustotheauthenticallyscientificaspectofthegenre.Sciencefictionvariesin
Thistendencytoemphasizelandscapehelpstoexplainthefacilitywithwhichsciencefictionstorieshavebeen adaptedtofilm,avisualmediumthatbyitsverynaturealsoemphasizessetting.TheappealofStanleyKubrickand ArthurClarkes2001:ASpaceOdyssey,forinstance,isobviouslyoneoflandscape,ofsuchvisualsequencesasthat ofthespaceshuttleslowlyaligningitselfwiththerotatingspacestationwhilethesoundtrack,playingtheBlue Danube,providesuswithanaestheticattitudetowardaworldofdancing,halflivingmachines.
1

qualityandinparticularcasesitisoftenimpossibletodistinguishfromfantasy; nevertheless,thescientificelementhasbeenimportantfromthebeginning.The ivoryandcrystalgadgetthatlaunchesH.G.Wellsstimetravelerintothefutureis magicalflimflam,buttheromanceitselfisameditationuponsomeofthehuman implicationsofDarwinsdiscoveries.Superficially,TheTimeMachinemaybe unscientific,butthefictionasawholeisinformedwithascientificvision. Agreatdealofsciencefictionisofcoursedependentuponflimflam,andI impliedearlierthatthereislittledifferencebetweenmagicofthesortthatweget inmedievalromancesandsuchsciencefictionalmarvelsasspacewarpsand mattertransformers.Letusnotenow,however,thatintheoldromances,asin modernfantasy,noexplanationsarerequiredfortheintroductionofmarvels: knightssimplyencountermagiciansaslittlegirlsfalldownrabbitholeswithout authorialapologies.Insuchworldsthemarvelousisnormal.Sciencefictiondiffers fromfantasyinthekindofrhetoricitevokestojustifyitsmarvelsH.G.Wells calledthisrhetoricscientificpatterandthedifferenceinrhetoricissignificant, forthescientificpattercontainsanimplicitassertionofthetruthofthescientific worldviewandanassurancethat,whilethelawsofthecosmosmaynotbefully understood,stilltherearelaws. InthePrefacetoLyricalBallads,writtenonlyafewyearsbefore Frankenstein,Wordsworthmakesastatementthatlooksforwardtoagreatdeal ofsciencefiction:
Ifthelaborsofmenofscienceshouldevercreateanymaterialrevolution, directorindirect,inourcondition,andintheimpressionswhichwehabitually receive,thepoetwillsleepthennomorethanatpresent;hewillbereadytofollow thestepsofthemanofscience,notonlyinthosegeneralindirecteffects,buthe willbeathisside,carryingsensationintothemidstoftheobjectsofthescience itself.Theremotestdiscoveriesofthechemist,thebotanist,ormineralogistwillbe asproperobjectsofthepoetsartasanyuponwhichitcanbeemployed,ifthetime shouldevercomewhenthesethingsshallbefamiliartous,andtherelationsunder whichtheyarecontemplatedbythefollowersoftheserespectivesciencesshallbe manifestlyandpalpablymaterialtousasenjoyingandsufferingbeings.Ifthetime shouldevercomewhenwhatisnowcalledscience,thusfamiliarizedtomen,shall bereadytoputon,asitwere,aformoffleshandblood,thepoetwilllendhis divinespirittoaidthetransfiguration,andwillwelcomethebeingthusproduced,as adearandgenuineinmateofthehouseholdofman.

Sciencefiction,contraryperhapstopopularopinion,isratherpoorasan instrumentofscientificprediction,butitisanexcellentmediumforthe explorationofthetaste,thefeel,thehumanmeaningofscientificdiscoveries. Thereis,forexample,acategoryofstoriesconcernedwithmicroscopicworlds. Thesetales,whichweremorepopularsomeyearsagothantheyaretoday,are generallylittlemorethanadventurestoriesintheexoticsettingsprovidedbythe microscopiclandscapes.Asaclasstheytendtobeoneofthelessinteresting varietiesofsciencefiction.Nevertheless,eveninthiscategorywecandetectan attempttocometogripswiththestillstunningdiscoverythatthereisaworldof lifeineverydropofwater.Indeed,theveryimageofaminiaturizedmanina microscopiclandscapeJamesBlishsSurfaceTensionorIsaacAsimovsFantastic Voyagewilldoforexamplescanbeappreciatedasasymboloftheattemptto makethisworldmorethanascientificfactbutpartofhumanexperience. Ifthecriticaldiscoveryofsciencefictioncanbeunderstoodaspartofa changeinourliterarysensibilitythathasledtoarenewalofinterestinromance forms,itmustalsobeseenaspartofthegeneralriseofinterestinuncanonical culturalformssuchaspopularandethnicliterature,aphenomenondirectly associatedwiththesocialupheavalsofthe1960sand70s.Somesciencefictionis notpopularliterature.IamthinkinginparticularoftheliterateBritishtradition thatspringsfromH.G.WellsandincludessuchwritersasW.OlafStapledon,C.S. Lewis,andAldousHuxley.ButthebulkofAmericansciencefiction,especiallythat publishedintheheydayofthesciencefictionmagazines,ispopularliterature. Recently,however,sciencefictionhasbeguntospawnwriterswhoemploythe themesandconventionsoftheratherprovincialpopulartraditionwithaliterary sophisticationequaltothatofalmostanyonewritingtoday,andinconnection withthesewriterstheveryconceptofhighversuspopularcultureseems besidethepoint. TheappearanceofsuchauthorsasStanislawLemandUrsulaK.LeGuinto citeonlytwoofthemostnotablecurrentwritershasoccurredsimultaneously withtheriseofcriticalinterestinsciencefiction.Indeed,someofthenew sciencefictionwritershavethemselvesproducednotableworksofcriticism.If sciencefictionhasuntilrecentlybeenratherprovincial,sotoohascriticisminits conceptionofliteratureandofthekindsofmaterialthatconstituteappropriate subjectsforcriticalinquiry.Bothsciencefictionandcriticismhavebeenchanging rapidly,however,andnow,astheessaysinthepresentvolumeindicate,critics

andauthorstogetherhaveatlastbegunasustainedexplorationoftheliterary possibilitiesinherentinthegenre. <<Contents>> ****

PARTONE

Backgrounds
****

StartingPoints

byKingsleyAmis1

ThosewhohaveneverseenalivingMartiancanscarcelyimaginethestrangehorror ofitsappearance.ThepeculiarVshapedmouthwithitspointedupperlip,the absenceofbrowridges,theabsenceofachinbeneaththewedgelikelowerlip,the incessantquiveringofthismouth,theGorgongroupsoftentacles,thetumultuous breathingofthelungsinastrangeatmosphere,theevidentheavinessand painfulnessofmovementduetothegreatergravitationalenergyoftheearthabove all,theextraordinaryintensityoftheimmenseeyeswereatoncevital,intense, inhuman,crippledandmonstrous.Therewassomethingfungoidintheoilybrown skin,somethingintheclumsydeliberationofthetediousmovementsunspeakably nasty.Evenatthisfirstencounter,thisfirstglimpse,Iwasovercomewithdisgust anddread.

Ifthatproducesnospecialreactionitcomes,ofcourse,fromanearly chapterofTheWaroftheWorldsperhapsthispassagewill:
IdonthavetotellyoumenthatPointofSalehasitsspecialproblems, Harveysaid,puffinghisthincheeks.Iswear,thewholedamnedGovernmentmust beinfiltratedwith[Conservationists]!Youknowwhattheyvedone.Theyoutlawed compulsivesubsonicsinourauraladvertisingbutwevebouncedbackwithalistof semanticcuewordsthattieinwitheverybasictraumaandneurosisinAmericanlife today.Theylistenedtothesafetycranksandstoppedusfromprojectingour messageonaircarwindowsbutwebouncedback.Labtellsme,henoddedtoour DirectorofResearchacrossthetable,thatsoonwellbetestingasystemthat projectsdirectontheretinaoftheeye___Hebrokeoff,Excuseme,Mr. Schocken,hewhispered.HasSecuritycheckedthisroom? FowlerSchockennodded.Absolutelyclean.NothingbuttheusualState DepartmentandHouseofRepresentativesspymikes.Andofcoursewerefeedinga cannedplaybackintothem.

StartingPoints.FromKingsleyAmis,NewMapsofHell:ASurveyofScienceFiction(NewYork:Harcourt,Brace andCompany,1960),pp.1541.Copyright1960byKingsleyAmis.ReprintedbypermissionofHarcourtBrace Jovanovich,Inc.andADPeters&CoLtd.

IquotethatextractfromTheSpaceMerchants(anovelpublishedin1953) andtheH.G.Wellspieceinordertomakepossibleatinyexperimentinself analysis:anybodyencounteringsuchpassageswhofailstoexperienceapeculiar interest,relatedto,butdistinctfrom,ordinaryliteraryinterest,willneverbean addictofsciencefiction.NowIacknowledgethatpeoplecanliveouthappyand usefullivesincompleteindifferencetothisformofwriting,butthepointabout addictionistheonewhereinvestigationshouldstart.Thosewhodecidethatthey oughttofindoutaboutsciencefiction,suspectingthatitfurnishesanew vantagepointfromwhichtosurveyourculture,willfindmuchtoconfirmthat suspicionandalso,Ihope,muchincidentalentertainment,buttheyareunlikely tobeabletoshare,norevenperhapstocomprehend,theexperienceofthe addicts,whoformtheoverwhelmingmajorityofsciencefictionreaders,andto whom,naturally,entertainmentisnotincidentalbutessential.Asisthewaywith addictions,thisoneismostlycontractedinadolescenceornotatall,like addictiontojazz.Thetwohavemuchincommon,andtheiractualcoexistencein thesamepersonisnotunusual. Thetwomodesthemselves,indeed,showmarkedsimilarities.Both emergedasselfcontainedentitiessometimeinthesecondorthirddecadeofthe century,andboth,farmoreprecisely,underwentrapidinternalchangearound 1940.BothhavestrongconnectionswithwhatImightcallmassculturewithout being,asIhopetoshowinthecaseofsciencefiction,massmediainthemselves. BotharecharacteristicallyAmerican 1productswithalargeaudienceanda growingbandofpractitionersinWesternEurope,excludingtheIberianpeninsula and,probably,Ireland.Bothintheirdifferentwayshaveanoticeablyradicaltinge, showingitselfagainandagaininthecontentofsciencefiction,whileasregards jazz,whosematerialisperforcenonpolitical,radicalismofsomesortoften appearsintheattitudesofthoseconnectedwithit;arecentarticleinthe SpectatorclaimedthatonemightaswellgiveuphopeofmeetingaBritish intellectualcommittedtojazzwhowasnotfirmlyovertotheleftinpolitics.Both ofthesefields,again,havethrownupalargenumberofinterestingand competentfigureswithoutproducinganybodyoffirstrateimportance;bothhave
1

Theprehistoryofsciencefiction,upuntil1914orlater,isadmittedlyasmuchBritishasAmerican,anduntilquite recentlythephenomenonoftheseriousauthorwhotakesanoccasionaltripintosciencefiction(Huxley,Orwell, WilliamGoldinginaratherdifferentsense)hasbeenBritishratherthanAmerican.Butthegeneralrunissofirmly AmericanthatBritishsciencefictionwriterswilloftenfabricateAmericanbackgroundsandfilltheirdialoguewith whattheybelievetobeAmericanidioms.(ComparetheBritishtoughthriller,atanyrateonitslowerlevels.)

arrivedatastateofanxiousandlargelynaiveselfconsciousness;both,having decisivelyandforsomethinglikehalfacenturyseparatedthemselvesfromthe mainstreamsofseriousmusicandseriousliterature,showsignsofbendingback towardsthosestreams.Oneshouldntgoonlikethisallnight;thetwoformshave nohelpfulresemblance,forexample,inoriginorinrole,butIshouldliketoround offthiscatalogueofsupposedparallelsbyobservingthatbothjazzandscience fictionhaveinthelastdozenyearsbeguntoattracttheattentionofthecultural diagnostician,ortrendhound,whobecomesinterestedinthemnotfororas themselves,butforthelighttheycanbemadetothrowonsomeotherthing.By sayingthisImeanonlytodistinguishthisinterest,nottodenigrateit;itseems worthyenough,evenpraiseworthy. Adefinitionofsciencefiction,thoughattemptedwithenormousand significantfrequencybycommentatorsinsidethefield,isboundtobe cumbersomeratherthanmemorable.Withthefictionpartweareon reasonablysecureground;thesciencepartraisesseveralkindsofdifficulty,one ofwhichisthatsciencefictionisnotnecessarilyfictionaboutscienceorscientists, norissciencenecessarilyimportantinit.Prolongedcogitation,however,would leadonetosomethinglikethis:Sciencefictionisthatclassofprosenarrative treatingofasituationthatcouldnotariseintheworldweknow,butwhichis hypothesisedonthebasisofsomeinnovationinscienceortechnology,or pseudoscienceorpseudotechnology,whetherhumanorextraterrestrialin origin.Thisisthekindofdefinitionthatdemandsfootnotes.Prosenarrative, then,becausetheappearanceofsciencefictioninterestsinverseformhaveso farbeenofminorextent.Anoccasionaldreadfulpoemaboutthemajestyofthe starsandsoonstrugglesintooneoranotherofthemagazinesasapagefiller, andthereisinEnglandapoetofsomestanding,RobertConquest,whoseworks includeanodetothefirstexplorersofMarsandareportonTerranculture imaginedastheworkofasurveyteamconstitutedbytheheadquartersofthe GalacticFederation(plusawholesciencefictionnovel,AWorldofDifference). ButConquestisatthemomentaratherlonelyfigure,orperhapsapioneer.Idraw attentionalsototheexistenceofavolumecalledTheSpaceChildsMother Goose,whichcontainsingenious,butnotalwaysstriking,variationsonnursery rhymesThisisthetheorythatJackbuilt,andsoonwithcontemporaryart nouveauillustrations.Theworkfallsintothatcategoryofadultschildrensbooks whichhassofarunaccountablyeludedthetrendhounds(unlessIhavemissed something,whichIwellmay),andalthoughthevolumegotareviewin

AstoundingScienceFiction,ratherpuzzledintone,Idoubtifithasmuch circulationamongordinaryreadersofthatjournal. Toharkbacknowtomydefinition:itscrucialpoint,clearly,liesinthe mentionofscienceandtechnologyandtheirpseudoforms.Manystoriesare basedon,orincidentallyinvolve,perfectlyplausibleextensionsofexisting theoriesandtechniques.Theuseofrobots,forinstance,stillaverypopular subject,seemsactuallyforeseeable,howeverunlikely,andeveniftheproblemof fittingallthatmachineryintoacontaineronthehumanscalewouldrequirethe developmentofakindofmicroelectronicsthatforthetimebeing,onewould imagine,isatarudimentarystage.Storiesbasedon,orinvolving,spaceflight, again,whichformprobablythelargestclass,canrestonprinciplesandprocesses thatdonoviolencetowhatisalreadyestablished.Butthosewriterswhofeel constrictedbyameresolarsystemfaceacertaininconveniencewhentheyset abouttakingtheircharacterstothefartherpartsofourgalaxyortoother galaxies.ThefactisandIapologizetoallthoseforwhomitisanodiouslyfamiliar factthattoreachanybuttheneareststarswouldtakeseveralhundredyears evenifonetravelledatthespeedoflight,inthecourseofdoingwhichonewould, ifIunderstandEinsteinspopulariserscorrectly,becomeinfiniteinmassandzero involume,andthisisfelttobeundesirable.Afewwriterssimplyacceptthis difficultyandarrangefortheirtravellerstoputthemselvesintosomesortof deepfreezeuntiljustbeforeplanetfall,orallowthemtobreedincaptivityforthe requisitenumberofgenerations,inwhichcasetheplotwillconcernwhat happenswhenacoupleofcenturieshaveelapsedandnobodyonboardisany longerawareofthesituation.Butmostcommonly,theauthorwillfabricateaway ofgettingaroundEinstein,orevenofsailingstraightthroughhim:adeviceknown typicallyasthespacewarporthehyperdrivewillmakeitsappearance,though withoutanymoreceremonythanHeappliedthespacewarp,orHethrewthe shipintohyperdrive.Suchreticencemaybaffleandannoytheneophyte,as unfamiliarconventionswill,butonewouldnotdemandthateveryWestern includeanexpositionofranchingtheory,andthespacewarpisanequally acceptableconvention,restingasitdoesonthenotionthatwhilethereisa theoreticallimittothespeedatwhichmattercanbemovedthroughspace,there isnosuchlimittothespeedatwhichspacecanbemovedthroughspace. Therefore,ifthespacebeingmovedcontainsaspaceship,thiscanbeshifted fromtheneighbourhoodoftheEarthtotheneighbourhoodoftheDogStarinan afternoonorsowithoutanyglaringaffronttoEinstein.

 Somuchforrealorgoodimitationscience;afewwordsnowonthe flagrantlypseudovariety.Ifaliensaretobeintroducedalienisthetermappliedin thetradetoanyintelligentcreatureoriginatingoutsidetheEarththeproblemof communicatingwiththemislikelytoarise.Someexcellentstorieshavebeen writtenaboutnoncommunicatingaliens,fromTheWaroftheWorldsonwards, buttheirpotentialitieshardlyextendbeyondsimplemenace,and,asweshallsee, recentsciencefictionhastendedtoloseinterestinmenaceofthiskind.Talkingto analien,however,presentsdifficultiesthatareliterallyinsurmountable.One doesntwanttostarttoofarback,butgrantedthatcommunication,whateverit is,canbeconceivedofinotherthanhumanterms,andgrantedthatitmight involvesomethinganalogoustospeech,oneisstillfacedwithachoiceof infeasibilities.Directlearningofanalienlanguageasonemightunderadverse conditionslearnahumanlanguage,byostensivedefinitionandthelike,entails presupposinganalienculturewithhumanlinguistichabits,whichseemsunlikely. Theideaofatranslationmachine,recallingthespacewarpinbeingusually introducedbyphraseslikeHesetupthetranslationmachine,differsfromthe spacewarpinpresentingadirectaffronttocommonsense,forsuchamachine wouldclearlybefoiledevenbyanutteranceinPortugueseunlessithadbeen taughtPortuguesetostartwith.TelepathyThethoughtformsofthealien floodedintohismindcannotexist.(Orcanit?Accordingtothedirectorofits newlyformedAstronauticsInstitute,theWestinghouseElectricCorporationis conductingresearchintotelepathyasameansoflongdistancecommunication.) Myconcernatthemoment,however,isnotthatallthesenotionsare,ormaybe, implausible,butthattheyareofferedasplausibleandthateffortsaremadeto concealtheirimplausibility.Thesameistrueofothertraditionaldevices:time travel,forinstance,isinconceivable,butifanapparatusofpseudologicisnot actuallysetuptosupportit,thepossibilityofrecoursetosuchanapparatuswill notbeexplicitlyruledout.Thesciencefictionwriterworksbyminimisingwhatis selfcontradictory. Whetherornotanindividualstorydoesjusticetothelawsofnatureisa considerationthatcanaffectourjudgmentofit,butmypurposehereistoinsist thatsuchjusticeisalwaysanaiminthefieldofsciencefiction.Thepointofthisis thatimmediatelyadjacenttothisfield,andinsomeinstancestobedistinguished fromitonlywithdifficulty,liesthefieldoffantasy.FantasyofthekindIamgoing todiscusshasdevelopedintoaselfcontainedformofwritinginthesamesense

andovermuchthesameperiodassciencefiction:thetwomodesappealtosome ofthesameinterests,sharesomeofthesamereadershipanduniteinthename ofaperiodical,TheMagazineofFantasyandScienceFiction.ItwillbeseenthatI amusingthetermfantasyinaspecialandrestrictedsense,correspondingtoa specialkindofpublicationabuttinguponmysubject;Iamawareoftheexistence ofabodyofworkthatcanbecalledfantasy,fromBeowulftoKafka,which anticipatesandparallelsthiskindoffantasyinawaythatnothingquite anticipatesorparallelssciencefiction,butmybusinessisnotwiththat.However, Iacknowledgethefactthatfantasy,inthespecialsense,gives,despiteitsmuch smallervolume,asvalidaglimpseofcontemporaryattitudesasdoesscience fiction.ButIthinkitbettertosaystraightoutthatIdonotlikefantasy,whether fromBeowulftoKafka,orinthespecialisedcontemporarymagazines,ratherthan takethetroubleofdevisingreasonsformydislike,thoughIthinkIcoulddosoif pressed.FornowImerelyintendtodifferentiatefantasyfromsciencefiction,a taskthatinvolveslittlemorethanremarkingthatwhilesciencefiction,asIhave beenarguing,maintainsarespectforfactorpresumptivefact,fantasymakesa pointoffloutingthese;forafurnitureofrobots,spaceships,techniques,and equationsitsubstituteselves,broomsticks,occultpowers,andincantations.It maybetothepurposetoquoteanutterancebyFredricBrown,oneofthemost ingeniousandinventive,thoughnotoneofthemostselfquestioning,writersof sciencefiction.Intheintroductiontohisvolumeofshortstories,StarShine,we findBrown,whoalsowritesfantasyonoccasion,attemptingtodistinguishthe twomodes.AfterreferringtotheMidasmythrememberit?heasks,an appositequestionwhenwetrytoimaginehisreadership,andgoesontogivea summaryBrownsays:
Letstranslatethatintosciencefiction.Mr.Midas,whorunsaGreekrestaurantin theBronx,happenstosavethelifeofanextraterrestrialfromafarplanetwhois livinginNewYorkanonymouslyasanobserverfortheGalacticFederation,towhich EarthforobviousreasonsisnotyetreadytobeadmittedTheextraterrestrial,who isamasterofsciencesfarbeyondours,makesamachinewhichaltersthemolecular vibrationsofMr.Midassbodysohistouchwillhaveatransmutingeffectupon otherobjects.Andsoon.Itsasciencefictionstory,orcouldbemadetobeone.

Itmightbethoughtthat,topushittothelimit,afantasystorycouldbe turnedintoasciencefictionstorymerelybyinsertingafewlinesofpseudo scientificpatter,andIwouldacceptthisasanextremetheoreticalcase,althoughI cannotthinkofanactualone.Evenso,adifferencewhichmakesthedifference

betweenabandoningverisimilitudeandtryingtopreserveitseemstometomake allthedifference,andinpracticethearbitraryandwhimsicaldevelopmentof nearlyeverystoryoffantasysoonputsitbeyondrecoverybyanytalkofgalactic federationsormolecularvibrations.Oneparentheticalnote:itshouldnotbe thoughtthatnostorydealingwithelvesandsuchcanbesciencefiction.Thereare pixiesandfourleafedcloversandcromlechsandthelandofheartsdesireinEric FrankRussellsstoryRainbowsEnd,butthesearemereapparatusinasinister hypnoticattackonabandofinterstellarexplorers.Similarly,althoughvampirism isoneofthestaplesofnineteenthcenturyfantasy,RichardMathesonsnovelI AmLegendmakesbrilliantlyingeniousandincidentallyhorrifyinguseofthemyth forsciencefictionpurposes,wherebyeverytraditionaldetailisexplainedalong rationallines:thewoodenstakethroughtheheart,forinstance,whichputpaidto Draculaandsomanyofhisplaymates,isnecessaryinordertomaintainthe distensionofthewoundbulletsandknivesarenogoodforthatjob,andthe microbewhichcausesvampirismisaerophobic. Whileperhapsseemingtohavekeptourdefinitiononlydistantlyinview,I haveinfactbeenratherdeftlyfillingoutandlimitingitsvariousimplications.All thatremainsinthissectionistodescribeacoupleofcodicils,kindsofnarrativeto beincludedonthegroundsthattheyappealtothesamesetofinterestsas sciencefictioninthesensedefined,oratleastarewrittenandreadbythesame writersandreaders.Thefirstofthese,numericallyunimportantandreadily disposedof,consistsofstoriesaboutprehistoricman.Theirexistencecanperhaps beblamed,forblameseemscalledfor,onthefactthatWellswrotesomething calledAStoryoftheStoneAge;Ialsonote,thoughwithoutatthemoment doingmorethannote,thatthesubjectreappearsinTheInheritors,thesecond novelofthecontemporaryBritishwriterWilliamGolding,whocomesnearerthan anybodysofartobeingaseriousauthorworkingwithinsciencefiction.Butmore ofhimlater.Thesecondsupplementarycategoryincludesstoriesbasedonsome changeordisturbanceorlocalanomalyinphysicalconditions.This accommodatesseveralveryfamiliartypesofstory,mostlyinvolvingnoveltiesthat threatenmankind.ThesemayoriginateoutsidetheEarth,asinConanDoyles ThePoisonBeltandFredHoylesrecentTheBlackCloud,orontheEarthitself, asinJohnChristophersTheDeathofGrass,publishedintheUnitedStatesasNo BladeofGrass.Alternatively,theauthorwillchroniclesomemonstrous emergencearisingfromexistingscienceandtechnology,especially,ofcourse,the hydrogenbomb.Thefilmindustryhasfallengleefullyuponthatone,servingupa

successionofbeastsproducedbymutationviaradiationgiantants,forinstance, inThemorelseliberatedfromsomeprimevalundergroundcavitybytest explosionsRodan,aJapanesefilm,madegreatplaywithabraceofgiantarmour platedradioactivesupersonicpterodactylsfinallydespatchedbyguidedmissiles. Menacesofthiskindnaturallyantedatethehydrogenbomb:anearlyand,I shouldguess,veryinfluentialexampleisWellssunpleasantlyvividTheEmpireof theAnts,inwhichtheanomalyinquestionconsistsofanincreaseinintelligence, notinmerebulk.Althoughthisistreatedashavingariseninthecourseof evolution,notunderartificialstimulus,thestoryhasanobviousplaceinthe developmentofitscategory.Finally,Ishouldpointouthere,orhereabouts,that thelasttenyearshaveseenaperceptibledeclineintheroleplayedinscience fictionbyactualscience.Thespaceship,forexample,foralongtimeremained novelenoughtobeworthsomedescription:nowadaysitisoftennomorethana meansofintroducingcharactersintoanalienenvironment,referredtoascasually asanaeroplaneorataxi.Manystoriesofthefuture,again,andthesecommonly ofthemoreinterestingkind,takeastheirthemechangesinthepoliticalor economicrealm,withscienceandtechnologyreducedtobackgrounddetail:the herowillbeservedwithVenusianflyingmonkeysteaksbyarobotwaiter,butthe mainbusinessofhiseveningwillbetopersuadehisfellowmembersofthe GeneralMotorsclantotakeuptheswordagainsttheChryslerclan.Science fictioniseverydaylosingsomeofitsappropriatenessasanameforscience fiction,andthekindofrearguardactionthatisbeingfoughtonitsbehalfbythe commentators,onthepleathatpoliticsandeconomicsandpsychologyand anthropologyandevenethicsarereallyornearlyasmuchsciencesasatomic physics,ischieflyvaluableasanindicationofastateofmind.Inanyevent,no alternativenomenclaturesofarsuggestedisapplicableenoughtojustifythehuge taskofgettingitacceptedinplaceofatermsofirmlyestablishedasthepresent one. Torestatematters,then:sciencefictionpresentswithverisimilitudethe humaneffectsofspectacularchangesinourenvironment,changeseither deliberatelywilledorinvoluntarilysuffered.Iturnnowtoabriefandselective accountoftheancestryoftheform.Todosoisatanyratetofollowan apparentlyunbreakablehabit,exceptperhapsasregardsbrevity,ofthosewho discusssciencefictionfromwithinthefield.Tobeperpetuallyrecountingitsown historymarkstheattainmentofakindofpubertyinthegrowthofamodeora style,andherewehaveyetanotherparallelindevelopmentbetweenscience

fictionandjazz.Theyear1441is,Ithink,theearliestdatetowhichanybodyhas yettracedbacktheoriginsofjazz;historiansofsciencefictionarelikelytostart offwithPlatoandtheAtlantisbitsintheTimaeusandtheCritias.Fromtherethey willwanderforward,usuallylendingtheiraccountincreasedbulkand impressivenessbysubsumingfantasyaswellassciencefictionundertheirritating headingofimaginativefiction,andtakinginonthewaytheDialoguesofPope GregoryI,theNiebelungenliedandBeowulf,theArthurianromances,Thomas More,Gulliver,TheMysteriesofUdolpho,Frankenstein,alotaboutPoe,Dracula, VerneandWells,arrivingfinallyatthereallyclimacticevent,thefoundationof AmazingStoriesin1926.(Allthesenames,andverymanymore,are conscientiouslydiscussedinL.SpraguedeCampsrepresentativeScienceFiction Handbook,publishedin1953.)Thesemanoeuvres,whichleavethejazzhistorian doingthebesthecanwithRavelandMilhaudandwhatanhonouritwasfor everybodywhenStravinskywrotetheEbonyConcertoforWoodyHermansband, perhapsrecalltheattemptsoftheRenaissanceapologiststoestablishthe respectabilityofpoetryassomethingneitherobscenenortrivial,andtheremay bemorethanamerelyverbalresemblancebetweentheboastfulnessofmuch sciencefictionpropagandaandScaligersassertionthat
Poetryrepresentsthingsthatarenot,asiftheywere,andastheyoughttobeor mightbe.Thepoetmakesanothernature,henceheturnshimselfintoanothergod: healsowillcreateworlds.

Historiesofsciencefiction,asopposedtoimaginativeliterature,usually begin,notwithPlatoorTheBirdsofAristophanesortheOdyssey,butwithawork ofthelateGreekproseromancerLucianofSamosata.Thedistinctionofthis,the socalledTrueHistory,isthatitincludesthefirstaccountofaninterplanetary voyagethattheresearchershavemanagedtounearth,butitishardlyscience fiction,sinceitdeliberatelypilesextravaganceuponextravaganceforcomic effect:

Relinquishingthepursuit,wesetuptwotrophies,onefortheinfantryengagement onthespiderswebs,andoneonthecloudsfortheairbattle.Itwaswhilewewere thusengagedthatourscoutsannouncedtheapproachoftheCloudcentaurs, whomPhaethonhadexpectedintimeforthebattle.Theywereindeedcloseupon us,andastrangesight,beingcompoundedofwingedhorsesandmen;thehuman part,fromthemiddleupwards,wasastallastheColossusofRhodes,andthe equinethesizeofalargemerchantman.TheirnumberIcannotbringmyselfto writedown,forfearofexcitingincredulity.

 ItisnomorethanappropriatethatLucianstriptothemoonshouldbe precededbyanencounterwithsomewomenwhoaregrapevinesfromthewaist downandfollowedbyseabattlesinsideawhalesmouth,norinparticularthatit shouldbeaccomplishedbythetravellersshipbeingsnatchedupinawaterspout. Leavingasidethequestionwhethertherewasenoughsciencearoundinthe secondcenturytomakesciencefictionfeasible,Iwillmerelyremarkthatthe sprightlinessandsophisticationoftheTrueHistorymakeitreadlikeajokeatthe expenseofnearlyallearlymodernsciencefiction,thatwrittenbetween,say, 1910and1940.InotefinallyLuciansdiscoverythatthemeninthemoonareof fantasticappearanceandhabits,butcertainlynotmenacinginanyway.The notionofnastyaliensisacomparativelyrecentone,althoughitisdominantinthe earlymodernperiodIhavejustdefined.Thecontemporaryalientendstobenot onlynotmenacing,butsomuchbetterthanmanmorallyratherthan technologicallyastoputhimtoshame.Iamnotquitesurewhatkindof deductiontodrawfromthatgraph,buttheremustbesome. Itisnotforamillenniumandahalfthat,accordingtothecanon,further attemptsatamoonvoyageappear.Theremightbethoughttohavebeenagood dealofsciencearoundinthe1630s,whatwithKeplersworkjustfinished,Galileo stilldoinghisstuff,andastronomicalobservationimprovedtothepointwherefor thefirsttimetheplanetMercurywasobservedintransitacrossthesun. However,KeplersSomniumpublishedin1634,thesameyearasthefirstEnglish translationofLuciansTrueHistoryevidentlydescribesatriptothemoonin whichdemonsareusedasthepowersource,orrathertheherodreamsthatthis iswhatistakingplace.Ifindallthisofcompellinginterest,butthepleaofthe sciencefictionhistorians,thatatthattimeyouhadlittlehopeofgettingtothe moonexceptbydreamingaboutdemons,failstoconvincemethattheSomnium, liketheTrueHistory,isanythingbutfantasy.ThesameappliestoBishopGodwins proCopernicanromance,ManintheMoone,oraDiscourseofaVoyageThither byDomingoGonsales,whichwaspublishedin1638,thoughprobablywrittena gooddealearlier,andwasreprintedhalfadozentimesbeforetheendofthe century.Gonsalesgetstothemoononaraftdrawnbywildswans,adevicewhich JohnWilkins,chairmanofthebodywhichlaterbecametheRoyalSociety, consideredtobequitesoundintheory.Theonlypointofmuchconcerntous, however,isthattheinhabitantsofthemoonarefoundtobewhattheyregularly areintheearlierexamples,creaturesofasuperiormorality,anywhofallfarshort

oftherequiredstandardbeinginfalliblydetectedanddeportedtoEarth:the ordinaryventforthem,Godwinexplains,isacertainhighhillintheNorthof America,whosepeopleIcaneasilybelievetobewhollydescendedofthem. Ihavegivenenough,Ithink,ofthetraditionalrollcalltoestablishits tendency,aheavyrelianceonaccidentalsimilarities.Thisjudgmentcertainly appliestothenextbookoneveryoneslist,CyranodeBergeracsVoyagedansla Lune(1650).Afteranabortiveexperimentwithbottlesofdewthesunsucksup dew,youseeCyranogetstothemooninachariotpoweredbyrockets.Itismuch worsethanpointlesstotakethisasananticipationoftheenginerecentlyfired atthemoonbytheRussiansorofanythinginrecentliterature,andthesameis trueofthefactthatinVoltairesMicromegaswehavethefirstvisittoEarthbyan alien.OneawaitstherevelationthatSpensersTalusisthefirst,oratanyratean early,robotinEnglishliterature.Aworkmoreoddlyomittedfromsciencefiction annalsisTheTempest,inwhichtheveryfeatureswhichmusthavecausedittobe passedoverthecomparativelyfactualoutline,theapproachbyship,insteadofin awaterspoutorbydemonpropulsionaretheoneswhichshouldhavebroughtit tonotice.Furthermore,whateverTheTempestmaybecurrentlyagreedtobe about,Icannothelpthinkingthatoneofthethingsitisaboutisspecialised knowledge,andwhatevermaybetherelationcurrentlydevisedbetween Jacobeanscienceandmagic,itwouldbesafetosaythatcontemporaryattitudes towardswhatwenowseeastwothingswerepartlyinseparable.Evenifone resiststhetemptationtodesignateCalibanasanearlymutantafreckledwhelp, youremember,notgiftedwithahumanshape,buthumaninmostotherways andArielasananthropomorphisedmobilescanner,Prosperosattitudetothem, andindeedhisentireroleasanadept,seemstosomedegreeexperimentalas wellassimplythaumaturgical.Theseconsiderations,Isuggest,whilenotmaking theplayanythingbutaverydiluteandindirectinfluenceonsciencefiction,do makeitadistantanticipation.Onacruderlevel,theeccentricscientistrecluse andhisbeautifuldaughterareanalmostwoefullyfamiliarpairofstereotypesin allbutthemostrecentsciencefiction,and,incidentally,largeareasofwhatI mightcalltheTempestmythreappearinoneofthebestofthesciencefiction films.ThetitlewasForbiddenPlanet,whichinducesthereflectionthatplanets haveonlyinthelasthundredyearsorlessbecomethenaturalsettingforthiskind ofwriting;ifwewanttofindearlyformsofitindayswhentheEarthwasstill incompletelyexploredandspacewasutterlyinaccessible,theobviousplaceto

lookisnotonotherplanetsbutinremoteregionsofourown,inparticular,of course,undiscoveredislands. TomentionGulliversTravelsnextisnotlikelytocauseanysurprise,nor,I hope,alarm.Thisworkisclearlyanancestorofsciencefiction,andnotonthe groundsthatLaputaisanearlypoweredsatellite,either.Theclaimrestsfirstlyon thenotoriouspainstakenbySwifttocounterfeitverisimilitudeinthedetailsofhis story.Withoutattemptingtodrawanexactparallel,Isubmitthatthisisrather likethemethodsofsciencefiction,atanyrateinthatitservestodispelthatairof arbitrariness,ofhavingnofurtheraimthantobestriking,whichischaracteristic ofmostfantasy:thesurprisingbehaviourofLilliputiancandidatesforpreferment wouldloseitseffect,Itakeit,inanantirealisticcontext.Allthatbusinesslike thoroughnessindescription,witheverythinggivenitsdimensions,reappears noticeablyintheworkofJulesVerne,whereitconstitutesthechiefoftenthe onlymethodofkeepingthereadersdisbeliefinsomestateofsuspension.The othersciencefictionthingaboutGulliversTravelsisthatitpresents,clearly enough,aseriesofsatiricalUtopias,thesebeingchronicledwithagreatpowerof inventingdetailsthataretobeconsistentwithsomebasicassumption.Thispoint, whereinventionandsocialcriticismmeet,isthepointofdepartureforagreat dealofcontemporarysciencefiction,andnoworkismorerelevantthanGullivers Travelstothispartofourinvestigation. SomeoftheseremarksapplytotwootherislandUtopias:Moresworkand BaconsNewAtlantis.Ofthese,theBaconfragmentmorestronglyrecallsscience fiction,inthatsomeofitsmarvelsaretechnological,withresearchin meteorology,medicine,horticulture,andmethodsofconjuring,plusaeroplanes, submarines,andmicrotonalmusicusingechochambers.ButneitherUtopianor TheNewAtlantismatchtheintentandsatiricalpreoccupationwiththesocial surfacethatwefindbothintheSwiftandin,forinstance,PohlandKornbluths TheSpaceMerchants,fromwhichIquotedearlier.BothMoreandBaconare,of course,darlingsofthesciencefictionacademics,togetherwithmanyanother writerwhofallsshortofgrimdocumentaryrealism.Typicalomissionsofmoreor lessunexpectednessincludeChaucer,whoseSquiresTalesurelyincludesan accountofanearlyflyingmachine,andtheMundusAlteretIdemattributedto BishopHall(1607).TheMundus,traditionallytakenasasourceofGullivers Travels,isastringofcomicsatiricUtopiasthegluttonsparadisewherestaircases arebannedasdifficultforeatersanddangerousfordrinkers,thefeminist

paradisewheremendoallthechoresandparliamentisinperpetualsessionwith everyonetalkingatoncethatanticipateswithweirdprecisionanotherPohland Kornbluthnovel,SearchtheSky.TheGothicnovelanditssuccessorsdogetinto thecanon,but,withonelargeexception,these,whileallimportantinthe ancestryofmodernfantasy,scarcelyprefiguresciencefiction.Theexceptioncan hardlyhelpbeingFrankenstein,which,albeitinadistortedform,hashada posthumouscareerofunparalleledvigour;evenoldDraculahaslessoftenbeen exhumedincinematicformandhasneverbeenmatedorallowedtoregalvanise himself.(Ihadbetterexplainatthispointthatthecontemporarytradeterm applyingtothemonsterisandroid,asyntheticbeingroughlyresemblingaman, asopposedtoarobot,whichisamereperipateticmachine.)Thenotablething aboutFrankensteinthecharacteristhat,farfrombeingpossessedof supernaturalpowers,heisaphysiologistwithacademictraining,afeaturehehas retainedinhismodernincarnations,whilealtogetherlosingthesentimental Shelleyanqualitythatmarkedhisoriginalappearance.Frankenstein,inthe popularmind,whennotconfusedwithhismonster,iseasilythemostoutstanding representativeofthegenericmadscientistwhoplaguedbadearlymodern sciencefictionandhasnowbeenfineddown 1intothebetteradjustedbutstill unsociableandeccentricscientistwho,oftenwithaMirandalikedaughter secretaryinattendance,continuestoheadanoccasionalresearchprojectand figureintheherosthoughtsastheOldMan.Moreimportantsciencefiction themesthanthis,however,haveradiatedfromtheoriginalbook.Itistruethat,as L.SpraguedeCampobserves,alltheshamblinghordeofmodernrobotsand androidsaredescendantsofFrankensteinssadlymalevolentmonster,but beyondthisliesthewholenotionoftheartificialcreationwhichturnsandrends itsmaster.CapeksR.U.R.(1920)wasperhapsthefirstmoderntreatmentofthis notion,whichstillregularlyreappears,arecentinstancebeingRobertSheckleys storyWatchbird.Hereanairbornedevice,programmedtodetectandforestall aggressiveintentions,endsbyprohibitingmostkindsofhumanaction.Thisidea generalisesintoinnumerablefictionalisedsermonsonthedangersofovergrown technologywhichIshallbedetailinglater.BeforeleavingFrankenstein,itisworth observingthatathirdaspectofthescientificcharacterdescendsfromit,thatof
1

Thecareerofthemadscientistflourishesuncheckedinthemodernjuvenilecomicbook.Thosewhoseeinthis factaconspiratorialattempttounderminepublicconfidenceinscientists(whichwouldbeapraiseworthyattempt anyhow,Ishouldhavethought)maybereassuredtofindthatthesedaysthemadscientisttendstobedeprivedof hislaboratorybyother,sanerscientists,ratherthanbeingoverthrownbythetwofistedspacerangers.HisEinstein haircutshouldbetakenasatributetotheuniversalityofthatgreatfigure.

themorallyirresponsibleresearcherindifferenttothedamagehemaycauseor renderpossible,akindofpersonconsciouslydescribedbyWellsinTheIslandof Dr.Moreau,whereanimalsarevivisectedinanattempttohumanisethem,andto allappearanceunconsciouslyinTheFoodoftheGods,whereHerakleophorbiaIV, thegrowthinducingcompound,isthrownontotherubbishdumpandswilled downthedrainsandgenerallyscatteredoverthecountrysideinafantastically lightheartedspirit.Theirresponsibletypeofscientistisnotaltogetherseparable fromafourthtypewithadiverseancestry,thattowhomscienceisarouteto personalpower. SomementionofPoeissadlydifficulttoavoidinthepresentcontext:ithas tobeadmittedthatwhilehewasmuchmoreimportant,perhapstothepointof beingallimportant,inthedevelopmentoffantasy,hehadinonesenseavery directinfluenceonthedevelopmentofsciencefiction.Beforeexaminingthis,it maybejustaboutworthwhilerecallingthatPoeseemstohaveinventedthe detectivestory,orsoIrememberbeingtoldatschool.Withoutattemptingto rivalthecomplexityofmycomparativeanalysisofjazzandsciencefiction,I shouldliketoassertflatlythatdetectivefictionandsciencefictionareakin.There isacloselysimilarexaltationofideaorplotovercharacterisation,andsome modernsciencefiction,likemostdetectivefiction,butunlikethethriller,invites thereadertosolveapuzzle.Itisnocoincidencehowcoulditbe?thatfromPoe throughConanDoyletoFredricBrown(theMidasexpert)thewriteroftheone willoftenhavesomesortofconcernwiththeother.Poe,atanyrate,wrotea coupleofstoriesinvolvingballoonflight,atthattimestillanovelty,andanother takingthedestructionoftheEarthasitspointofdeparture.Hisunfinishednovel, however,TheNarrativeofA.GordonPym,thoughsometimescited,isaromance thatwandersoffintofantasyratherthanhavinganythingtodowithscience fiction.SuchinterestasitholdsforusliesinthefactthatJulesVernesAn AntarcticMysteryisacontinuation,albeitanincoherentone,ofthePym narrative,anditisclearfrominnumerableresemblances,aswellasfromhisown admission,thatVernelearntmorefromPoethanfromanyotherwriter. WithVernewereachthefirstgreatprogenitorofmodernsciencefiction.In itsliteraryaspecthisworkis,ofcourse,ofpoorquality,afeaturecertainly reproducedwithgreatfidelitybymostofhissuccessors.Althoughinterspersedon occasionwithfastandexcitingnarrative,forinstanceintheepisodewhere CaptainNemoandhisassociatesfindtheirtwentythousandleaguevoyage

interruptedbytheAntarcticicepack,thestorylineisclutteredupagainandagain bylongexplanatorylecturesandbaldundramatisedflashbacks.Eventhemore activepassagesarefullofcomicallybadwriting:

Whatascene!Theunhappyman,seizedbythetentacleandfastenedtoits blowholes,wasbalancedintheairaccordingtothecapriceofthisenormoustrunk. Hewaschoking,andcriedout,Amoi!moi!(Help!help!).ThoseFrenchwords causedmeaprofoundstupor.ThenIhadacountrymanaboard,perhapsseveral!I shallhearthatheartrendingcryallmylife! Theunfortunatemanwaslost.Whowouldrescuehimfromthatpowerful grasp?CaptainNemothrewhimselfonthepoulp,andwithhishatchetcutoff anotherarm.Hisfirstofficerwasfightingwithrageagainstothermonstersthat wereclimbingthesidesoftheNautilus.Thecrewwerefightingwithhatchets. TheCanadian,Conseil,andIdugourarmsintothefleshymasses.Aviolent smellofmuskpervadedtheatmosphere.Itwashorrible.

OnewouldhavetoblameVernestranslatorforsomeofthoseineptitudes, butsuchwastheforminwhichthenovelsreachedEnglishspeakingreaders, noneofwhom,tomyknowledge,hasbotheredtocomplain.Thestoryandthe ideaswerethething.Theseideas,thescientificonesatleast,havenaturallygota bitdated:thehelicopterwithseventyfourhorizontalscrews,thetunneltothe centreoftheEarth,themoonshipshotoutofagunataspeedthatwouldhave pulpedthetravellersbeforetheywereclearofthebarrel.Buttheseerrorshardly matter,anymorethanSwiftsBrobdingnagiansceasetobeimpressivewhenwe reasonthattheywouldhavebrokenmostoftheirboneswhenevertheytriedto standup.ItmattershardlymorethatVernedidsuccessfullyforetelltheguided missile,northatthisextractfromFiveWeeksinaBalloon(1862)hasabearingon eventsofeightyyearslater:
Besides,saidKennedy,thetimewhenindustrygetsagriponeverythinganduses ittoitsownadvantagemaynotbeparticularlyamusing.Ifmengooninventing machinerytheyllendbybeingswallowedupbytheirowninventions.Iveoften thoughtthatthelastdaywillbebroughtaboutbysomecolossalboilerheatedto threethousandatmospheresblowinguptheworld. AndIbettheYankeeswillhaveahandinit,saidJoe.

Thegeneralprophecyaboutinventionoverreachingitselfisclearlyfarmore interestingthantheparticularglimpseofsomethinglikethenuclearbomb,or ratherofitspossibleoutcome.Vernesimportanceisthat,whileusuallywrongor implausibleorsimplyboringindetail,histhemesforeshadowagreatdealof contemporarythinking,bothinsideandoutsidesciencefiction. Asregardsthemodeitself,Vernedevelopedthetraditionofthe technologicalutopia,presentinginTheBegumsFortunearivalpairofthese,the oneenlightenedandpaternalistic,theothertotalitarianandwarlike.Thiswas publishedin1879,soitisnosurprisetofindthattheniceutopiaisFrenchandthe nastyoneGerman.Therearealsoseveralnovelsvirtuallyinitiatingwhathas becomeabasiccategoryofsciencefiction,thesatirethatisalsoawarning,andit isherethatVerneisofsomegeneralinterest.ThusinRoundtheMoon,afterthe projectilehasfallenbackintotheseaataspeedof115,200milesanhour, incidentally,andwithouthurtinganyoneinsidewefindacompanybeingfounded todevelopthemoonafterafashionthatanticipatesTheSpaceMerchants.The sequeltoRoundtheMoon,ThePurchaseoftheNorthPole,involvesnotonlythe saidpurchaseonthepartoftheBaltimoreGunClub,thepeoplewhosetupthe cannontofirethemoonprojectile,butaschemewherebyamonstrousexplosion shallaltertheinclinationoftheEarthsaxisandsobringthepolarregionintothe temperatezone.Sincepartsofthecivilisedworldwouldcorrespondinglybe shiftedintonewpolarregions,theresponseofofficialdomisunfavourable. However,theexplosiontakesplace,andonlyanerrorinthecalculations preservesthestatusquo.Thenotionofanadvancingtechnologyincreasingthe destructivepowerofunscrupulousnessreappearsonasmallerscaleinThe FloatingIsland,wherethehugeartifactbreaksupinmidoceanasaresultof rivalrybetweentwofinancialcliques.Thebookcloseswithastraightforward Verneansermononthedangersofscientificprogressconsideredasan embodimentofhumanarrogance.Theheavymoraltoneofthisandmany passagesintheotherbooksisamongthelessfortunateofVerneslegaciesto modernsciencefiction,andsomeofhisotheranticipations,iftheyareproperly that,givenocauseforcongratulation.Inparticular,hissexualinterestisverythin: PhileasFogg,theheroofAroundtheWorldinEightyDays,doespickupanIndian princessinthecourseofhistravels,butwediscoveralmostnothingabouther, andFoggtreatsherwithaninflexiblecourtesywhichgoesbeyondmere Victorianismandwhichanygirlofspiritmightfindsubtlyunflattering.Eventhe villainsrarelydosomuchasaspiretolechery.Itisinhispoliticaltone,which,

howevervagueandeccentric,isnearlyalwaysprogressive,andevenmoreinhis attitudetotechnology,fascinatedbutscepticalandattimestingedwith pessimism,thatVernesheritageismostinterestingandvaluable:hislastbook, TheEternalAdam,isakindofprolepticelegyforthecollapseofWestern civilisation.Thesearetheconsiderationswhichgosomewaytooverridehis ineptitudeandpomposity,hisnineteenthcenturyboysstorystuffiness,and makehim,notonlyinasciencefictionsense,recognisablymodern. Whateverelsehemayormaynothavebeen,JulesVerneiscertainlytobe regardedasoneofthetwocreators1ofmodernsciencefiction;theother, inevitablyenough,isH.G.Wells.TotreatWellsassuch,ratherthanasthefirst importantpractitionerinanexistingmode,isnodenigration.Rather,ittakes accountofthefactthatallhisbestandmostinfluentialstoriesappearedbetween 1895and1907,beforesciencefictionhadseparateditselffromthemainstream ofliterature,andsowerewritten,published,reviewed,andreadasromances orevenadventurestories.TheexpectedcomparisonwithVerne,madeoften enoughatthetime(thoughrepudiatedbyboth),nowshowsnotonlyahuge disparityinliterarymeritbutcertaindifferencesinthedirectionofinterest.A mainpreoccupationofVernes,asIsaid,wastechnologyitself,actual possibilities,asWellsputit,ofinventionanddiscovery,andthisholdstrue equallywhenwhatwerepossibilitiestoVerneareimpossibilitiesorgrotesque improbabilitiestous.ThelongscientificlecturesinterpolatedinhisstoriesIfI createdatemperatureof180,thehydrogenintheballoonwillincreaseby 18/480s,or1,614cubicfeetandsoontheselectures,howevertedious,are highlygermanetowhatVernewasdoing.Wells,ontheotherhand,isnearly alwaysconcernedonlytofireoffafewphrasesofpseudoscientificpatterand bundlehischaractersawaytothemoonorthe803rdcenturywithdespatch. Vernehimselfsawthispointallright,andcomplainedafterreading(rather cursorily,itseems)TheFirstMenintheMoon:
1

Therewere,ofcourse,innumerableotherancestorsofsecondaryimportance.ThevolumeofUtopianliterature inthesecondhalfofthenineteenthcenturyishuge,anditsrangestretchesallthewayfromtractlike,plotless dogmatismsofpolitics,economics,orreligiontoadventurestorieswithafewideasinthem.Someoftheseworks wereofgreatandprolongedpopularity:theclassicinstanceisEdwardBellamysLookingBackward,withitsworld widesaleanditsdozensofrejoinders.ThevogueofthiskindofwritingwassuchthatGilbertandSullivan,whohad asharpeyeforfashionsintasteiffornothingelse,thoughtitworthawholeoperetta,UtopiaLtd.(firstperformed in1893),whichIhavesofarbeenunabletoseeperformed.Norwasthisaninterestconfinedtospecialistsor cranks,asistestifiedbytheexistenceofUtopianworksbyBulwerLytton,SamuelButler,W.H.Hudson,William Morris,andWilliamDeanHowells.

Imakeuseofphysics.Hefabricates.Igotothemooninacannonballdischarged fromagun.Thereisnofabricationhere.HegoestoMars[sic]inanairship[sic], whichheconstructsofametalthatdoesawaywiththelawofgravitation.Thatsall veryfine,butshowmethismetal.Lethimproduceit.

ItisoftensaidthatWellssmaininterestwasnotinscientificadvanceas suchbutinitseffectonhumanlife.Althoughthisistrueofsomeofhisworks,as weshallseeinamoment,itispatentlynottrueoftheoneswhichhadthemost immediateeffectonthegrowthofsciencefiction.Indeed,inthisrespectthe VerneofTheFloatingIslandorThePurchaseoftheNorthPoleseemsdistinctly morecontemporarythantheWellsofTheTimeMachineorTheInvisibleMan. Therealimportanceofthesestoriesisthattheyliberatedthemediumfrom dependenceonextrapolationandinsodoinginitiatedsomeofitsbasic categories.Thetimemachineitself,theMartiansandtheirstrangeirresistible weaponsinTheWaroftheWorlds,themonstersinthefirsthalfofTheFoodof theGods,theotherworldcoterminouswithoursinThePlattnerStory,the carnivorousplantinTheFloweringoftheStrangeOrchid,allthesehavehadan innumerableprogeny.Whatisnoticeableaboutthemisthattheyareusedto arousewonder,terror,andexcitement,ratherthanforanyallegoricalorsatirical end.WhentheTimeTravellerfindsthatmankindwillhavebecomeseparatedinto tworaces,thegentleineffectualEloiandthesavageMorlocks,theideathatthese aredescendedrespectivelyfromourownleisuredclassesandmanualworkers comesasamereexplanation,asolutiontothepuzzle;itisnottransformed,asit inevitablywouldbeinamodernwriter,intoawarningaboutsomecurrenttrend insociety.TheInvisibleManisonlyveryincidentallyconcernedwiththenotion thatascientificdiscoverymaybedangerouslytwoedged;thenovelisaboutthe problems,firstlyofbeing,secondlyofcatching,aninvisibleman.TheCountryof theBlind,whichissciencefictionofthephysicalchangevariety,isaboutwhatit wouldbelikeforasightedpersoninacountryoftheblind:theproverbaboutthe oneeyedmanbeingkingtheredoubtlessinspiredthestory,butitsthemeisa concretisation,notadaringimaginativestatement,oftheuntruthfulaspectof thatproverb.Acontemporarywriter,again,wouldhaveusedtheproposed blindingoftheheroasaclimacticpointfortheenfiladingofourintolerance towardsexceptionaltalents;Wellsthrowsthisawayinanaside,givingusthehero ofanadventurestoryindanger,nottherepresentativeofanythingbeing threatenedwithanythingrepresentative.Dr.Moreausbeastmenarebeastmen, notsymbolicpuppetsenactingaviewofbeastsandmen,orofmen.TheFirst MenintheMoonadmittedlyhassomesatiricaldiscussionsofwarandhuman

irrationality,togetherwithoneofseveralearlyanticipationsoftheconditioning duringsleepideaHuxleydevelopedinBraveNewWorld,butWellssmaindrive hereissimpledelightininvention,inworkingoutanalienecology,typicalofwhat Imightcallprimitivesciencefiction. Despitethefluentimaginativenessofthestoriesmentioned,themost forcefulofWellssromancesisthestronglyVernelikeTheWarintheAirof1907. ThiscurioussynthesisofWorldWarsI,II,andIII,withGermanyattackingthe UnitedStatesbeforebothareoverwhelmedbyaChineseJapanesecoalition,is certainlyconcernedwiththeeffectoftechnologyonmankind,sincetheoneis madetoreducetheothertobarbarism,andbeingbothsatireandwarning,ithas, inthesciencefictioncontextatanyrate,anunmistakablymodernring.TheWar intheAir,however,ratescomparativelylittleattentionfromthecommentators, asdoWellssUtopianromancesandtheirnotsoremoteancestoroftheearly Fabianperiod,WilliamMorrissNewsFromNowhere.MenLikeGods,withits nudism,orIntheDaysoftheComet,whereastrangegassofillshumanitywith lovingkindnessthateveryonegetsstartedoncompanionatemarriage,havenone ofthefireoftheearlyWells,andgiveasoporificwhiffofleftwingcrankiness,but theirvirtualexclusionfromthemodernsciencefictioncanonissurprising.This partofWellssoutputanticipated,butevidentlydidnotinfluence,later developments.EvenAStoryoftheDaystoCome,anearlyandlivelypiece, nevergetsamention,andyetitforecaststhemodernsatiricalUtopiawith fantasticexactness:advertisingmatteriseverywherebawledoutofloudspeakers, phonographshavereplacedbooks,mankindisurbanizedtothepointwhere agriculturalistscommuteinreverse,hugetrustsreignsupreme,anarmyof unemployablesismaintainedbyakindofinternationalpoorhousecalledthe LabourCompany,allchildrenarebroughtupinStatecrches,deviatesgettheir antisocialtraitsremovedbyhypnosis,dreamscanbeobtainedtoorder,andasa lastdetail,aprophecysouniversalnowadaysastojustifypanicinrazorblade circles,mendontshaveanymore,theyusedepilatories.QuitelikelyWellswill soongetall,insteadofpart,oftherecognitionaspioneerheclearlydeserves. <<Contents>> ****

ScienceFictionandLiterature

byRobertConquest1
Atypeofwritingwhosefriendsamongpostwarpractitionersofordinary fictionincludesuchnamesasWilliamGolding,KingsleyAmisandAngusWilson, scarcelyneedsdefendinginanyordinarysense.Ontheotherhand,sciencefiction isatypeofimaginativewritingwhichhasnotbeenmuchdealtwithinthevast literatureaboutliteraturewhichissuchamark,orpossiblystigma,ofourepoch; anditisdoubtlesstruethatanyonepreparedtolookatitisunlikelytotakethe conventionalcriticaltrappingsveryseriously.Butinanycase,itisalargefield,in whichstandardsvaryconsiderably,andinthissortofessayoneisalmostobliged tobesketchyandselective,andmakeafewgeneralpoints,ratherthan rigorouslyassess. Agoodamountofperspicuouscommentonthenatureandvirtuesof sciencefictionhasappearedinMr.EdmundCrispinsintroductionstohisyearly anthologies,forinstance.Iwanttodealmainlywithsomethingdifferentthe illuminationitcastsonthenatureofourliteraryhabitsandonourculture generally.Itisspeciallysuitabletodothisnow,whenthingshavesettleddown andafirstprematureburstofmodishnessisfortunatelyover.Thisbriefband wagonperiod,duringwhichdonsreviewedsciencefictionwithanenthusiasm temperedbypatronageandstultifiedbyignorance,didnogoodtoanyone,and canhardlybesaidtohavehadmucheffectontheLiteraryMind. Thehabits,onemightalmostsaythereflexes,ofaculturesattitudetoits literaturedependontheworkingsofthemindsofpeoplelikecriticsandgeneral kulturtragerratherthanonwritersthemselves.Thegeneralizedculturedmanis interestedinballetandinmusic,andinliteratureassuchratherthananything whichitmightbethoughtofasdealingwith.Creativewritersareoftenvery differenttonedeaf,likeYeats,orbrazenlyphilistine,likeMarkTwain,or
1

ScienceFictionandLiteraturebyRobertConquest.FromTheCriticalQuarterly,V(1963),35567.Reprintedby permissionofRobertConquest.

concernedwiththemessagemorethanthewriting,likeTolstoy.Andtheyare interestedintheactualitiesandpotentialitiesofthephenomenalworldfortheir ownsakes,notmerelyasbackgroundforthesubjective(compareAudenwithhis lessercontemporaries). Weareallinclinedtotakeourparticularformofcultureforgranted;our literaturetoo.YetWesternliterature,asithasbeeninthelasttwohundredyears orso,isaveryspecialandeccentricsortofthingcomparedwithanyother.What distinguishesitistheextraordinary,dominatingpositionofthenovelofcharacter. Literarytastehasthereforeinvolvedacceptanceoftheconventionsimplicit inthis.Moreover,underpresentconditionstheaveragecultivatedmanislikelyto beconsiderablymoreintrovertedthantheaverage.Andthusheislikelytohavea specialbiasinfavouroftheliteratureofcharacterandtoseeinitasignificance andsuperioritywhichisentirelyamatterofhispersonaltaste.(Themainworks whicharenotnovelsofcharacterandareyetlappedupbythisoverintroverted audiencearethosewhich,likeKafkas,arecentredonangstahighlyrevealing exception.)Theclaimsusuallymadeforthepsychologicalnovelarethatitismore humanandmorerealisticthananyother.Butitwasanovelistwhocomplainedof ascribingtoothersthefeelingsyouwouldfeelifyouwereintheirplace.Itisthis (amongmuchelse)thatmakesnovelssofalse.EvenTolstoysprivatelifemay makeusfeelthathewasnotveryunderstandingaboutrealhumanbeings.Fiction isfiction,moreover;andtheproductionofthesuspensionofdisbelief,whichI taketobethecruxofthenovelistsart,canyetonlybecalledrealismasasort ofconventionallabel. Toanyoneinterestedatallinliteraturesciencefictionshouldbeamost curiousandsignificantphenomenon,fortworeasons.Inthefirstplace,itisa traditionwhichhassprungupalmostentirelyoutsidethegeneralflowof literature.Andinthesecondplaceitmakesafairlycleanbreakwithprinciples whichhavecometoberathertakenforgrantedinanovelsincetheEighteenth Century,ratherastheunitiesusedtobeinFrenchdrama.Ofcourse,totake literaryconventionsforgranted,andwhentheyarebrokentoretorthotlythat anythingoutsidethemisnotliteratureisapieceofunthinkingautomatism. Sciencefictionhereperformstheserviceofmakingpeoplethinkoratworst makingthemshowthattheyareincapableofthinking.Ineithercaseitisagood thingtoknowwherewestand.

 Therehavealwaysbeentwosortsofimaginationinliterature.Onehas beenfascinatedbythevariationsofhumanfeelingsandactionswithincontexts whicharetakenforgranted.Theotherisinclinedtotakethehumanbehaviour largelyforgrantedandtobeinterestedmoreinenvironmentalchanges expressed,certainly,intheeffectonhumanbehaviour.Thedifferenceis,ifyou like,thatbetweentheComdieHumaineandtheDivinaCommedia.Thereisnow thisinclinationtoholdthatthepsychologicalinterestissomehowhigherand moreimportantthantheother.Itisinchildhoodthatthefacultyofintellectual, objectivecuriositydevelops,whileitisonlyinadolescencethatintrospection begins.Botharenecessaryhumanqualities.Bothcarryequalchargesof imaginationevenofawe.Therehasbeen,inthelastcenturyorso,atendencyin theliteraryworldgreatlytoexaggeratetheimportanceoftheadolescent component,thoughthishasnotbeensonoticeableamongthecreators.Literary intellectualsareinclinedtolookdownonthescientist,theimaginativeman whosefacultyislargelyconcentratedontheobjectiveside,aschildish.Yetthe orderinwhichthecomponentsareassembledisquiteirrelevanttotheir importanceinthecompletedadultbeing.Itisreasonableforabalancetoexist, andforvariousreasonsthetendencyhasbeenforonesideofthethingtobe grosslyhypertrophied.Tosomeextentthisisaselfperpetuatingprocess. Introspectiveliteratureattractsintrospectivecriticswhocreateintrospective canonsandanathematisewhatdoesnotappealtothem.Anditisagoodsignfor literatureingeneralthatthingshavealteredalittle. Foroverthelastfewyearstherehasbeensomechangeintheattitudeto sciencefiction.Foralongtimeitwasregardedasanoutrformofmass culture.Itwasassociatedwiththesensationalismofitslowesttype(asabsurdan attitude,really,astocondemnnovelsaboutlovee.g.AnnaKareninaonaccount ofthesentimentalwomensserial).Now,however,itseemstobecomingback intothemainstreamofliterature,fromwhichitonlydivergedafewhundred yearsago.Forquiteatimetherehavebeenatleastsomeliterarymenwhohave readsciencefictionwithoutanyspecialcondescension. Evenso,veryfewintellectualreadershavecometoitexceptinan accidentalfashion,leadingtocuriousmisapprehensions.Tohaveread(asis common)onlytheworkofJohnWyndhamandRayBradburyisratherasifones knowledgeoftheEuropeannovelwereconfinedtoTrollopeandFirbank.Mr.

Wyndhamis,ofcourse,theTrollope.Heisanoldandexperiencedsciencefiction writer,ofwhomitwouldnotbeunfairtosaythathisworkappearedfordecades, andrightly,inephemeralpulpmagazines.ThenhesuddenlyproducedTheDayof theTriffids.Thissmallmasterpieceattainsitseffectbysuperimposing extraordinaryeventsonaslowmoving,ordinary,veryEnglishbackgroundof personsandfeelings.Thisisanoldwayofdoingitandiscertainlyanadmirable andlegitimateone.IfIuseawordlikeparochialaboutit,thatisnotintheleastto denigrateit.Justthesame,itdoesnotgetyoufarinafieldwherethenormisby nomeansthesocietyofhereandnowwiththeextraordinaryjustsuperimposed onit,thoughonecanseeandwelcomethereasonsforitswideacceptancebya largerpublic. Mr.Bradburyssuccessisofaquitedifferentsort.Hetoostartedoffasa pulpwriter.Buthislatersuccessisapeculiarone.Heisnothighlyregardedin sciencefictioncirclesproper,apartfromtheoccasionalstory.HisGoldenApples oftheSunappearedintheObserverwithgreatceremony.Itwasareprintfrom thethirdratePlanetStories.Why,then,hashereceivedsuchpraise?Theanswer isprobablytobesoughtunderseveralheads:first,hegoesinforfinewriting; secondlyhismoodis,inaverycrudeway,oneofantiscientifichumanism,if youcancallitthat.Then,hehasthatsortofSaroyanatmosphereofconscious naivetymomsandsoonwhichforsomeprobablynotverycreditablereason oftengoesdownbigintheliteraryworld.Butafinalmotivemightbesomething likethis:heisawriterwholiterarymindedpeoplecanfeelissciencefiction.They wouldperhapsbealittleignorant,iftheydidnotreadalittle.TheyfindBradbury, butnotsciencefictionproper,tolerable.Thushebecomesthesciencefiction writerofthepersonwhodoesntreallylikesciencefiction,muchasColinWilson wasbrieflythephilosopherofpeoplewhodontreallylikephilosophy.Thisisjust atrifleunfairtoBradbury,anditisworthrecallingthatallthesefaultsofhis becometolerablewhenhewritespurefantasyghoststoriesinwhichacertain amountofmannergoesverywell.And,indeed,someofhiss.f.isscarcelytobe thoughtofassuch. Tosaywhatismeantbysciencefictionalwaysleadstoadefinitionwhich excludesatleastsomethingthatanys.f.readerwouldordinarilyinclude.The genretapersoffgraduallythroughallsortsofborderlinestoriessometimesbarely distinguishablefromstraightfictionontheonehandandsometimeshardto

disentanglefrompurefantasyontheother.Allthesametherearereasonsfor sayingsomethingaboutthecoverageoftheterm. Themerewordsciencefictionisinclinedtoirritatethetooliteraryreader byraisingindigestiblywhatherightlyorwronglythinksofasscience:thegadgetry andinventionsofphysicists.Inpracticesciencefictionrangesovereverytypeof storyinwhichthecentreofattentionisontheresultsofapossible,thoughnot actual,changeintheconditionsoflife.Thismaymerelyinvolvedescribingwhat happenswhenamanistransferredtothemoon.Itmaybeamoreorlesssocial satiretheextrapolationofsomethinginpresentsocietyintoanexaggerated future.Itmaybepsychologicallikeastoryofthefuture,BeyondBedlam,which onceappearedinGalaxy,aboutatimewhenthepsychologicaltensions destructiveofsocietyhavebeenresolvedbythewithdrawalofclashing personalityfacetsineveryindividualintotwodistinctpersonalities,eachofwhich hastheuseofthebodyforaweekatatime:(itwaswellworkedoutandof coursethegreatestsocialcrimeconsistedofextendingyourtenurebyvarious tricksandcommittingadulterywithyourwifesalterego).Butthevariationsare wide,andleadtothereflectionthatsciencefictionisinsomewaysan unfortunatename.Possibilityfictionmighthavebeenbetter. Thecentreofinterestmaywellnotbeheroatall.Butthisdoesnotmean thatthecharacterhastobeacardboardone.Justasinsomeoftheordinary novelsofAmerica,afewhintsaresufficienttocreateanadulteffectwithout distractingattentionfromthemainissues.Thesortofliteraryproblems presentedarequitenew.Forexample,thereisanexcellentstorybyRobert Heinlein(ByHisBootstraps)whoseheroisquitesimplyTimeandtheparadoxes involvedintimetravel.Themaincharacterstransferredtoandfrobetweenavery distantfutureandthesamepointoftimenowadays.Theresultisthatheappears inhisownroomnowthreetimesasfarashislifelineisconcernedbut simultaneouslyfromthetimepointofview,i.e.helivesthroughascenethree timesatlaterandlaterpointsinhisownlife.Theartisticdifficultiesofastoryof thissortareapparentatonce.Itcouldsoeasilybecompletelywooden,certainly. Butalsoitcouldfallovertheotherwayandmakethecharactersorich,ifyoulike, thatthemainpointofthestorywouldbeobscured. Norisittruethatbecausecharacterisnotthefocus,subtletyaswellas intelligenceisanylessinvolved.Evenataverycrudemateriallevel,thiscanbe

shown,aswhen,intheNullAnovels,vanVogtprovidesaphilosophicalbasis bothforinstantaneouslongdistancetravel,andfortelepathybetweencarefully controllednearidenticaltwins,bytheconceptofsimilarity.Absoluteidentity impliesidentityastospatialpositionalso:sothattheinstrument(distorter) whichforcessimilaritytoanenormouslyhighdegree,downtoelectroniclevel,by thatactforcesaspatialtransferoftheonesimilarisedobjecttothelocationof itsmodel.Oneortwoqueriesnaturallyariseinourminds,butthesophistication oftheconceptshowssomethingofthesubtletyofwhichsciencefictioniscapable evenindealingwithgrossmovement.Thisillustratesthefactthatthemusclesof theimaginationneedmorethanonesortofexercise.Theliterarymindisoften defectiveinimaginativecapacityofatypeithasnotbeentrainedfororsimply doesnothavethepotentialitiesfor. Therearemanywaysinwhichsciencefictionilluminatesmattersof literatureandofculturefarbeyonditsownsphere.Forexample,itshowsthe comparativelyprimitiveandirrationalbasisonwhichourtastesinreadingarisein thefirstplace.KingsleyAmis,inhisNewMapsofHell,describeshow,coming acrossapileofearlyAmericans.f.pulpsinWoolworthsbeforethewar,heat onceknewthatthiswashiskindofthing.JohnChristopher,thesciencefiction author,hasdescribedhisinitiationinexactlythesameway.(Thesamehappened tothepresentwriter,thoughhehad,asoneimaginesAmisandChristopherhad, beenreadingWellsandVernesincetheageofabouteight.)Thepointisthatwe havehere,asdoubtlesswiththousandsofothers,acaseofimmediate, temperamentaltaste,inwhichtherecanbelittlequestionoftraining,education orevencultureintheordinarysense.Itwasnot,ofcourse,anexclusivetaste. Manyofuswhohavereadmodernsciencefictioneversincethosemagazinesof ourearlyteens,havealsobecomeinvolvedinordinary(mainstream,as sciencefictionwriterscallit)literatureinvariousways,eventotheextentof writingit.Butitindicates,whatisperhapstoooftenforgotteninsophisticated analysis,theessentiallyprimitive,basicnatureofourviewsandtastesin literature.Iwouldimaginethatwithmostpeople,inotherspherestoo,the essentialismuchthesame:oneormoretheophaniesintheirearlyteens Swinburnespoetry,perhaps,orPoundswhichalltheirlaterdevelopmentis eitherelaborationoforreactionfrom,orboth. Sciencefictionhasitshistoryanditsroots,anditiscommonforbooksand essaysonthesubjecttoproduceamostrespectablepedigreegoingbackto

LucianofSamosata(oreven,ifitcomestothat,totheTimaeus)andtracingthe developmentfromthosetimesthroughpeoplelikeBishopWilkins,whowrotean accountofalunarvoyageintheearlyseventeenthcentury,CyranodeBergerac, andsoon.Butallthatseemsratherbesidethepoint.Itisdoubtfulthatthese peoplehadaninfluenceoneachother,letaloneonsciencefictionasithas developedinthelasthalfcentury.Thefirsttrueprimitiveclassicsare,naturally, JulesVerneandH.G.Wells.Purelytechnically,inregardtotheliteraryspiritof theirwritings,itisnottoodifficulttoderivetheseauthors.Vernehasbeenheld upbysomeFrenchcriticsasasortofmilepostofromanticismsomethinglike Delacroixinpainting.Butitisratherpointlesstospeakofsciencefictionassuch asinvolvingaparticularmoodormovement,ifonlybecauseasweallknowthere hasbeenplentyofs.f.withverydifferentattitudes.Therealquestionis,howor whydidthesciencefictionwritersadopttheirparticularthemes.Orrather,not simplythethemes,butawholemethodofregardingthesuitabilityofspecial matter.ItisnotaliteraryderivationthatVerneandWellsshowusonthispoint. Thenewcomponentsoftheirworkwereinjectedsideways,asitwere,intothe literarystreamfromoutside,fromthehugearenainwhichcreativeHomoFaber haderectedawholenewattitudeofscienceand(atthattime)ofoptimism. VerneandWellswerenotasisolatedastheyseeminretrospect.Quitealot ofsimilarthoughinferiorworkwasbeingproducedatthetime.Anditnever reallyceased.ButVernediedfiftyyearsago.AndWellswasinmanywaysavery untypicalfigure.Sciencefictionasagenreonitsownshouldreallybeconsidered ashavingbeencreatedmuchlaterandquiteapartfromWells. ItisusualtotraceittoanextremelypoorstorycalledRalph124C41by HugoGernsback,whichcameoutduringtheFirstWorldWar.Itmayseemalittle incredibletoshuffleWellsofflikethis(and,inadditionpeoplelikeRudyard KiplingandE.M.Forsterwereoccasionallywritingwhatcanreasonablybecalled sciencefiction).Butitisnotararethingforanewartformtostartoffatavery crudelevelLatinrhymedpoetryisaninstance.Gernsbackswritingisquite insignificant.Itwasjustoneofmanystoriesbeingwritteninaratherhamhanded fashionbypeoplewhoseimaginationswereturnedinthesciencefiction direction,butwhoseliterarygiftswereprettynegative.Whyitistakentomarkan epochiscontinuity:Gernsbackwasamagazineeditorwhosomeyearslater foundedthefirstpermanentsciencefictionmagazine,AmazingStories.Inthelate twentiesandearlythirtiesthismagazineandthetwowhichfollowedit,Wonder

Storiesand(asitwasthencalled)AstoundingStories,laidthebasisformodern sciencefiction.Thequalityofthewriting,asmightbeexpected,waslow.And, curiouslyenough,foratimeitgraduallygotlowerstill. Thereasonforthiswasthatatthebeginningthereweretworather differentwaysinwhichthestorieswerebad.SomewerewrittenbyGermanor GermanAmericanprofessorswhosequalificationswereusuallygiven;andvery impressivetheseoftenwere.Theirstoriesusuallyconsistedofhighlytechnical futuredevelopments,completewithfootnotesexplainingthedetails.Theaction wasoftensimplyofanaiveyounghero(ifthatistheword)beingshownround someislandorplanetaryUtopiawhosesocialarrangementsseemedtoindicate thattheprofessorheldoveroptimisticviewsabouttheregulationofthehuman passions. Theothertypeofwritinggavetheimpressionthatitwasbeingproducedby peopleintheirlateteens,withhighlydevelopedimaginationsabouttheshape andcharacteristicsofextraterrestrialmonstersandafaircapabilityofdescribing hairsbreadthescapes,butwithratherstereotypedideasaboutthemotivations evenofthemonsters.Thoughlessadult,thesewereonthewholemorepopular thantheprofessorialones,andrightlyso,andtheycrowdedthemout. Thesignificantthingisthatmostofthesestoriesreallywerewrittenbyvery youngpeople.Theyhadstartedwritinginthisunsophisticatedwaybecausethey had,howevercrudely,somethingimaginativetheywantedtosay.Andtheygrew up!Byabout193940anumberofthemhadmaturedineverypossibleway.And, inmanycases,theyhadlearnttowrite.IfwetakeamanlikeIsaacAsimovand lookathisearliestworkitisquiteashock.Iknowthatmanypeoplewhobecame addictedtosciencefictionhadtheluck,asIdidmyself,togrowupwiththese magazines.Fortheboyofelevenortwelvetheearlycruditieswereperfectlyall right.Andashegrewoutofthemtheygrewoutofthemtoo.Whathad happenedwasaveryrareandcuriousthing.Awholeseriesofwriterswriting almostsolelyinmagazinesdevotedtotheirsinglegenrehaddevelopedquite separatelyfromordinaryliteraryorigins.Nodoubtthisshouldbequalifiedby sayingthattheordinaryliteraryinfluencesseepedacrossinageneralway.Butit isonlyaqualification.

A.E.vanVogtsstoryBlackDestroyer(laterincorporatedinTheVoyage oftheSpaceBeagle)appearedinAstoundinginAugust1939,anditisoftentaken asthebeginningofthegoldenagewhichgotproperlygoingabout1943and begantotaperoffalittlearound1948.(TomymindtheBeaglestorieswere betterbeforetheywerelinkedtogetherbyacentralcharacter,thenexialist Grosvenor.)Maturitybroughtvariation.(Butthevehicleforyearswasalmost solelyAstounding,underJohnCampbellsinspirededitorship.Truesciencefiction wasforlongneverseeninhardcovers.Theoddexceptionswerebroughtoutby specialistpressesinsmalleditionsvanVogtsSlanforinstancewasprintedin Pennsylvaniainaneditionof2,000,whosepricefiveyearslaterwassomething liketenortwelvetimesabovepar.) Apointthatoftenescapesliterarycriticsdealingwiththegenreisjusthow verydifferentandindividualitsbestwritersare.Itmightseemtosomebody consideringthewholebusinessinanabstractwaythatallitswriterswouldbe ratheralike.ItwasAnatoleFrance,himselfanenormousstylist,whopointedout thatthebestauthorsoftendonotwriteverywell.Thoughtherearefinestylists andworkmanlikeartificersamongsciencefictionwriters,itistruethatsomeof themosteffectivehavemajorfaultsofamoreorlesssuperficialnature.Van Vogt,tomymindoneofthemostextraordinaryinthefield,isanexample.Not onlyishisworkerraticingeneral,andsometimesconstructedinanalmost incomprehensiblemanner,butheoftenheavilyoverwrites,eveninhisbestwork. Ifwedividesciencefictionintotwomainmoods,onemightbesaidtolay outitsimaginaryworldcoollyandcalmly1andgainitseffectsbyacumulative objectivity;andtheotherwhichhustlesthereaderintoacceptancebysheerhigh paceandobsessiveness.VanVogtisagreatfigureinthissecondschool.Ina differentwayAlfredBester,whoseworkiswellknownoverhere,doessomething ofthesamesortinhisTiger!Tiger!andTheDemolishedMan.Similarly,adivision mightbemadebetweenstoriesoftheextremeandfantasticfutureandwork fairlyrigorouslycoveringchangeswhichcanbemoreorlessdefinitelyforeseen frompresentknowledgegoingintothenextfiftytoahundredyears,perhaps,at themost.InthislatterthemosteffectivestuffisclearandsimpleArthurClarkes TheSandsofMarsorRobertHeinleinsTheManWhoSoldtheMoonandsoon. Thisraisesasmallbutitselfsignificantissue:whatconstitutesauthenticity? Forexample,itiscompletelyestablishedthatahumanbeingcouldnotsurviveon

Marsbreathingitsatmosphere.Asciencefictionwritermusteithergivehis humanvisitortoMarsanoxygenmask,orhemustindicatethattheatmosphere hasinsomewaybeenchanged.Ifyousaywhatdoesitmatter?youareputting yourselfinthepositionofamanwhoseesnothingoddinreadinganordinary imaginativenovelabouttheIrishcountrysideinwhichthevillagersare,forsome unexplainedreason,Negroes.Asimilarproblemsometimesarisesinhistorical novels.Certainlyitdependsontheamountofknowledgeareadermight reasonablybesupposedtohave.ProfessorTrevorRoperwouldbeputoutby anachronismsinanovelofElizabethanlifewhichtherestofuswouldscarcely notice.Still,therearelimits,andItrustthatwewouldallhaveanuneasyfeelingif wereadaboutSirWalterRaleighgreetingtheQueenbyraisinghisbowlerhat. Howmuchscience,then,shouldweknow?Itreallyseemsthatnowadays therearequitealotofliterarypeoplewhoregardthemselvesaseducatedinspite ofwhatonemightalmostcallarecklessandwilfulignoranceofeventhemost ordinarybitsofscientificinformation.Afterall,itisnotasifanyonepretendsthat evenamoderatelyeducatedmancanrelyentirelyonartisticinformation.He wouldbeexpectedtoknowalittleelementarygeography,say:thatAustraliahas nolandconnectionwithAsiaorthatMountEverestisnotsituatedintheAlps.But thereisapointatwhichcompulsiveignorancesetsin.Toreadsomecriticismof sciencefiction,andindeedofscience,onewouldimaginethatitwasapositive insulttosuggestthatknowledgeaboutthesurfaceoftheMoonisavailable,let alonedesirable.(Curiouslyenough,thisdoesnotpreventliterarypeople, sometimes,frommakingpronouncementsinscientificfieldsofwhichtheyknow nothing.InoneofthebetterSundaypapersayearorsoagotherewasaperfectly seriousreviewbyanexcellentpoetandcriticofabookbasingitselfonthewholly crackpotHoerbigertheoryofcosmology.) Toalargenumberofsuchpeoplesciencefictionismoreorlessidentified withasingletheme:theinterplanetaryrocket.Thisisreallyrathera misapprehension.Whatistrueisthatalargeproportionofsciencefictionissetin thefuture,forobviousreasons.Andourgrandchildren,unlessindeedtheyare barbarianslivinginaradioactivedesert(athemenotignoredbysciencefiction), willliveinaworldinwhichthemostunavoidablyobviousnewdevelopmentwill beinterplanetarytravel.ThusawriterproducinganystoryofacivilisedTwenty FirstCenturyisboundtoprovidesomebackgroundofspacetravelsimplyinthe interestsofauthenticity.Buttoanyonewhoisusedtoititisnomoreintrusive

thantheshipsare,bywhichSwiftwasabletotransferGullivertounknown islandsatatimewhensuchexisted. Astothefuture,agoodmanythingshavebecometakenforgrantedand haveevenbecometraditional.AsMr.R.C.Churchillsays,itmaybesurprisingto learnthattherearetraditionsaboutthefuture,butsuchisthecase.Inascience fictionradioplayofMr.AmissInoticedoneofthem:blaster.Intheolddays thesidearmofthefutureexplorerorduellistorwhateverwasgivenavarietyof names,usuallyofahighlyunlikelytechnicalnature,aswhoshouldcallaColt revolveramultipleleadprojector.Andtheirworkingswerefrequently described.Nowadaysitisseldomthatthisisbotheredwith,andwesimplyhave theblaster.Thereareotherthingsofthesamesort.Themainsettlementonthe MooniscalledLunaCitybyquiteanumberofauthors.Travelfasterthanlight, obviouslynecessaryforcertainplots,butimpossibleinEinsteinianspace,is carriedonbyspacewarpthroughsubspaceorhyperspace.Oneofthe oddestofthesebitsofterminologyisthecurrencyofthefuture,whichisalmost alwaysthecredit.Andthat,Ithink,isaconvenientsymboloftheabsenceof chauvinisminthislargelyAmericanorAngloAmericanart.Ofcourseitisusually theWesternculturewhichisprojected,atleastintothenearfuture,forobvious reasons.ButitisquitenormalforMr.Heinleintogiveusasolarsystemruledbya kingoftheDutchroyalhouse,orMr.SpraguedeCamptohaveasthedominant languageoftheinterstellarperiodPortuguesethelanguageoftheleadingnation, Brazil,anditsorganisationViagensInterplanetarias. Thegenrehasalwaysincludedsociologicalandothersatire,andherewe haveaproblemnotconfinedtosciencefiction.Itisatruismthatifapolemicin novelformistobemorethanaratherboringtractthemaininterestmustbein thestoryitselfandnotinitsmessage.AsYeatssaysofoneofhisplays: Playersandpaintedstagetookallmylove Andnotthosethingsthattheywereemblemsof AstorylikePohlandKornbluthsTheSpaceMerchants(originallycalled GravyPlanet)mightbecalledasatirebyreductioadabsurdumonthataspectof moderncommercialcivilisationinwhichheavyadvertisingstrives,mostanti socially,tosecurethemaximumconsumptionofeverything.Butthestoryitselfis thething.Neithertheconstructiverealityoftheworldtheyaredescribingnorthe

tempoofthedevelopmentisbrokenupsimplyforshrewdhits.Masterpieces likeTheSleeperAwakesand1984needalltheirpowertocarryquiteasmallload ofdeadwood,andwhenitcomestoMr.RayBradburysFahrenheit451the preachingissocrudethatitisratherrareforanyonetolikeitexceptthosewho approveofitasatract. Forwhateveritssatiricalorothervirtues,fictionisadeadlossifitdoesnot presentanimaginaryworldwhichisdeeplybelievable,acceptable.Onlythus,in someasyetunexplainedway,areourownfeelingsgivensustenance,ourown imaginationgivenexercise.Sciencefictionissimplyaneglected,andwrongly neglected,wayofdoingthis.Theparticulartypeofexcitementtobefoundin sciencefictionisnot,perhaps,entirelynew:thereissomethingofthesame feelinginElizabethanwriting,whenourculturesimaginationwasstrongly directedtothepossibilitiesofunknownlands,toDr.Deesprojectsfor discoveringthephilosophersstone,andsoon,andwhenUtopiassetinaquite imaginaryVirginiaenteredintothecreativeliterature.(Itisnotthemerepieceof informationthatsomeonewillbringusbackinthenextfewdecadesabout Martianvegetationsaythatissignificant.Itistheactofreducingtheunknownto orderthatgivesititspowerandexcitement.)Anothersidetothisfuture discoveriesandexplorationsthemeisevenmoretraditionalsimplythatanactive andeducatedliteraturehasusually,oroften,beenwrittenbythemanwhohas kepthisimaginationatthefrontiersofexpandingknowledge. Anthropologistshaveheldthatagreatliterature,aculturalexpansion, oftengoeswithaphysicalexpansionthattheagesofGreekandElizabethan explorationwerenotaccidentallythoseofgreatliterature.Andthatisonlytaking itatitscrudest,themereactoflandingonSicilyorAmericaorMars.Inaculture likeourownthefrontiersofknowledgehaveallsortsofotherdirections,andifa writerisbeingtrulywhatIwouldcallmodern,heisatleastawareofthem.Asfor subjects,naturallyheisnotcompelledtotakeanyspecialthemes.Anditgoes withoutsayingthatitisnogoodtryingtomakepoetry,forexample,modernby fillingitwithrocketslikethetractorsandtravellingcraneswhichinfestedthe poorerverseoftheThirties.Yet,ifonewishesforaphysicalobjecttowriteabout, Icannotbutfeelthattherocketispreferabletotheroodscreen. Astrikingthingaboutthesciencefictionofthe1890siswhereitgoes wronginitspredictionsaboutthe1950s.Technicaldetails,ofcourse,arenot

alwaysrightusuallythespeedoftechnologicaladvancehasbeengreatlyunder estimated.Thereareinclinedtobeairshipsandmovingpavements.Butevenin theclosestpredictionsthegreatfailureisonthesocialside.Peoplegoon behavingmuchthesameasinthenineties.Theheavilyclothedwomenare tendedwithsmellingsaltsastheyhavethevapoursinspaceships.Theballistic missileisanticipated,butnottheBikinibathingdressnorifitcomestothat, changesinfurnitureandgeneraltaste.Onewouldnotnecessarilyexpectthe detailsofsuchchangestobegotright,butinquasipredictivesciencefictionit seemsreasonabletohypothesisesomesortofchangesandprettyradicalones. Onthewholethemodernwritersavoidthesetrapsatleasttheymakeaneffort todoso. Ifyoustartreadingandjudgingsciencefictionmoreorlessforthefirst timethereisonethingtobewarnedagainst.Ingenuityisoneofthegreatvirtues ofthegenre.Butitisonthewholeextremelyrarenowadaysforareallynewidea tobeputforward.Andanystorywhichdependsforitseffectonsayingtoyou LookhowcleverIamtohavethoughtofthismayfallflatwithsomeonewho hasreadalotmoreofthemforthisreason.Ofcoursethiscomparative exhaustionofgimmicksandtwistswasoneofthethingswhichledtoscience fictionwritershavingtolearntowritebetterifthethemecouldnotwinsimplyby itsnoveltythenitjusthadtobemuchbetterwrittentowinatall. Thereis,aswehavesaid,alargeeducatedpublicwhichknowsits literature,andknowsnothingofsciencefiction.Weallknowhowrareitisnotto passjudgmentonthingsweknowpracticallynothingabout.Uptoapointthisis fairenough.IpersonallywouldagreewithMr.PhilipLarkininthinkingthatitisa littletoomuchtoexpectpeopletoforcethemselvestoappreciatenewthingsby makingverylargeefforts.Butonefeelsacertainsmughostility.Oneseesthem clearly,thedetractorswhetherpuffingtheirThreeNunsoverHughWalpoleina countryvicarage,orlecturingonHenryJamesinthemostadvancedjargon.Afew yearsagotheObserverheldacompetitionofsciencefictionshortstories.With oneadmirableexception(astorybyMr.BrianAldiss)allthesuccessfulstories wouldhavebeenrejected,andrightlyrejected,byanysciencefictionmagazine. Thejudgmentnotonlyshowed,presumably,thatignoranceofthegenreprevails amongliterarypersonswhoareneverthelesspreparedtojudgeit,butalsothat literarytrainingproduces,notanaturalgoodtastebutsimplycertainconditioned responses,adequateonlyinfamiliarfields.

 Oneoftheactive,ratherthanmerelyhabitual,misapprehensionsabout literaturecanbeseeninthethesisputforwardfrequentlyand,asmightbe expected,withthegreatestclarity,byDr.DonaldDavie.Thisisthatserious writingcanonlybedonebythosewhohavemasteredaculturalsyllabus comparabletoAndreMalrauxImaginaryMuseuminthevisualarts.Eveninthis generalform,thetheoryseemsdubious.Mr.PhilipLarkincanwriteanexcellent poemwithoutpayinganyattentiontothewriting,oreventheexistence,ofMr. EzraPound.ButtheparticularinterpretationgiventoitconsciouslybyDavie,and implicitlybyalargenumberofthoseinterested,isevenlesstenable,containing asitdoesconcealedandfaultyassumptions. Inthefirstplace,itisassertedthatanappreciationofforeignliteratureisa definiterequisite.Wearetold,say,thatacertainpoethasassimilatedLaforgue. Thissortofclaimshowsaninsensitivityandarrogancewhichitishardto understand.ThenumberofEnglishwriterswhocanappreciateFrenchverseas versemustbeveryfewindeed.Itmaybetruethatafruitfulmisunderstanding ofaforeignliteratureispossible,butinthatcasewecanonlyspeakofastimulus, andonenotofaliterarynature.Andthusforeignliteratures,ingeneral,inso farastheystimulateEnglishliterature,arenottoberankedasdifferentinkind fromstimuliofanonliterarytype,suchasthosethatscienceandphilosophymay provide.TheImaginaryMuseumshouldeitherbecloseddownorextendedacross ExhibitionRoadtoincludetheNaturalHistoryandScienceMuseumsinaddition totheV.&A. Infact,thiswasalwaysthetraditionhereuntilconstrictingnotionsabout theprimacyofLiteratureandtheHumanSoulintroducedadisproportioninto criticalandsometimesevencreativeattitudes.Itisnotonlyinsciencefictionthat therehasbeensomethingofareturntotheprincipleofAristotlethatcharacter shouldbesubordinatetothestory,and,indeed,merelyadevelopmentofthe story.Thereisplentyofstraightfictionwhichdoesnotfollowthetuneofthe psychologicalnovel.Mr.WilliamGolding,forinstance,writescompulsivelytohis theme.LordoftheFliesandTheInheritorsarebothborderlinesciencefiction novels.Itwouldnothavebeenreallysurprisingtohaveseenthemserialisedin Galaxy.Atthesametimethecommonreader(oreventhecommoncritic,more concernedwitherectingbarriers)isnotsurprisedtoseethempresentedas novelspureandsimple.Andrightlyso.Fourhundredyearsagoimaginative

literaturewasallofapiece.ItwasnotuntilAretinothatpornographybeganto becomeareallyspecialisedjob.Shakespearescharacterscrackobscenejestsin themostnaturalwaybetweentragicdeaths.Inthesameway,sciencefictionwas partoftheordinarywritingofSwiftorVoltaire,butuntilrecentlyittoohadlong beenflourishingasalmostaseparateculturaltradition.Thesplitinimaginative writingprobablytookplacewhenacertaintypeofliterarymanbegantoassume, withoutsufficientreason,thattheinterplayofcharacterwasthehighest,and thentheonly,truesubjectoffictionalwriting.Inrecentyearsmuchofwhatused toberegardedaspornographichasbeenresumedintoordinaryliteratureand therearenowreasonablesignsthatthisishappeningtosciencefictiontoo.Itis difficulttojudgewhetherSamuelRichardson,onreadingofaseductionina spaceship,wouldhaveobjectedmoretotheactorthevenue.Wearenow,even thespecialists,readyforboth,Ihope. ToconcludeonthenoteIbeganwith:justbecausesciencefictionhasnot beenacademicised,itisoneofthefewremainingareasofliteratureinwhich readingisdoneinvariablyforpleasureandneverforduty.Itisacase,infact,of whatourattitudestoliteraturealwaysusedtobelike.And,onecannothelp feeling,ofwhatitisnowbeingincreasinglyrealisedtheywillhavetogetlike again.AsMr.PhilipLarkinhaswrittenofpoetry,Ifapoetloseshispleasure seekingaudiencehehaslosttheonlyaudienceworthhaving,forwhichthedutiful mobthatsignsoneverySeptemberisnosubstituteifthemediumisinfactto berescuedfromamongourdutiesandrestoredtoourpleasures,Icanonlythink thatalargescalerevulsionhastosetinagainstpresentnotions. Sciencefictionilluminatesotherfieldsofliteraturebycontrast.Butitmay beregardedasinsomesortanexample:athreatorapromise,dependingonhow youlookatit. <<Contents>> ****

TheRootsofScienceFiction

byRobertScholes 1
Allfictioneverybookeven,fictionornottakesusoutoftheworldwe normallyinhabit.Toenterabookistoliveinanotherplace.Outofthenatureof thisothernessanditsrelationtoourlifeexperiencescomeallourtheoriesof interpretationandallourcriteriaofvalue.InthepreviouslectureIarguedthe caseforaparticularrelationbetweenfictionandexperience,expressedin temporaltermsasfuturefiction.Thepolemicalnatureofmysituationas advocateforapopularbutcriticallydeprecatedformoffictionledmeinevitably tomakeacasewhichisincertainrespectstoonarrowforitssubject.Thelawsof rhetoricforceallradicaladvocatestochoosebetweenbetrayingtheircausesby anexcessofconciliationorofhostility,andIunderstandthoselawsonlytoowell. Incompensation,Iwishtobemoretentativeandspeculativenow,indescribing theparametersofafictionalformthatisbotholdandnew,rootedinthepastbut distinctlymodern,orientedtothefuturebutnotboundedbyit. ItiscustomaryinourempiricallybasedAngloSaxoncriticismtodistinguish betweentwogreatschoolsoffictionaccordingtotherelationshipbetweenthe fictionalworldstheypresentandtheworldofhumanexperience.Thuswehave, sincetheeighteenthcentury,spokenofnovelsandromances,ofrealismand fantasy,andwehavefoundthedistinctionusefulenoughattimes,eventhough, becauseofourempiricalbias,wehavetendedtovaluerealismmorehighlythan romance.Itwillbeappropriate,then,atleastasabeginning,toseethetradition thatleadstomodernsciencefictionasaspecialcaseofromance,forthistradition alwaysinsistsuponaradicaldiscontinuitybetweenitsworldandtheworldof ordinaryhumanexperience.Initssimplestandmostancientformthis discontinuityisobjectifiedasanotherworld,adifferentplace:Heaven,Hell,Eden, Fairyland,Utopia,TheMoon,Atlantis,Lilliput.Thisradicaldislocationbetween theworldofromanceandtheworldofexperiencehasbeenexploitedindifferent
1

TheRootsofScienceFictionbyRobertScholes.FromStructuralFabulation:AnEssayonFictionoftheFuture (NotreDame,Indiana:UniversityofNotreDamePress,1975),pp.2744.ReprintedbypermissionofUniversityof NotreDamePress.

ways.Oneway,themostobvious,hasbeentosuspendthelawsofnaturein ordertogivemorepowertothelawsofnarrative,whicharethemselves projectionsofthehumanpsycheintheformofenactedwishesandfears.These pureenactmentsareattherootofallnarrativestructures,arethemselvesthe definingcharacteristicsofallnarrativeforms,whetherfoundinrealisticor fantasticmatrices.Inthesublimativenarrativesofpureromancetheyare merelymoreobviousthanelsewherebecauselessdisguisedbyotherinterests andqualities.Butthereisanotherwaytoexploittheradicaldiscontinuity betweentheworldofromanceandthatofexperience,andthiswayemphasizes cognition.Thedifferencecanbeusedtogetamorevigorouspurchaseoncertain aspectsofthatveryrealitywhichhasbeensetasideinordertogeneratea romanticcosmos.Whenromancereturnsdeliberatelytoconfrontrealityit producesthevariousformsofdidacticromanceorfabulationthatweusuallycall allegory,satire,fable,parable,andsoontoindicateourrecognitionthatrealityis beingaddressedindirectlythroughapatentlyfictionaldevice. Fabulation,then,isfictionthatoffersusaworldclearlyandradically discontinuousfromtheoneweknow,yetreturnstoconfrontthatknownworldin somecognitiveway.Traditionally,ithasbeenafavoritevehicleforreligious thinkers,preciselybecausereligionshaveinsistedthatthereismoretotheworld thanmeetstheeye,thatthecommonsenseviewofrealityrealismis incompleteandthereforefalse.Science,ofcourse,hasbeentellingusmuchthe samethingforseveralhundredyears.Theworldweseeandhearandfeel realityitselfisafictionofoursenses,anddependentontheirfocalability,as thesimplestmicroscopewilleasilydemonstrate.Thusitisnotsurprisingthat whatwecallsciencefictionshouldemploythesamenarrativevehicleasthe religiousfictionsofourpast.Inasense,theyarefellowtravellers.Butthereare alsogreatdifferencesbetweenthesekindsoffiction,whichmustbeinvestigated. Therearetwovarietiesoffabulationordidacticromance,which correspondroughlytothedistinctionbetweenromancesofreligionand romancesofscience.Wemaycallthesetwoformsdogmaticandspeculative fabulation,respectively.Thisdistinctionisneithercompletenorinvidious.It representsatendencyratherthandelineatingatype,butmostdidacticromances areclearlydominatedbyonetendencyortheother.EvenwithintheChristian tradition,wecanrecognizeDantesCommediaasadogmaticfabulationand MoresUtopiaasaspeculativeone.Dantesworkisgreaterbymostaccepted

standardsofcomparison.Butitworksoutofaclosed,antispeculativesystemof belief.AUtopiaadmitsinitstitlethatitisnowhere.ACommedia,humanor divine,ontheotherhand,mustfilltheknowncosmos.Asopposedtodogmatic narrative,speculativefabulationisacreatureofhumanism,associatedfromits originswithattitudesandvaluesthathaveshapedthegrowthofscienceitself. Swiftdetestedthescienceofhistime,whichdrovehimtodogmaticposturingin BookIIIofGulliver.ButsurelywithoutthemicroscopeandtelescopeBooksIand IIcouldnothavebeenastheyare.AndBookIVisaspeculationbeyondalldogma. SinceDante,dogmaticfabulationhasdeclined,thoughitalwayslurksinthe worldsofsatire.SinceMore,speculativefabulationhasgrownanddeveloped. Bornofhumanismithasbeenfosteredbyscience.Butithasneverflourishedasit doesatpresentforreasonsthatitisnowourbusinesstoexplore. AsClaudioGuillenhastaughtus,literaturemaybeusefullyseenasaspiring towardsystemasacollectionofentitiesconstantlyrearrangingthemselvesin searchofanequilibriumneverachieved.Inthecourseofthisprocesscertain genericformscrystallizeandpersistorfadefromexistence,andamongthese formssomecomeintodominanceatparticularmomentsofhistory,onlytoyield theirdominantpositionwiththepassageoftime.Ineveryage,astheRussian Formalistswerefondofobserving,certaingenericformsareregardedas canonicaltheacceptedformsfortheproductionofseriousliteratureandother formsareconsideredoutsidethepale,beingeithertooesoteric(coterie literature)ortoohumble(popularliterature).Butwiththepassageoftime canonicalformsbecomerigid,heavy,mannered,andlosetheirvitalpower.Even thedominantformseventuallygiveuptheirprivilegedpositionandmovetoward theedgesoftheliterarycanon.Thereasonsforthismaybeseeninpurelyformal termsastheexhaustionoftheexpressiveresourcesofthegenre.Ortheymaybe seeninbroaderculturaltermsasresponsestosocialorconceptualdevelopments outsidetheliterarysystemitself.Tomywayofthinking,sincefictionisacognitive artitcannotbeconsideredadequatelyinpurelyformalterms.Formalchanges,to beunderstood,mustbeseeninthelightofotherchangesinthehumansituation. Ipropose,then,toexamineasmallbutimportantpartofthesystemof literature:theinteractionofcertainformsoffictionalrepresentationovera periodofafewcenturies,endingwiththepresenttime.AndIfurtherproposeto seethisinteractionasanaspectofalargermovementofmind.Mytreatmentwill beextremelybrief;themodelIgeneratewillbeverysketchy.Butinmattersof

thiskindtruepersuasionisnottobeachievedbytheamassingofargumentative detail.Iaskyousimplytoconsiderthefictionaluniversefromtheperspectiveof thismodelandthenseeifyouroldperspectivecaneverbecomfortablyassumed again.Iwillbeginbyraisingaquestionseldomconsideredperhapsbecauseitis toolargetoadmitofananswer.Thequestionis,simply,Whatmakesaform dominant?Admittingthephenomenonofdominance,why,forinstance,should dramadominatethewesterncountriesofEuropeforahundredyearsfromthe latesixteenththroughtheseventeenthcentury?Ingeneraltermsithasbeen argued,andIthinkconvincingly,thatdramawasideallysuitedtoanerainwhich monolithicfeudalismhadlostitspoweroverindividualexistencebutbourgeois democracyhadnotyetcomeintobeingasaregulatorofthepowervacuumleft behindbythecrumblingfeudalsystem.Anageofprinces(intheMachiavellian sense)madeheroicdramaconceivableasneitheranearlierageofkingsnora laterageofministersevercould.Thedramaticdispositionoftheage,withits incrediblereversalsoffortune,asseen,forinstance,inthelifeofanEssexora Raleigh,enabledaspecificliteraryformtorealizeitsmaximumpotential. Inthecaseofthenovel,wefindaformthatcameintodominancefor parallelculturalreasons.Theriseofthemiddleclassdidnotcausetheriseof thenovel,butnewconceptsofthehumansituationenabledbothofthese phenomenatotakeplace.Inparticular,anewgraspofhistory,asaprocesswith itsowndynamicsresultingfromtheinteractionofsocialandeconomicforces, generatedanewconceptofmanasacreaturestrugglingagainstthese impersonalentities.Andthisstrugglecouldhardlyberepresentedonthestagein thesamewayasmansstrugglewithfortuneorhisownambitiousdesires.Itis notthatplaysdealingwithsocioeconomicmancouldnotbewritten.Writers fromSteeletoIbsenstruggledmanfullytogeneratearichsocialcanvasonstage. Butwhatthenovelachievedeasilyandnaturally,thedramacoulddoonlywith greatpainsandclumsyinadequacy.Thenovelnaturallycametobetheliterary forminwhichanageconsciousofhistoryasashapingforcecouldexpressitself mostsatisfyingly.Thenovelwasthediachronicformofadiachronicage.Ineach volumeofthegreatnineteenthcenturyrealistswefindthehistoryofan individualagainstabackgroundoftheforcesshapinghismomentofhistory.And inthesequencesofnovelsproducedbywriterslikeBalzacandZolawecansee wholeerastakinghumanshape,becomingprotagonistsstrugglinginthegripof thelargedesignsofHistoryitself.Forthis,ofcourse,wastheageinwhichHistory

acquiredacapitalH,becomingasubstituteforGod,withaGrandPurposein Mind,whichHisangeltheTimeSpiritsoughttoeffect. Letusnarrowthefocus,now,tothenarrativeformsofrepresentationonly, fordominancecanbeconsiderednotonlyamongthegreatgenerickinds,and evenamongwholearts,butalsowithintheboundariesofasinglekindof literature.Inthenovelitselfwecantracetheriseandfallfromdominanceof sentimentalfictionintheeighteenthcentury,ofamoresociologicalandhistorical fictioninthenineteenth,andfinallyamoreinwardandpsychologicalfictionin theearlytwentiethcentury.Alloftheseformshavegoneunderthenameof realism,andasanevolvingtraditionthisrealismpreservedadominantplace amongtheformsoffictionfromthetimeofDefoeandMarivauxuntilwellinto thepresentcentury.Otherfictionalformshavecoexistedwiththedominant realismsuchasthegothic,whichfirstemergedinthelateeighteenthcenturyto fillanemotivegapopenedinthesystembythemoveofsocialandsentimental formsawayfromsituationsofheroicintensity.AndafterSwiftaspeculative fabulationwithsatiricaltendencieswaskeptalivebywriterslikeJohnsonin RasselasandCarlyleinSartorResartus.Butitisfairtosaythatthistradition lackedvigorandcontinuitylackedgenericcertaintyuntilnewconceptual developmentsputfictionalspeculationonanentirelydifferentfooting,changing thefabricofmansvisioninwaysthatinevitablyledtochangesinhisfiction. ThisrevolutioninmansconceptionofhimselfwasbegunbyDarwins theoryofevolution.ItwascontinuedbyEinsteinstheoryofrelativity.Andithas beenextendedbydevelopmentsinthestudyofhumansystemsofperception, organization,andcommunicationthatrangefromthelinguisticphilosophyof WittgensteinandthegestaltpsychologyofKohlertothestructuralanthropology ofLeviStraussandthecyberneticsofWiener.Thiscenturyofcosmic rearrangement,crudelyindicatedherebythislistofnamesandconcepts,hasled tonewwaysofunderstandinghumantimeandspacetime,aswellastoanew senseoftherelationshipbetweenhumansystemsandthelargersystemsofthe cosmos.Initsbroadestsense,thisrevolutionhasreplacedHistoricalManwith StructuralMan. Letusexplorethisgreatmentalshiftabit.Darwin,andthosewhohave continuedhiswork,puthumanhistoryinaframeofreferencemuchgranderthan thatofHistoricalMan.Thisstretchedmansentiresenseoftimeintoanewshape

andfinallyalteredhisfamiliarpositioninthecosmos.Earlyreactionsto evolutionarytheoryoftentriedtoaccommodateDarwinianevolutionarytheory withinthefamiliardimensionsofhistoricaltime,suggestingthatsomeSuperman lurkedjustaroundtheevolutionarycornerinmuchthesamewaythatpeople oncebelievedtheapocalypsetobescheduledfortheverynearfuture.Butby expandingoursenseoftimetheDarwiniansreducedhistorytoamomentand mantoabitplayerinagreatunfinishednarrative.Thepossibilityoffurther evolution,withspeciesmoreadvancedthanourselvescomingintobeingonthis earth,displacedmanfromthefinalpointoftraditionalcosmicteleologyas effectivelyasGalileohaddisplacedmansplanetfromthecenterofthespatial cosmos.ThusDarwiniantime,whichhasbeencontinuallyextendedwiththe discoveryofnewgeologicalandarcheologicalevidence,hashadaprofoundeffect onmanssenseofhimselfandhispossibilities.Historicaltime,then,isonlyatiny fragmentofhumantime,whichisagainatinyfragmentofgeologictime,whichis itselfonlyabitofcosmictime. Thetheoriesofrelativityhaveworkedinasimilarfashiontoshakemanout ofhishumanistperspective.Bydemonstratingthatspaceandtimeareinamore intimateperspectivalrelationthanwehadknown,Einsteintoocalledhistoryinto question.Whenwethinkintermsofthecosmicdistancesandabsolutevelocities oftheEinsteinianuniverse,notonlydoweloseourgrasponfundamentalhuman conceptslikesimultaneityandidentity,welosealsoourconfidenceinthat commonsenseapprehensionoftheworldwhichreplacedmansmythic consciousnessasthenovelreplacedtheepicinthehierarchyofnarrativeforms. Andonthesmallerscaleofpurelyhumanstudiesinanthropology,psychology, andlinguistics,ideasnolessearthshakinghavebeendeveloped.Whatdoesitdo toourtimesensetothinkofstoneagemenlivingtheirtimelesslivesintheyear 1974insomeremotejungleonourearth?Andwhatdoesitdotoourconfidence inhumanprogresswhenweseethatthoughtheylackallthethingsthatour scienceandtechnologyhavegivenus,theyliveinaharmonywiththecosmos thatshamesus,andknowinstinctively,itseems,lessonsthatwearepainfully relearningbyhavingtofacetheconsequencesofourownecologicalwantonness? Ateveryturnwerunintopatternsofshapingforcethathavegoneunobservedby ourinstrumentalapproachtotheworld.Welearnthatmensvisualperceptions aregovernedbymentalleapstowholeconfigurationsorgestaltsratherthanby patientaccumulationofphenomenaldetails.Welearnthatweacquirelanguage insimilarquantumjumpsofgrammaticalcompetence.Andweknowthatour

acquiredlanguagesinturngovernandshapeourperceptionsofthisworld. Finally,wehavebeguntoperceivethatoursocialsystemsandourlinguistic systemssharecertainsimilaritiesofpattern,thatevenourmostintimateformsof behaviorareorderedbybehavioralconfigurationsbeyondourperceptionand controlledthroughbiologicalfeedbacksystemsthatmaybealteredbytheinput ofvariousdrugs,hormones,andotherbiochemicalmessages. Inshort,wearenowsoawareofthewaythatourlivesarepartofa patterneduniversethatwearefreetospeculateasneverbefore.Whereanything maybetruesometime,someplacetherecanbenoheresy.Andwherethe patternsofthecosmositselfguideourthoughtssopowerfully,sobeautifully,we havenothingtofearbutourownlackofcourage.Therearefieldsofforcearound usthatevenourfinestinstrumentsofthoughtandperceptionareonlybeginning todetect.Thejoboffictionistoplayinthesefields.Andinthepastfewdecades fictionhasbeguntodojustthis,todreamnewdreams,confidentthatthereisno gateofivory,onlyagateofhorn,andthatalldreamsaretrue.Itisfictionverbal narrativethatmusttaketheleadinsuchdreaming,becauseeventhenew representationalmediathathavebeenspawnedinthisagecannotbeginto matchthespeculativeagilityandimaginativefreedomofwords.Thecameracan captureonlywhatisfoundinfrontofitormadeforit,butlanguageisasswiftas thoughtitselfandcanreachbeyondwhatis,orseems,towhatmayormaynot be,withthespeedofasynapse.Untilthemindcanspeakinitsowntongueless images,thewordwillbeitsfleetestandmostdelicateinstrumentof communication.Itisnotstrange,then,thatthemodernrevolutioninhuman thoughtshouldfindexpressioninatransformationofaformoffictional speculationthathasbeenavailableforcenturies.Ittookonlyaquantumjumpin fictionalevolutionforspeculativefabulationtobecomestructural,andthe mutationtookplacesometimeearlyinthiscentury. What,then,isstructuralfabulation?Consideredgenerically,structural fabulationissimplyanewmutationinthetraditionofspeculativefiction.Itisthe traditionofMore,Bacon,andSwift,asmodifiedbynewinputfromthephysical andhumansciences.Consideredasanaspectofthewholesystemof contemporaryfiction,ithasgrowninproportiontothedeclineofotherfictional forms.Forinstance,totheextentthatthedominantrealisticnovelhas abandonedthepleasuresofnarrativemovementforthecaresofpsychological andsocialanalysis,agapinthesystemhasdevelopedwhichanumberoflesser

formshavesoughttofill.Alltheformsofadventurefiction,fromwestern,to detective,tospy,tocostumehavecomeintobeinginresponsetothemovement ofseriousfictionawayfromplotandthepleasuresoffictionalsublimation. Becausemanyhumanbeingsexperienceapsychologicalneedfornarration whetherculturalorbiologicalinorigintheliterarysystemmustincludeworks whichanswertothatneed.Butwhenthedominantcanonicalformfailstosatisfy suchabasicdrive,thesystembecomesunbalanced.Theresultisthatreaders resortsecretlyandguiltilytolesserformsforthatnarrativefixtheycannotdo without.Andmanyfeelnearlyasguiltyaboutitaswecouldhopetomakeany habitualoffenderagainstourofficialmores.Thespectacle(reportedbyGeorge Moore,asIrecollect)ofW.B.Yeatsexplainingwithgreatembarrassmentwhyhe happenedtobereadingadetectivestorycanstandasaparadigmoftheguiltfelt byintellectualswhoseemotionalneedsdrivethemtolesserliteraryformsfor pleasure.Wedocallpeopleaddictsiftheyseeminordinatelyfondofdetective stories,orevenofsciencefiction.Butthemetaphorofaddictionisadangerously misleadingone.Forthisisemotionalfood,notamindbendingnarcotic,thatwe areconsidering. Thusthevacuumleftbythemovementofseriousfictionawayfrom storytellinghasbeenfilledbypopularformswithfewpretensionstoanyvirtues beyondthoseofnarrativeexcitement.Buttheveryemptinessoftheseforms,as theyareusuallymanaged,hasleftanothergap,forformswhichsupplyreaders needsfornarrationwithoutstarvingtheirneedsforintellection.Theletdown experiencedafterfinishingmanydetectivestoriesoradventuretalescomesfrom asenseoftimewastedtimeinwhichwehavedeliberatelysuspendednotmerely oursenseofdisbeliefbutalsofartoomanyofournormalcognitiveprocesses. Andthisletdowngrowstoagenuineandappropriatefeelingofguilttotheextent thatwedobecomeaddictedandindulgeinthereadingofsuchstoriesbeyond ournormalneedfordiversionandsublimation.Evenfoodshouldnotbetakenin abnormalquantities,especiallyifmuchofitisemptycalories.Werequireafiction whichsatisfiesourcognitiveandsublimativeneedstogether,justaswewant foodwhichtastesgoodandprovidessomenourishment.Weneedsuspensewith intellectualconsequences,inwhichquestionsareraisedaswellassolved,andin whichourmindsareexpandedevenwhilefocusedonthecomplicationsofa fictionalplot.

Thesemaybedescribedasourgeneralrequirementsneedswhichhave existedaslongasmanhasbeensufficientlycivilizedtorespondtoaformthat combinessublimationandcognition.Butwealsohavetoconsiderherethe specialrequirementsofourownageourneedforfictionswhichprovidea sublimationrelevanttothespecificconditionsofbeinginwhichwefind ourselves.Themostsatisfyingfictionalresponsetotheseneedstakestheformof whatmaybecalledstructuralfabulation.Inworksofstructuralfabulationthe traditionofspeculativefictionismodifiedbyanawarenessofthenatureofthe universeasasystemofsystems,astructureofstructures,andtheinsightsofthe pastcenturyofscienceareacceptedasfictionalpointsofdeparture.Yet structuralfabulationisneitherscientificinitsmethodsnorasubstituteforactual science.Itisafictionalexplorationofhumansituationsmadeperceptiblebythe implicationsofrecentscience.Itsfavoritethemesinvolvetheimpactof developmentsorrevelationsderivedfromthehumanorthephysicalsciences uponthepeoplewhomustlivewiththoserevelationsordevelopments. Inthepreviousera,historicistviewsofhumancultureledtoavisionof mansfutureasguidedbysomeplanbeyondhumancomprehension,perhaps,in itstotality,butsolicitousofmanandamenabletohumancooperation.Thusgreat fictionalnarrativescouldbecouchedintermsofindividualmenandwomen seekingtoalignthemselveswithorstruggleagainstthesocialforcesthrough whichHistorywasworkingitsWilltoachieveitsIdea.Butnowstructuralism dominatesourthought,withitsviewofhumanexistenceasarandomhappening inaworldwhichisorderlyinitslawsbutwithoutplanorpurpose.Thusmanmust learntolivewithinlawsthathavegivenhimhisbeingbutofferhimnopurpose andpromisehimnotriumphasaspecies.Manmustmakehisownvalues,fitting hishopesandfearstoauniversewhichhasallowedhimaplaceinitssystematic working,butwhichcaresonlyforthesystemitselfandnotforhim.Manmust createhisfuturehimself.Historywillnotdoitforhim.Andthestepshehas alreadytakentomodifythebiospherecanbeseenaslimitingthefutureoptions ofthehumanrace.Itisinthisatmospherethatstructuralfabulationdrawsits breath,respondingtotheseconditionsofbeing,intheformofextrapolative narrative.Theextrapolationsmaybeboldandphilosophicalorcautiousand sociological,buttheymustdepartfromwhatweknowandconsiderwhatwe haveduecausetohopeandfear.Likeallspeculativefabulationstheywilltake theirorigininsomeprojecteddislocationofourknownexistence,buttheir

projectionswillbebasedonacontemporaryapprehensionofthebiosphereasan ecosystemandtheuniverseasacosmosystem. Obviously,notallworksthatarecalledsciencefictionmeetthiskindof standard.Manywritersaresodeficientintheirunderstandingofthecosmic structureitselfthattheyhavenosenseofthedifferencebetweenpurposeful discontinuityandamagicalrelaxationofthecosmicstructure.Andmanyothers seektopresenttraditionalromanceasifithadsomestructuralorspeculative significance.But,ifawriterfailstounderstandthediscontinuityonwhichhis workisbasedasadiscontinuityfromacontemporaryviewofwhatistrueor natural,heispowerlesstomakethatdiscontinuityfunctionstructurallyforus. Thusanycognitivethrustinhisworkwillbeaccidentalandintermittent.Andifa writertransportsmentoMarsmerelytotellacowboystory,heproducesnot structuralfabulationbutstardreckharmless,perhaps,butanabuseofthat economyofmeansthatgovernsmatureestheticsatisfaction.Orifheallowssuch avarietyofmagicaleventsthathisfictionalworldseemsdeficientinitsown naturallaws,hisworkwillfailstructurallyandcognitively,too,thoughitmay retainsomesublimativeforce.Butinthemostadmirableofstructuralfabulations, aradicaldiscontinuitybetweenthefictionalworldandourownprovidesboththe meansofnarrativesuspenseandofspeculation.Intheperfectstructural fabulation,ideaandstoryaresoweddedastoaffordussimultaneouslythe greatestpleasuresthatfictionprovides:sublimationandcognition. <<Contents>> ****

PARTTWO

Theory
****

OnthePoeticsofthe ScienceFictionGenre1

byDarkoSuvin2
1.ScienceFictionAsFiction{Estrangement) 1.1.Theimportanceofsciencefiction(SF)inourtimeisontheincrease.First, therearestrongindicationsthatitspopularityintheleadingindustrialnations (USA,USSR,UK,Japan)hasrisensharplyoverthelast100years,regardlessof localandshortrangefluctuations.SFhasparticularlyaffectedsomekeystrataof modernsocietysuchasthecollegegraduates,youngwriters,andtheavantgarde ofgeneralreadersappreciativeofnewsetsofvalues.Thisisasignificantcultural effectwhichgoesbeyondanymerelyquantitativecensus.Second,ifonetakesas minimalgenericdifferencesofSFeitherradicallydifferentfigures(dramatis personae)oraradicallydifferentcontextofthestory,itwillbefoundtohavean interestingandclosekinshipwithotherliterarysubgenres,whichflourishedat differenttimesandplacesofliteraryhistory:theGreekandHellenisticblessed islandstories,thefabulousvoyagefromAntiquityon,theRenaissanceand Baroqueutopiaandplanetarynovel,theEnlightenmentstate(political) novel,themodernanticipation.antiutopia,etc.Moreover,althoughSF shareswithmyth,fantasy,fairytaleandpastoralanoppositiontonaturalisticor empiricistliterarygenres,itdiffersverysignificantlyinapproachandsocial functionfromsuchadjoiningnonnaturalisticormetaempiricalgenres.Bothof thesecomplementaryaspects,thesociologicalandthemethodological,arebeing

OnthePoeticsoftheScienceFictionGenrebyDarkoSuvin.FromCollegeEnglish,XXXIV(December,1972), 37283.Copyright1972bytheNationalCouncilofTeachersofEnglish.Reprintedbypermissionofthepublisher andtheauthor. 2 ThefirstversionofthisessaycrystallizedoutofalecturegiveninJ.M.Holquistsseminaronfantasticliterature intheYaleUniversitySlavicDepartmentinSpring,1968.ItwasfirstpublishedinCollegeEnglish,wheremanyother debtsarementioned,andinlieuofelaborateannotation,anowsomewhatdatedbibliographyofthemost prominentbooksonSFisincluded.IshouldlikeheretorecordparticularlymygratitudetotheCanadaCouncil, whoseresearchgrantshelpedtoshapeitsfinalform.Literatureandliteraryinthisessayaresynonymouswith fictionandfictional.

vigorouslydebatedamongwritersandcriticsinseveralcountries;bothtestifyto therelevanceofthisgenreandtheneedofscholarlydiscussiontoo. InthefollowingpaperIshallargueforadefinitionofSFastheliteratureof cognitiveestrangement.Thisdefinitionseemstopossesstheuniqueadvantageof renderingjusticetoaliterarytraditionwhichiscoherentthroughtheagesand withinitself,andyetdistinctfromnonfictionalutopianism,fromnaturalistic literature,andfromothernonnaturalisticfiction.Itthuspermitsustolaythe basisofacoherentpoeticsofSF. 1.2.Ishouldliketoapproachsuchadiscussion,andthisfieldofdiscourse, bypostulatingaspectrumorspreadofliterarysubjectmatter,runningfromthe idealextremeofexactrecreationoftheauthorsempiricalenvironment1to exclusiveinterestinastrangenewness,anovum.Fromtheeighteenthtothe twentiethcentury,theliterarymainstreamofourcivilizationhasbeennearerto thefirstofthetwoabovementionedextremes.However,atthebeginningsofa literature,theconcernwithadomesticationoftheamazingisverystrong.Early taletellerstellaboutamazingvoyagesintothenextvalleywheretheyfounddog headedpeople,alsogoodrocksaltwhichcouldbestolenorattheworstbartered for.Theirstoriesareasyncretictravelogandvoyageimaginaire,daydreamand intelligencereport.Thisimpliesacuriosityabouttheunknownbeyondthenext mountainrange(sea,ocean,solarsystem),wherethethrillofknowledgejoined thethrillofadventure.

Avirtueofdiscussingthisseeminglyperipheralsubjectofsciencefictionanditsutopiantraditionisthatone hastogobacktofirstprinciples,onecannotreallyassumethemasgivensuchasinthiscasewhatisliterature. Usually,whendiscussingliteratureonedetermineswhatitsays(itssubjectmatter)andhowitsayswhatitsays (theapproachtoitsthemes).Ifwearetalkingaboutliteratureinthesenseofsignificantworkspossessingcertain minimalaestheticqualitiesratherthaninthesociologicalsenseofeverythingthatgetspublishedatacertaintime ortheideologicalsenseofallthewritingsoncertainthemes,thisprinciplecanmorepreciselybeformulatedasa doublequestion.First,epistemologically,whatpossibilityforaestheticqualitiesisofferedbydifferentthematic fields(subjects)?Theanswerofdominantaestheticsatthemomentisanabsolutelyequalpossibility,andwith thisanswerouraestheticskicksthequestionoutofitsfieldintothelapofideologistswhopickitupbydefaultand proceedtobungleit.Second,historically,howhassuchapossibilityinfactbeenused?Onceyoubeginwithsuch considerationsyoucomequicklyupagainsttheratherunclearconceptofrealism(nottheproseliterarymovement inthe19thcenturybutametahistoricalstylisticprinciple),sincetheSFgenreisoftenpigeonholedasnonrealistic. Iwouldnotobjectbutwouldheartilywelcomesuchlabelsifonehadfirstpersuasivelydefinedwhatisrealand whatisreality.True,thisgenreraisesbasicphilosophicalissues;butitisperhapsnotnecessarytofacethemina firstapproach.ThereforeIshallheresubstituteforrealismandrealitytheconceptoftheauthorsempirical environment,whichseemsasimmediatelyclearasany.

Anislandinthefaroffoceanistheparadigmoftheaestheticallymost satisfyinggoaloftheSFvoyage,fromIambulusandEuhemerusthroughthe classicalUtopiatoVernesislandofCaptainNemoandWellsislandofDr. Moreau;especiallyifwesubsumeunderthistheplanetaryislandintheaether oceanusuallytheMoonfromLucianthroughCyranoandSwiftsminiMoonof Laputatothe19thcentury.Yettheparallelparadigmofthevalley,overthe range1whichshutsitinasawall,isperhapsasrevealing.Itrecursalmostas frequently,fromtheearliestfolktalesaboutthesparklingvalleyofTerrestrial ParadiseandthedarkvalleyoftheDead,bothalreadyinGilgamesh.Edenisthe mythologicallocalizationofUtopianlonging,justasWellsvalleyintheCountryof theBlindisstillwithintheliberatingtraditionwhichcontendsthattheworldis notnecessarilythewayourpresentempiricalvalleyhappenstobe,andthat whoeverthinkshisvalleyistheworld,isblind.Whetherislandorvalley,whether inspaceor(fromtheindustrialandbourgeoisrevolutionson)intime,thenew frameworkiscorrelativetothenewinhabitants.ThealiensUtopians,monstersor simpledifferingstrangersareamirrortomanjustasthedifferingcountryisa mirrorforhisworld.Butthemirrorisnotonlyareflectingone,itisalsoa transformingone,virginwombandalchemicaldynamo:themirrorisacrucible. Thus,itisnotonlythebasichumanandhumanizingcuriositythatgives birthtoSF.Besideanundirectedinquisitiveness,asemanticgamewithoutclear referrent,thisgenrehasalwaysbeenweddedtoahopeoffindingintheunknown theidealenvironment,tribe,state,intelligenceorotheraspectoftheSupreme Good(ortoafearofandrevulsionfromitscontrary).Atallevents,thepossibility ofotherstrange,covariantcoordinatesystemsandsemanticfieldsisassumed. 1.3.Theapproachtotheimaginarylocality,orlocalizeddaydream, practicedbythegenreofSFisasupposedlyfactualone.Columbus(technicallyor genologicallynonfictional)letterontheEdenheglimpsedbeyondtheOrinoco mouth,andSwifts(technicallynonfactual)voyagetoLaputa,Balnibarbi, Glubbdubbdrib,LuggnaggandJapan,standattheoppositeendsofaconstant interpenetrationofimaginaryandempiricalpossibilities.ThusSFtakesofffroma fictional(literary)hypothesisanddevelopsitwithextrapolatingandtotalizing (scientific)rigorthespecificdifferencebetweenColumbusandSwiftissmaller thantheirgenericproximity.Theeffectofsuchfactualreportingoffictionsisone ofconfrontingasetnormativesystemaPtolemaictypeclosedworldpicturewith
1

SubtitleofSamuelButlersSFnovelErewhon.

apointofvieworglanceimplyinganewsetofnorms;inliterarytheory,thisis knownastheattitudeofestrangement.Thisconceptwasfirstdevelopedonnon naturalistictextsbytheRussianFormalists(ostranenie,ViktorShklovsky1917), andmostsuccessfullyunderpinnedbyananthropologicalandhistoricalapproach intheopusofBertoltBrecht,whowantedtowriteplaysforascientificage. WhileworkingonaplayabouttheprototypescientistGalileo,hedefinedthis attitude(Verfremdungseffekt)inhisShortOrganonfortheTheatre(1948):A representationwhichestrangesisonewhichallowsustorecognizeitssubject, butatthesametimemakesitseemunfamiliar.Andfurther:forsomebodytosee allnormalhappeningsinadubiouslight,hewouldneedtodevelopthat detachedeyewithwhichthegreatGalileoobservedaswingingchandelier.He wasamazedbythependulummotionasifhehadnotexpecteditandcouldnot understanditsoccurring,andthisenabledhimtocomeattherulesbywhichit wasgoverned.Thus,thelookofestrangementisbothcognitiveandcreative; andasBrechtgoesontosay:onecannotsimplyexclaimthatsuchanattitude pertainstoscience,butnottoart.Whyshouldnotart,initsownway,trytoserve thegreatsocialtaskofmasteringLife? 1(Later,Brechtwasalsotonoteitmight betimetostopspeakingintermsofmastersandservantsaltogether.)InSF,the attitudeofestrangementusedbyBrechtinadifferentway,withinastill predominantlyrealisticcontexthasgrownintotheformalframeworkofthe genre. 2.ScienceFictionAsCognition(CritiqueandScience) 2.1.Theuseofestrangementbothasunderlyingattitudeanddominant formaldeviceisfoundalsointhemyth,aritualandreligiousapproachlookingin itsownwaybeneaththeempiricsurface.However,SFseesthenormsofanyage, includingemphaticallyitsown,asunique,changeable,andthereforesubjecttoa
1

ViktorShklovsky,Iskusstvokakpriem,inPoetika,Petrograd,1919.IntheEnglishtranslationofthisessayArt asTechnique,inLeeT.LemonandMarionJ.Reiseds.,RussianFormalistCriticism:FourEssays,Lincoln,Nebraska, 1965,ostranenieisrenderedsomewhatclumsilyasdefamiliarization.Cf.alsotheilluminatingsurveyofVictor Erlich,RussianFormalism:HistoryDoctrine,TheHague,1955. BertoltBrecht,KleinesOrganonfurdasTheater,inhisSchriftenzumTheater7,Frankfurt,1964,transl. inJohnWilletted.,BrechtOnTheatre,NewYork,1964.Myquotationsarefromp.192and96ofthistranslation,in whichIhavechangedMr.WillettstranslationofVerfremdungasalienationintomyestrangement,since alienationevokesincorrect,indeedoppositeconnotations:estrangementwasforBrechtanapproachmilitating directlyagainstsocialandcognitivealienation. seeErnstBloch,Entfremdung,Verfremdung:Alienation,Estrangement,inErikaMunk,ed.,Brecht,New York,1972.

cognitiveglance.Themythisdiametricallyopposedtothecognitiveapproach sinceitconceiveshumanrelationsasfixed,andsupernaturallydetermined, emphaticallydenyingMontaignes:laConstancememenestquunbranleplus languissant.Themythabsolutizesandevenpersonifiesapparentlyconstant motifsfromthesluggishperiodswithlowsocialdynamics.Conversely,SF,which isorganizedbyextrapolatingthevariableandfuturebearingelementsfromthe empiricalenvironment,clustersinthegreatwhirlpoolperiodsofhistory,suchas the1617thand1920thcentury.Wherethemythclaimstoexplainonceandfor alltheessenceofphenomena,SFpositsthemfirstasproblemsandthenexplores wheretheyleadto;itseesthemythicalstaticidentityasanillusion,usuallyas fraud,inthebestcaseonlyasatemporaryrealizationofpotentiallylimitless contingencies.ItdoesnotaskaboutTheManorTheWorld,butwhichman?:in whichkindofworld?:andwhysuchamaninsuchkindofworld?Asaliterary genre,SFisjustasopposedtosupernaturalormetaphysicalestrangementasto empiricism(naturalism). 2.2.SFis,then,aliterarygenrewhosenecessaryandsufficientconditions arethepresenceandinteractionofestrangementandcognition,andwhosemain formaldeviceisanimaginativeframeworkalternativetotheauthorsempirical environment. Theestrangementdifferentiatesitfromtherealisticliterarymainstream of18thto20thcentury.Thecognitiondifferentiatesitnotonlyfrommyth,but alsofromthefairytaleandthefantasy.Thefairytalealsodoubtsthelawsofthe authorsempiricalworld,butitescapesoutofitshorizonsandintoaclosed collateralworldindifferenttowardcognitivepossibilities.Itdoesnotuse imaginationasameanstounderstandthetendenciesinreality,butasanend sufficientuntoitselfandcutofffromtherealcontingencies.Thestockfairytale accessory,suchastheflyingcarpet,evadestheempiricallawofphysicalgravity astheheroevadessocialgravitybyimaginingitsopposite.Thewishfulfilling elementisitsstrengthandweakness,foritneverpretendsthatacarpetcouldbe expectedtoflythatahumblethirdsoncouldbeexpectedtobecomeakingwhile thereisgravity.Itjustpositsanotherworldbesideyourswheresomecarpetsdo, magically,fly,andsomepaupersdo,magically,becomeprinces,andintowhich youcrosspurelybyanactoffaithandfancy.Anythingispossibleinafairytale, becauseafairytaleismanifestlyimpossible.Therefore,SFretrogressingintofairy

tale(e.g.aspaceoperawithaheroprincessmonstertriangleinastronautic costume)iscommittingcreativesuicide. EvenlesscongenialtoSFisthefantasy(ghost,horror,Gothic,weird)tale,a genrecommittedtotheinterpositionofanticognitivelawsintotheempirical environment.Wherethefairytalewasindifferent,thefantasyisinimicaltothe empiricalworldanditslaws.Thethesiscouldbedefendedthatthefantasyis significantinsofarasitisimpureandfailstoestablishasuperordinated maleficentworldofitsown,causingagrotesquetensionbetweenarbitrary supernaturalphenomenaandtheempiricalnormstheyinfiltrateinto.Gogols NoseissointerestingbecauseitiswalkingdowntheNevskiProspect,witha certainrankinthecivilservice,etc.;iftheNosewereinacompletelyfantastic worldsayH.P.Lovecraftsitwouldbejustanotherghoulishthrill.Whenfantasy doesnotmakeforsuchatensionbetweenitsnormsandtheauthorsempirical environment,itsreductionofallpossiblehorizonstoDeathmakesofitjustasub literatureofmystification.CommerciallumpingofitintothesamecategoryasSF isthusagravedisserviceandrampantlysociopathologicalphenomenon. 2.3.Asdifferentfromsuchharshbutdeservedwords,thepastoralis essentiallyclosertoSF.Itsimaginaryframeworkofaworldwithoutmoney economy,stateapparatus,anddepersonalizingurbanizationallowsittoisolate, asinlaboratory,twohumanmotivationseroticsandpowerhunger.This approachrelatestoSFasalchemydoestochemistryandnuclearphysics:anearly tryintherightdirectionwithinsufficientsophistication.SFhasthusmuchtolearn fromthepastoraltradition,primarilyfromitsdirectlysensualrelationships withoutclassalienation.Ithasinfactoftendoneso,wheneverithassoundedthe themeofthetriumphofthehumble(Restif,Morris,etc.uptoSimak,Christopher, Yefremov,LeGuin).Unfortunately,theBaroquepastoralabandonedthistheme andjelledintoasentimentalconvention,discreditingthegenre;butwhenthe pastoralescapespreciosity,itshopecanfertilizetheSFfieldasanantidoteto pragmatism,commercialism,otherdirectednessandtechnocracy. 2.4.ClaimingaGalileanorBrunoanestrangementforSFdoesnotatall meancommittingittoscientificvulgarizationoreventechnological prognostication,whichitwasengagedinatvarioustimes(someVerne,U.S.inthe 1920s1930s,U.S.S.R.underStalinism).Theneedfulandmeritorioustaskof popularizationcanbeausefulelementoftheSFworksatajuvenilelevel.But

eventheromanscientifiquesuchasVernesFromtheEarthtotheMoonorthe surfacelevelofWellsInvisibleManthoughalegitimateSFform,isalowerstage initsdevelopment.ItisverypopularwithaudiencesjustapproachingSF,suchas thejuvenile,becauseitintroducesintotheoldempiricalcontextonlyoneeasily digestiblenewtechnologicalvariable(Moonmissile,orrayswhichlowerthe refractiveindexoforganicmatter). 1Theeuphoriaprovokedbythisapproachis realbutlimited,bettersuitedtotheshortstoryandanewaudience.It evaporatesmuchquickerasthepositivisticnaturalsciencelosesprestigeinthe humanisticsphereaftertheWorldWars(cf.NemosasagainsttheU.S.Navys atomicNautilus),andsurgesbackwithprestigiouspeacetimeapplicationsin newmethodologies(astronautics,cybernetics).EveninVerne,thestructureof thesciencenovelisthatofapondafterastonehasbeenthrownintoit:thereis amomentarycommotion,thewavesgofromimpactpointtoperipheryandback, thenthesystemsettlesdownasbefore.Theonlydifferenceisthatonepositivistic factusuallyanitemofhardwarehasbeenadded,likethestonetothepond bottom.Thisstructureoftransientestrangementisspecifictomurdermysteries, nottoamatureSF. 2.5.Aftersuchdelimitations,itisperhapspossibleatleasttoindicatesome differentiationswithintheconceptofcognitivenessorcognition.Asused here,thistermdoesnotimplyonlyareflectingofbutalsoonreality.Itimpliesa creativeapproachtendingtowardadynamictransformationratherthantowarda staticmirroringoftheauthorsenvironment.SuchtypicalmethodologyofSFfrom Lucian,More,Rabelais,Cyrano,andSwifttoWells,London,Zamiatinandthelast decadesisacriticalone,oftensatirical,combiningabeliefinthepotentialitiesof reasonwithmethodicaldoubtinthemostsignificantcases.Thekinshipofthis cognitivecritiquewiththephilosophicalfundamentsofmodernscienceis evident. 3.ScienceFictionasaLiteraryGenre{FunctionsandModels) 3.0.Asafullfledgedliterarygenre,SFhasitsownrepertoryoffunctions, conventionsanddevices.Manyofthemarehighlyinterestingandsignificantfor literarytheoryandhistory,buttheirrangecanscarcelybediscussedinabrief

NotethefunctionaldifferencetotheantigravitymetalinWellsFirstManontheMoon,whichisanintroductory gadgetandnotthebeallofamuchrichernovel.

approachasitisproperlythesubjectforabooklengthwork.However,itmight bepossibletosketchsomedeterminingparametersofthegenre. 3.1.Inatypologyofliterarygenresforourcognitiveage,1onebasic parameterwouldtakeintoaccounttherelationshipoftheworld(s)eachgenre presentsandthezeroworldofempiricallyverifiablepropertiesaroundthe author(thisbeingzerointhesenseofacentralreferencepointinacoordinate system,orofthecontrolgroupinanexperiment).Letuscallthisempiricalworld naturalistic(thoughwecouldhavealsocalleditrealistic.mundane.this worldlyetc.).Init,andinthecorrespondingnaturalisticliterature,ethicsarein nosignificantrelationtophysics.Modernmainstreamliteratureisforbiddenthe patheticfallacyofearthquakesannouncingtheassassinationofrulersordrizzles accompanyingthesadnessoftheheroine.Itistheactivityoftheprotagonists, interactingwithother,physicallyequallyunprivilegedfigures,thatdeterminesthe outcome.Howeversuperiortechnologicallyorsociologicallyonesideinthe conflictmaybe,anypredeterminationastoitsoutcomeisfeltasanideological impositionandgenologicalimpurity:2thebasicruleofnaturalisticliteratureis thatmansdestinyisman,i.e.,otherhumans.Onthecontrary,innonnaturalistic, metaphysicalliterarygenres,discussedin2.1and2.2,circumstancesaroundthe heroareneitherpassivenorneutral.Thefairytaleworldisorientedpositively towarditsprotagonist.Afairytaleisdefinedbytheherostriumph:magic weaponsandhelpersare,withnecessarynarrativeretardations,athisbeckand call.Inversely,theworldofthetragicmythisorientednegativelytowardits protagonist.Oedipus,AttisorChristarepredestinedtoempiricalfailurebythe natureoftheirworldbutthefailureisthenethicallyexaltedandrecuperatedfor religioususe.Thefantasyaderivationofthetragicmythjustasthefairytale derivesfromthevictoriousheromythisdefinedbytheheroshorrible helplessness:itcanbethoughtofastragicmythemeswithoutmetaphysical compensations.Thus,inthefairytaleandthefantasyethicscoincidewith (positiveornegative)physics,inthetragicmyththeycompensatethephysics,in theoptimisticmyththeysupplythecoincidencewithasystematicframework.
1

IhavetriedtodevelopsuchatypologysomewhatmorefullyintheessayScienceFictionandtheGenological Jungle,Genre6,No.3(Sept.1973). 2 IncasessuchassomenovelsofHardyandplaysbyIbsen,orsomeofthemoredoctrinaireworksofthehistorical schoolofNaturalism,wheredeterminismstronglystressescircumstancesattheexpenseofthemainfigures activity,wehaveunderneathasurfaceappearanceofrealismobviouslytodowithabourgeoisapproachto tragicmythusingashamefacedmotivationinanunbelievingage.AscontrarytoShakespeareandtheRomantics, inthiscaseethicsfollowphysicsinasupposedlycausalchain(mostoftenthroughbiology).Ananalogousapproach tofairytalesistobefoundin,say,themimicryofrealismfoundintheHollywoodhappyendmovies.

 TheworldofaworkofSFisnotaprioriintentionallyorientedtowardits protagonists,eitherpositivelyornegatively;theprotagonistsmaysucceedorfail intheirobjectives,butnothingintheirbasiccontrastwiththereader,inthe physicallawsoftheirworlds,guaranteeseither.SFisthus(possiblywiththe exceptionofsomeprefigurationsinthepastoral)theonlymetaempiricalgenre whichisnotatthesametimemetaphysical;itshareswiththedominantliterature ofourcivilizationamatureapproachanalogoustothatofmodernscienceand philosophy.Furthermore,itsharestheomnitemporalhorizonsofsuchan approach.Themythislocatedabovetime,thefairytaleinaconventional grammaticalpastwhichisreallyoutsidetime,andthefantasyintheheros abnormallydisturbedpresent.ThenaturalisticliterarymainstreamandSFcan rangethroughalltimes:empiricalonesinthefirst,nonempiricalonesinthe lattercase.Thenaturalisticliterarymainstreamconcentratesonthepresent,but itcandealwiththehistoricalpast,andeventosomedegreewiththefuturein theformofhopes,fears,premonitions,dreams,etsim.SFconcentrateson possiblefuturesandtheirspatialequivalents,butitcandealwiththepresentand thepastasspecialcasesofapossiblehistoricalsequenceseenfromanestranged pointofview(byafigurefromanothertimeand/orspace).SFcanthususethe creativepotentialitiesofanapproachnotlimitedbyaconsumingconcernwith empiricalsurfacesandrelationships. 3.2.Asamatterofhistoricalrecord,SFstartedfromaprescientificor protoscientificapproachofdebunkingsatireandnaivesocialcritique,andmoved closertotheincreasinglysophisticatednaturalandhumansciences.Thenatural sciencescaughtupandsurpassedtheliteraryimaginationinthe19thcentury;the sciencesdealingwithhumanrelationshipsmightbearguedtohavecaughtup withitintheirhighesttheoreticalachievementsbuthavecertainlynotdonesoin theiralienatedsocialpractice.Inthe20thcentury,SFhasmovedintothesphere ofanthropologicalandcosmologicalthought,becomingadiagnosis,awarning,a calltounderstandingandaction,andmostimportantamappingofpossible alternatives.ThishistoricalmovementofSFcanbeenvisagedasanenrichmentof andshiftfromabasicdirectorextrapolativemodeltoanindirectoranalogic model. 3.3.TheearlierdominantmodelofSFfromthe19thcenturyon(thoughnot necessarilyinprecedingepochs)wasonewhichstartedfromcertaincognitive

hypothesesandideasincarnatedinthefictionalframeworkandnucleusofthe fable.Thisextrapolativemodele.g.,ofLondonsIronHeel,WellsTheSleeper WakesandMenLikeGods,ZamiatinsWe,StapledonsLastandFirstMen,Pohl andKornbluthsSpaceMerchants,orYefremovsAndromedaisbasedondirect, temporalextrapolationandcenteredonsociological(i.e.,Utopianandanti utopian)modelling.Thisiswherethegreatmajorityofthenewmapsofhell belongsforwhichpostwarSFisjustlyfamous,inallitsmanifoldcombinationsof sociotechnologicalscientificcognitionandanticognitivesocialoppression(global catastrophes,cybernetictakeovers,dictatorships).YetalreadyinWellsTime MachineandinStapledon,thisextrapolationtranscendedthesociological spectrum(fromeverydaypracticethrougheconomicstoerotics)andspilledinto biologyandcosmology.Nonetheless,whateveritsostensiblelocation(future, fourthdimension,otherplanets,alternativeuniverses),extrapolativemodelling isorientedfuturologically.Itsvaluesandstandardsaretobefoundinthe cognitiveimportofthefablespremisesandtheconsistencywithwhichsuch premises(usuallyoneorveryfewinnumber)arenarrativelydevelopedtoits logicalend,toacognitivelysignificantconclusion. SFcanthusbeusedasahandmaidenoffuturologicalforesightin technology,ecology,sociology,etc.Whereasthismaybealegitimatesecondary functionthegenrecanbemadetobear,anyoblivionofitsstrictsecondariness usuallyleadstoconfusionandindeeddanger.Ontologically,artisnotpragmatic truthnorfictionfact.ToexpectfromSFmorethanastimulusforindependent thinking,morethanasystemofstylizednarrativedevicesunderstandableonlyby wayoftheirmutualrelationshipswithinafictionalwholeandnotasisolated realities,leadsinsensiblytocriticaldemandforandofscientificaccuracyinthe extrapolatedrealia.Editorsandpublishersofsuchhardpersuasionhave,from theU.S.pulpmagazinestotheSovietagitprop,beeninclinedtoturnthe handmaidenofSFintotheslaveryofthereigningtheologyoftheday (technocratic,psionic,Utopian,catastrophic,orwhatever).Yetthisfundamentally subversivegenrelanguishesinstraitjacketsmorequicklythanmostotherones, respondingwithatrophy,escapism,orboth.Layingnoclaimtopropheciesexcept foritsstatisticallytobeexpectedshare,SFshouldnotbetreatedasaprophet: neitherenthronedwhenapparentlysuccessful,norbeheadedwhenapparently unsuccessful.AsPlatofoundoutinthecourtofDionysusandHythlodayat cardinalMortons,SFfiguresbetterdevotethemselvestotheirownliterary republics;which,tobesure,leadbackbutintheirownwaytotheRepublicof

Man.SFisfinallyconcernedwiththetensionsbetweenCivitasDeiandCivitas Terrena,anditcannotbeuncriticallycommittedtoanymundaneCity. 3.4.TheanalogicmodelinSFisbasedonanalogyratherthanextrapolation. Itsfiguresmaybutdonothavetobeanthropomorphicoritslocalities geomorphic.Theobjects,figures,anduptoapointtherelationshipsfromwhich thisindirectlymodelledworldstartscanbequitefantastic(inthesenseof empiricallyunverifiable)aslongastheyarelogically,philosophicallyandmutually consistent.Again,asinalldistinctionsofthisessay,oneshouldthinkofa continuumatwhoseextremesthereispureextrapolationandanalogy,andof twofieldsgroupedaroundthepolesandshadingintoeachotheronawidefront inthemiddle. Thelowestformofanalogicmodellinggoesbacktoaregionwhere distinctionbetweenacrudeanalogyandanextrapolationbackwardsarenotyet distinguishable:itistheanalogytoEarthpast,fromgeologicalthroughbiological toethnologicalandhistorical.Theworldsmoreorlessopenlymodelledonthe CarboniferousAge,ontribalprehistory,onbarbaricandfeudalempiresinfact modelledonhandbooksofgeologyandanthropology,onSpenglerandTheThree MusketeersareunfortunatelyabundantinthefoothillsofSF.Someofthemmay beusefuladolescentleisurereading,whichoneshouldnotbegrudge;however, theiruneasycoexistencewithasuperscienceinthestoryframeworkoraround theprotagonist,whichissupposedtoprovideanSFalibi,bringsthemclosetoor overthebrinkofminimumcognitivestandardsrequired.TheBurroughsto Asimovspaceopera,croppingupinalmostallU.S.writersrightdowntoSamuel Delanybelongshere,i.e.,intotheuneasyborderlinebetweeninferiorSFandnon SF(formsmimickingSFscenerybutmodelledonthestructuresoftheWestern andotheravatarsoffairytaleandfantasy). Thehighestformofanalogicmodellingwouldbetheanalogytoa mathematicalmodel,suchasthefairlyprimaryoneexplicatedinAbbotts Flatland,aswellastheontologicalanalogiesfoundinacompressedoverview forminsomestoriesbyBorgesandthePolishwriterLem,andinasomewhat morehumanenarrationwithasufferingprotagonistinsomestoriesbyKafka(The MetamorphosisorInthePenalColony)andnovelsbyLem(Solaris).Suchhighly sophisticatedphilosophicoanthropologicalanalogiesaretodayperhapsthemost significantregionofSF,indistinguishableinqualityfromthebestmainstream

writing.SituatedbetweenBorgesandtheupperreachesintowhichshadethe bestUtopias,antiutopiasandsatires,thissemanticfieldisamodernvariantof thecontephilosophiqueofthe18thcentury.SimilartoSwift,Voltaire,orDiderot, thesemodemparablesfusenewvisionoftheworldwithanapplicabilityusually satiricalandgrotesquetotheshortcomingsofourworkadayworld.Asdifferent fromtheolderRationalism,amodernparablemustbeopenendedbyanalogyto moderncosmology,epistemology,philosophyofscience,andindeedliberating politics. 1 TheindirectmodelsofSFfall,however,stillclearlywithinitscognitive horizonsinsofarastheirconclusionsorimportisconcerned.Thecognitiongained maynotbeimmediatelyapplicable,itmaybesimplytheenablingofthemindto receivenewwavelengths,butiteventuallycontributestotheunderstandingof themostmundanematters.ThisistestifiedbytheworksofKafkaandLem,of KarelCapekandAnatoleFrance,aswellasofthebestofWellsandtheSF reservationwriters. 4.ForaPoeticsofScienceFiction(SummationandAnticipation) 4.1.Theabovesketchshould,nodoubt,besupplementedbyasociological analysisoftheinnerenvironmentofSF,exiledsincethebeginningofthe20th centuryintoareservationorghettowhichwasprotectiveandisnowconstrictive, cuttingoffnewdevelopmentsfromhealthycompetitionandthehighestcritical standards.Suchasociologicaldiscussionwouldenableustopointoutthe importantdifferencesbetweenthehighestreachesofthegenre,glancedatin thisessayinordertodefinefunctionsandstandardsofSF,andthe80percentor moreofdebilitatingconfectionery.Yetitshouldbestressedthat,asdifferent frommanyotherparaliterarygenres,thecriteriafortheinsufficiencyofmostSF aretobefoundinthegenreitself.ThismakesSFinprinciple,ifnotyetinpractice, equivalenttoanyothermajorliterarygenre. 4.2.Ifthewholeaboveargumentationisfoundacceptable,itwillbe possibletosupplementitalsobyasurveyofformsandsubgenres.Besidesome mentionedin1.1.whichrecurinanupdatedgarbsuchastheUtopiaandfabulous
1

IhavetriedtoanalyzetwosuchrepresentativeworksinmyafterwordtoStanislawLemsSolaris,NewYork,1970 and1971,entitledTheOpenEndedParablesofStanislawLemandSolaris,andinmyIntroductiontoKarel CapeksWarWiththeNewts,Boston,1975.

voyagesubgenresorformssuchastheanticipation,thesupermanstory,the artificialintelligence(robots,androids,etc.)story,timetravel,catastropheor meetingwithalienswouldhavetobeanalyzed.ThevarioussubgenresofSF couldthenbecheckedfortheirrelationshipstootherliterarygenres,toeach other,andtovarioussciences.Forexample,theUtopiasarewhateverelsethey maybeclearlysociologicalfictionsorsocialsciencefiction, 1whereasmodernSF isanalogoustomodernpolycentriccosmology,unitingtimeandspacein Einsteinianworldswithdifferentbutcovariantdimensionsandtimescales. SignificantmodernSF,withdeeperandmorelastingsourcesofenjoyment,also presupposesmorecomplexandwidercognitions:itdiscussesprimarilythe political,psychological,anthropologicaluseandeffectofcognition(natural sciences,humansciences,andphilosophyofscience),andthebecomingorfailure ofnewrealitiesasaresultofit.Theconsistencyofextrapolation,precisionof analogyandwidthofreferenceinsuchacognitivediscussionturnintoaesthetic factors.(Thatiswhythescientificnoveldiscussedin2.3.isnotfeltas completelysatisfactoryitisaestheticallypoorbecauseitisscientificallymeager.) Oncetheelasticcriteriaofliterarystructuringhavebeenmet,acognitiveinmost casesstrictlyscientificelementbecomesameasureofaestheticquality,ofthe specificpleasuretobesoughtinSF.Inotherwords,thecognitivenucleusofthe plotcodeterminesthefictionalestrangementinSF.Thisworksonallliterary levels:e.g.,purelyaesthetic,storytellingreasonsledmodernSFtothecognitive assumptionofahyperspacewhereflightspeedisnotlimitedbythespeedof light. 4.3.Finally,itmightbepossibletosketchthebasicpremisesofasignificant criticism,historyandtheoryofthisliterarygenre.FromEdgarAllanPoetoDamon Knight,includingsomenotableworkontheoldersubgenresfromtheUtopiasto Wells,andsomegeneralapproachestoliteraturebypeopleawaketo methodologicalinterest,muchspadeworkhasbeendone.IntheworkofLemand thecriticsfromScienceFictionStudies(seeBibliography)wemayevenpossess somecornerstonesforaneededcriticalhome.Ifonemayspeculateonsome fundamentalfeaturesorindeedaxiomsofsuchcriticism,thefirstmightbethe alreadymentionedonethatthegenrehastobeevaluatedproceedingfromits heightsdown,applyingthestandardsgainedbytheanalysisofitsmasterpieces.
1

SeefurtherargumentationinmyessaysDefiningtheLiteraryGenreofUtopia,StudiesintheLiterary Imagination6,No.2(Fall1973),andTheRiverSideTrees,orSF&Utopia,TheMinnesotaReview,n.s.,No.23 (SpringFall1974).

ThesecondaxiommightbetodemandofSFalevelofcognitionhigherthanthat ofitsaveragereader:thestrangenoveltyisitsraisondtre.Asaminimum,we mustdemandfromSFthatitbewiserthantheworlditspeaksto. Inotherwords,thisisaneducationalliterature,hopefullylessdeadening thanmostcompulsoryeducationinoursplitnationalandclasssocieties,but irreversiblyshapedbythepathosofpreachingthegoodwordofhumancuriosity, fear,andhope.SignificantSF(towhich,asinallgenresbutsomewhat disappointinglysoatleast95percentofprintedmatterclaimingthenamedoes notbelong)deniesthusthetwoculturesgapmoreefficientlythananyother literarygenreIknowof.Evenmoreimportantly,itdemandsfromtheauthorand reader,teacherandcritic,notmerelyspecialized,quantifiedpositivistic knowledge(scientid)butasocialimaginationwhosequality,whosewisdom (sapientia),testifiestothematurityofhiscriticalandcreativethought. <<Contents>> ****

TheTimeTravelStoryandRelated MattersofSFStructuring
byStanislawLem 1 Letslookatacoupleofsimplesentenceswhichlogic,byvirtueofa disconnectedmiddleorbyvirtueofatautology,assertsarealwaystrue,and letsinvestigatewhethertherecanbeworldsinwhichtheirveracityceases.The firstwillbetheeverrealdisjuncture:JohnisthefatherofPeterorJohnisnotthe fatherofPeter.Anylogicianwouldacknowledgethatthisdisjuncturesatisfiesat alltimestherequirementfortruthsincetertiumnondatur,itisimpossibletobe 40%fatherand60%nonfather. Next,letsworkwithacomplexsentence:IfPeterhassexualrelationswith hismother,thenPetercommitsincest.Theimplicationisatautologicalone since,accordingtothesemanticrulesoflanguage,tohavesexualrelationswith onesmotheristantamounttocommittingincest.(Ourconjunctionisnota completetautologysinceincestconstitutesaconceptbroaderthansexual relationswithamother,referringrathertorelationswithanypersonofsuch closekinship.Wecouldbringthesentencetoaperfecttautology,butthiswould necessitatecomplexitieswhichwouldinnowayaltertheessenceofthematter andmerelymaketheargumentationmoredifficult.) Tosimplifymattersweshallinvestigatefirsttheimpactofchangesonthe veracityorfalsityofthestatementJohnisthefatherofPeter.Weshouldpoint outthatwhatisinvolvedhereisatrulycausativebiologicalrelationtothebirthof achild,andnottheambiguoususeofthedesignationfather(sinceitisindeed possibletobeabiologicalfatherandnotbeabaptismalfather,orconversely,to beagodfather,butnotaparent).
1

TheTimeTravelStoryandRelatedMattersofSFStructuringbyStanislawLem,translatedfromthePolishby ThomasH.HoisingtonandDarkoSuvin.FromScienceFictionStudies,I(1974),pp.14354.Reprintedbypermission ofScienceFictionStudiesandTheSeaburyPress.

SupposeJohnisapersonwhodiedthreehundredyearsago,butwhose reproductivecellswerepreservedbyrefrigeration.Awomanfertilizedbythem willbecomePetersmother.WillJohnthenbePetersfather?Undoubtedly. Butthensupposethefollowing:Johndiedanddidnotleavereproductive cells,butawomanaskedagenetictechniciantomakeupinlaboratorya spermatozoonofJohnfromasinglepreservedcellofJohnsepithelium(allthe cellsofthebodyhavingthesamegeneticcomposition).WillJohn,once fertilizationiscomplete,nowalsobePetersfather? Nowsupposethefollowingcase:Johnnotonlydied,butdidnotleavea singlebodilycell.Instead,Johnleftawillinwhichheexpressedthedesirethata genetictechnicianperformthestepsnecessarytoenableawomantobecomethe motherofachildofJohn,i.e.thatsuchawomangivebirthtoachildandthatthe childbemarkedlysimilartoJohn.Inaddition,thegenetictechnicianisnot permittedtouseanyspermatozoa.Rather,heissupposedtocausea parthenogeneticdevelopmentofthefemaleovum.Alongwiththisheissupposed tocontrolthegeniesubstanceanddirectitbyembryogenetictransformationsin suchawaythatthePeterbornisthespitandimageofJohn(thereare photographsofJohnavailable,arecordingofhisvoice,etc.).Thegeneticist sculpturesinthechromosomalsubstanceofthewomanallthefeaturesJohn cravedforinachild.Andthus,tothequestionIsJohnthefatherornotthe fatherofPeter?itisnowimpossibletogiveanunequivocalanswerofyesor no.InsomesensesJohnisindeedthefather,butinothersheisnot.Anappeal toempiricismalonewillnotinitselffurnishaclearanswer.Thedefinitionwillbe essentiallydeterminedbytheculturalstandardsofthesocietyinwhichJohn, Petersmother,Peter,aswellasthegenetictechnician,alllive. Letsassumethatthesestandardsarefixed,andthatthechildrealizedin strictaccordancewithJohnstestamentalinstructionsisgenerallyacknowledged tobehischild.If,however,thegenetictechnicianeitheronhisownoratthe instigationofothersmadeup45%ofthegenotypicalfeaturesofthechildnotin accordancewiththestipulationsofthewill,butinaccordancewithanentirely differentprescription,itwouldthenbeimpossibletomaintainthatJohn,in agreementwiththestandardsofagivenculture,eitherisorisnotthechilds father.Thesituationisthesameaswhensomeexpertssayaboutapicture reputedtobeaworkofRembrandt:ThisisacanvasbyRembrandtwhileothers

say:ThisisnotacanvasbyRembrandt.SinceitisquitepossiblethatRembrandt beganthepicture,butthatsomeanonymouspersonfinishedthework,then47% oftheworkcouldbesaidtooriginatefromRembrandt,and53%fromsomeone else.Insuchasituationofpartialauthorship,tertiumdatur.Inotherwords, therearesituationsinwhichitispossibletobeafatheronlyinpart.(Itisalso possibletoachievesuchsituationsinotherways,e.g.,byremovingacertain numberofgenesfromaspermatozoonofJohnandsubstitutinganotherpersons genesforthem.) Thepossibilitiesofthetransformationsmentionedabove,whichentaila changeinthelogicalvalueofthedisjunctionJohnisthefatherofPeterorJohnis notthefatherofPeterlie,onemayjudge,inthebosomofanottoodistant future.Thusaworkdescribingsuchamatterwouldbefantastictoday,butthirty orfiftyyearshenceitmightindeedberealistic.However,theworkbynomeans needstorelatethestoryofadefinite,concreteJohn,Peter,andmotherofPeter. Itcoulddescribefictitiouspersonsinamannertypicalofanyformofliterary composition.Therelationalinvariablesbetweenfather,mother,andchildwould nothaveatthattimethefictitiousnaturetheyhaveinthepresent.The invariablesthatconcernpaternityaretodaydifferentfromthoseofatimewhen geneticengineeringwouldberealized.Inthissenseacompositionwrittentoday anddepictingagivensituationwithoutadisconnectedmiddleinthe predicationofpaternity,maybeconsideredafuturologicalprognosisora hypothesiswhichmayprovetobetrue. Forarealtautologytobecomeafalsehood,thedeviceoftravelintimeis necessary.SupposePeter,havinggrownup,learnsthathisfatherwasaveryvile person,viz.thatheseducedPetersmotherandabandonedheronlytodisappear withoutatrace.Burningwiththedesiretobringhisfathertoaccountforso despicableanactandunabletolocatehiminthepresent,Peterboardsatime vehicle,setsoutforthepastandseeksoutthefatherinthevicinityoftheplace wherehismotherwassupposedtohaveresidedatthattime.Thesearch, althoughverythorough,turnsouttobeinvain.However,inthecourseof establishingvariouscontactsrelatedtohisexpedition,Petermeetsayounggirl whoattractshim.Thetwofallinloveandababyisconceived.Peter,however, cannotremainpermanentlyinthepast;heisobligedtoreturntohisoldmother, forwhomheisthesolesupport.Havingbeenconvincedbythegirlthatshehas notbecomepregnant,Peterreturnstothepresent.Hehasnotsucceededin

findingtracesofhisfather.Onedayhefindsinoneofhismothersdrawersa thirtyyearoldphotographandtohishorrorrecognizesinitthegirlwhomhe loved.Notwishingtoimpedehim,shecommittedawhitelie,andhidher pregnancy.Peterthuscomestounderstandthathedidnotfindhisfatherforthe simpleenoughreasonthathehimselfisthefather.So,Peterjourneyedintothe pasttosearchforamissingfather,assumingthenameofJohntofacilitatehis searchbyremainingincognito.Theupshotofthisjourneyishisownbirth.Thus, wehavebeforeusacircularcausalstructure.Peterishisownfather,but,as againstasuperficialjudgment,hedidnotcommitincestatall,since,whenhehad sexualintercoursewithher,hismotherwasnot(andcouldnotbe)hismother. (Fromapurelygeneticpointofview,ifweforgetthatasistodaybelievedthe causalcircleisimpossible,Peterisgenotypicallyidenticalwithhismother.In otherwords,Petersmotherforallpracticalpurposesgavebirthtohim parthenogeneticallysince,ofcourse,nomaninseminatedherwhowasaliento her.) **** Thisstructureconstitutesthesocalledtimeloop,acausalstructure characteristicofanenormousnumberofSFcompositions.Thecompositionwhich Idescribedisaminimalloop,yetthereisonestillsmaller,createdbyRobert HeinleininthestoryAllYouZombies(1959)Itsplotisasfollows:acertain younggirlbecomespregnantbyamanwhothenpromptlydisappears.Shebears achild,ormorecorrectly,givesbirthtoitbyCaesareansection.Duringthe operation,thedoctorsascertainthatsheisahermaphroditeanditisessential (forreasonsnotexplainedbytheauthor)tochangehersex.Sheleavestheclinic asayoungmanwho,becausehewasuntilquiterecentlyawoman,hasgiven birthtoachild.Sheseeksherseducerforalongtime,untilitcomestolightthat sheherselfishe.Wehavethefollowingcircularsituation:oneandthesame individualwasintimeT1bothagirlandherpartnersincethegirl,transformed intoamanbysurgicalintervention,wastransferredbythenarratortotimeT1 fromafuturetime,T2.Thenarrator,atimetraveller,removedtheyoungman fromtimeT2andtransferredhimtotimeT1sothatthelatterseducedhimself. NinemonthsaftertimeT1thechildwasborn.Thenarratorstolethischild andtookitbackintimetwentyyears,tomomentT0,sohecouldleaveitunder thetreesofafoundlinghome.Sothecircleiscompletelyclosed:thesame

individualcomprisesfather.mother,andchild.Inotherwords,aperson impregnatedhimselfandgavebirthtohimself.Thebaby,bornasaresultofthis, isleftbehindintime,bringingaboutintwentyyearsthegrowthofagirlwhohas intimeT1sexwithayoungmanfromtimeT2.Theyoungmanissheherself, transformedintoamanbyasurgicaloperation.Thefactthatasexual hermaphroditeshouldnotbeabletobearachildisarelativelysmallhindrance, sincethepuzzlingsituationofapersonsgivingbirthtohimselfisconsiderably moreimpossible.Whatwearedealingwithhereisanactofcreatioexnihilo.All structuresofthetimeloopvarietyareinternallycontradictoryinacausalsense. Thecontradictoriness,however,isnotalwaysasapparentasinHeinleinsstory. FredericBrownwritesaboutamanwhotravelsintothepastinorderto punishhisgrandfatherfortormentinghisgrandmother.Inthecourseofan altercationhekillshisgrandfatherbeforehisfatherhasbeenengendered.Thus thetimetravellercannotthencomeintotheworld.Who,therefore,infactkilled thegrandfather,ifthemurdererhasnotcomeintotheworldatall?Hereinlies thecontradiction.Sometimesanabsentmindedscientist,havingleftsomething inthepastwhichhehasvisited,returnsforthelostobjectandencountershis ownself,sincehehasnotreturnedexactlytothemomentafterhisdeparturefor thepresent,buttothetimepointatwhichhewasbefore.Whensuchreturnsare repeated,theindividualissubjecttomultiplereproductionintheformof doubles.Sincesuchpossibilitiesappeartobepointless,inoneofmystoriesabout IonTichy(the7thJourney),Imaximalizedduplicationofthecentralcharacter. IonTichysspaceshipfindsitselfingravitationalwhirlpoolsthatbendtimeintoa circle,sothatthespaceshipisfilledwithagreatnumberofdifferentIons. Theloopmotifcanbeused,forinstance,inthefollowingways:someone proceedsintothepast,depositsducatsinaVenetianbankatcompoundinterest, andcenturieslaterinNewYorkdemandsfromaconsortiumofbankspaymentof theentirecapital,agiganticsum.Whydoesheneedsomuchmoneyallofa sudden?Sothathecanhirethebestphysiciststoconstructforhimathusfar nonexistenttimevehicle,andbymeansofthisvehiclegobackintimetoVenice wherehewilldepositducatsatcompoundinterest(MackReynolds, CompoundedInterest[1956]).Oranotherexample:inthefuturesomeone comestoanartist(inonestorytoapainter,inanothertoawriter)andgiveshim eitherabookdealingwithpaintinginthefutureoranovelwritteninthefuture. Theartistthenbeginstoimitatethismaterialasmuchaspossible,andbecomes

famous,theparadoxbeingthatheisborrowingfromhisownself(sincehe himselfwastheauthorofthatbookorthosepictures,onlytwentyyearslater). Welearn,further,fromvariousworksofthissorthowtheMesozoic reptilesbecameextinctthankstohunterswhoorganizedasafariintothepast (FredericBrown),orhow,inordertomoveintimeinonedirection,anequalmass mustbedisplacedintheoppositedirection,orhowexpeditionsintimecan reshapehistoricalevents.Thelatterthemehasbeenusedtimeandagain,asin oneAmericantaleinwhichtheConfederateStatesarevictoriousovertheNorth (WardMooresBringtheJubilee[1952/1953]).Thehero,amilitaryhistorian,sets outforthepastinordertoinvestigatehowtheSouthernersgainedvictorynear Gettysburg.Hisarrivalinatimemachine,however,throwsGeneralLeestroop formationsintodisarray,whichresultsinvictoryfortheNorth.Theheroisno longerabletoreturntothefuture,becausehisarrivalalsodisturbedthecausal chainuponwhichthesubsequentconstructionofhistimemachinedepended. Thus,thepersonwhowassupposedtohavefinancedtheconstructionofthe machinewillnotdothis,themachinewillnotexist,andthehistorianwillbestuck intheyear1863withoutthemeanstotravelbackintotheoriginaltime.Of courseherealsothereisaninherentparadoxjusthowdidhereachthepast?Asa rule,thefunconsistsinthewaytheparadoxisshiftedfromonesegmentofthe actiontoanother.Thetimeloopasthebackboneofaworkscausalstructureis thusdifferentfromthefarloosermotifofjourneysintimeperse;but,ofcourse, itismerelyalogical,althoughextreme,consequenceofthegeneralacceptanceof thepossibilityofchronomotion.Thereareactuallytwopossibleauthorial attitudeswhicharemutuallyexclusive:eitheronedeliberatelydemonstrates causalparadoxesresultingfromchronomotionwiththegreatestpossible consistency,orelseonecleverlyavoidsthem.Inthefirstinstance,thecareful developmentoflogicalconsequencesleadstosituationsasabsurdastheone cited(anindividualthatishisveryownfather,thatprocreateshimself),and usuallyhasacomiceffect(thoughthisdoesnotfollowautomatically). **** Eventhoughacircularcausalstructuremaysignalizeafrivoloustypeofcontent, thisdoesnotmeanthatitisnecessarilyreducedtotheconstructionofcomic antinomiesforthesakeofpureentertainment.Thecausalcirclemaybe employednotasthegoalofthestory,butasameansofvisualizingcertaintheses,

e.g.fromthephilosophyofhistory.SlonimskisstoryoftheTimeTorpedobelongs here.Itisabelletristicassertionoftheergonessorergodicityofhistory: monkeyingwitheventswhichhavehadsadconsequencesdoesnotbringabout anyimprovementofhistory;insteadofonegroupofdisastersandwarsthere simplycomesaboutanother,innowaybetterset. Adiametricallyopposedhypothesis,ontheotherhand,isincorporatedinto RayBradburysASoundofThunder(1952).Inanexcellentlywrittenshort episode,aparticipantinasafarifortyrannosaurstramplesabutterflyanda coupleofflowers,andbythatmicroscopicactcausessuchperturbancesofcausal chainsinvolvingmillionsofyears,thatuponhisreturntheEnglishlanguagehasa differentorthographyandadifferentcandidatenotliberalbutratherakindof dictatorhaswoninthepresidentialelection.ItisonlyapitythatBradburyfeels obligedtosetinmotioncomplicatedandunconvincingexplanationstoaccount forthefactthathuntingforreptiles,whichindeedfallfromshots,disturbs nothinginthecausalchains,whereasthetramplingofatinyflowerdoes(whena tyrannosaurdropstotheground,thequantityofruinedflowersmustbegreater thanwhenthesafariparticipantdescendsfromasafetyzonetotheground).A SoundofThunderexemplifiesanantiergodichypothesisofhistory,as opposedtoSlonimskisstory.Inaway,however,thetwoarereconcilable:History canasawholebeergodicifnotveryresponsivetolocaldisturbances,andat thesametimesuchexceptionalhypersensitivepointsinthecausalchainscan exist,thevehementdisturbanceofwhichproducesmoreintensiveresults.In personalaffairssuchahyperallergicpointwouldbe,forexample,asituationin whichacarattemptstopassatruckatthesametimethatasecondcaris approachingfromtheoppositedirection. AsisusuallythecaseinSF,athemedefinedbyacertaindevisedstructure ofoccurrences(inthisinstancepertainingtoajourneyintime)undergoesa characteristiccognitiveartisticinvolution.Wecouldhavedemonstratedthisfor anygiventheme,butletstakeadvantageoftheopportunityathand. Atfirst,authorsandreadersaresatisfiedbythejoyofdiscerningtheeffects ofinnovationsstillvirginalasfarastheirinherentcontradictionsareconcerned. Then,anintensesearchisbegunforinitialsituationswhichallowforthemost effectiveexploitationofconsequencesthatarepotentiallypresentinagiven structure.Thus,thedevicesofchronomotionbeginsupporting,e.g.,thesesof

historyandphilosophy(concernedwiththeergodicityornonergodicityof history).Then,grotesqueandhumorousstorieslikeFredericBrownsTheYehudi Principle(1944)appear:thisshortstoryisitselfacausalcircle(itendswiththe wordsthatitbeganwith:itdescribesatestofadeviceforfulfillingwishes;oneof thewishesexpressedisthatastorywriteitself,whichiswhatjusthappened). Finally,thepremiseoftimetravelservesfrequentlyasasimplepretextfor weavingtalesofsensational,criminal,ormelodramaticintrigue;thisusually involvestherevivalandslightrefurbishmentofpetrifiedplots. TimetravelhasbeenusedsoextensivelyinSFthatithasbeendividedinto separatesubcategories.Thereis,e.g.,thecategoryofmissentparcelsthatfind theirwayintothepresentfromthefuture:someonereceivesaBuildaManSet boxwithfreezedriednervepreparations,bones,etc.;hebuildshisowndouble, andaninspectorfromthefuture,whocomestoreclaimtheparcel, disassemblesinsteadoftheartificialtwin,theveryheroofthestory;thisis WilliamTennsChildsPlay(1947).InDamonKnightsThingofBeauty(1958) thereisadifferentparcelanautomatonthatdrawspicturesbyitself.Ingeneral, strangethingsareproducedinthefuture,SFteachesus(e.g.,polkadottedpaint aswellasthousandsofobjectswithsecretnamesandpurposesnotknown). Anothercategoryistiersintime.Initssimplestformitispresentedin AnthonyBouchersTheBarrier(1942),aslightlysatiricwork.Thehero, travellingtothefuture,comestoastateofeternalstasis,which,toprotectits perfectstagnationfromalldisturbances,hasconstructedtimebarriersthatfoil anypenetration.Nowandthen,however,abarrierbecomespervious.Rather disagreeableconditionsprevailinthisstatewhichisruledbyapolicesimilarto theGestapo(Stapper).OnemustbeaslightlymoreadvancedSFreadertofollow thestory.Theherofindshiswayimmediatelyintoacircleofpeoplewhoknow himverywell,butwhomhedoesnotknowatall.Thisisexplainedbythefactthat inordertoeludethepolicehegoessomewhatfurtherbackintime.Heatthat timegetstoknowtheseverypeople,thenconsiderablyyounger.Heisforthema stranger,buthe,whilehewasinthefuture,hasalreadysucceededingettingto knowthem.Anoldlady,whogotintothetimevehiclewiththeherowhenthey werefleeingfromthepolice,meetsasaresultherownselfasayoungpersonand suffersasevereshock.Itisclear,however,thatBoucherdoesnotknowwhatto dowiththeencounteringoneselfmotifinthiscontext,andthereforemakesthe

ladysshocklonganddrawnout.Furtherjumpsintime,oneafteranother, complicatetheintrigueinapurelyformalway.Attemptsarebeguntooverthrow thedictatorialgovernment,buteverythinggoestopieces,providinginthe processsensationalism.Antiproblematicescapismintoadventureisavery commonphenomenoninSF:authorsindicateitsformaleffectiveness,understood astheingenioussettingofagameinmotion,astheskillofachievinguncommon movements,withoutmasteringandutilizingtheproblematicandsemantic aspectsofsuchkinematics. Suchauthorsneitherdiscussnorsolvetheproblemsraisedbytheirwriting, butrathertakecareofthembydodges,employingpatternslikethehappy endingorthesettinginmotionofsheerpandemonium,achaoswhichquickly engulfsloosemeanings. Suchastateofaffairsisaresultofthedistinctlyludicorplayfulposition ofwriters;theygoforaneffectasatankgoesforanobstacle:withoutregardfor anythingincidental.Itisasiftheirfieldofvisionweregreatlyintensifiedand, simultaneously,alsogreatlyconfined.AsinTennsstory,theconsequencesofa temporallapseinapostalmatterareeverything.Letuscallsuchavision monoparametric.Atissueisasituationwhichisbizarre,amusing,uncanny, logicallydevelopedfromastructuralpremise(e.g.,fromthepresuppositionof journeysintime,whichimpliesaqualitativedifferenceintheworldscausal structure).Atthesametimesuchavisiondoesnotdealwithanythingmorethan that. Thiscanbeseenreadilyfromanexampleofmaximalintensificationof thesubjectofgovernmentsintimeorchronocracy,describedbyIsaacAsimovin hisnovelTheEndofEternity(1955).TheBarriershowedasinglestateisolating itselfinthehistoricalflowofevents,asoncetheChineseattemptedtoisolate themselvesfromthedisturbinginfluencesbybuildingtheChinesewall(aspatially exactequivalentofatimebarrier).TheEndofEternityshowsagovernmentin powerthroughouthumanitysentiretemporalexistence.Inspectorgenerals, travellingintime,examinethegoingsoninindividualepochs,centuries,and millenia,andbycalculatingtheprobabilityofoccurrencesandthencounteracting theundesirableones,keepinhandtheentiresystemhistoryextendedinafour dimensionalcontinuuminastateofdesirableequilibrium.Obviously, presuppositionsofthissortaremorethicklylardedwithantinomiesthanisthe

scrawniestharelardedwithbacon.WhileAsimovsgreatproficiencyismanifested bythesizeoftheslalomoverwhichthenarrativeruns,itis,intheend,an ineffablynaiveconceptionbecausenoissuesfromphilosophyorhistoryare involved.Theproblemofclosedmillenia,whichthetempocratsdonothave accessto,isexplainedwhenacertainbeautifulgirl,whomaninspectorfallsin lovewith,turnsouttobenotalowlyinhabitantofoneofthecenturiesunderthe dominionofthetempocracy,butasecretemissaryfromtheinaccessible millenia.Thetimedictatorshipasacontroloverthecontinuumofhistorywillbe destroyed,andaliberatedhumanitywillbeabletotakeupastronauticsandother selectsuitableoccupations.Theenigmaoftheinaccessiblemilleniaisremarkably similartotheenigmaoftheclosedroomfoundinfairytalesanddetective stories.Thevariousepochsaboutwhichtheemissariesofthechronocracyhover alsorecallseparaterooms.TheEndofEternityisanexhibitionofformal entertainmenttowhichsentimentsaboutthefightforfreedomandagainst dictatorshiphavebeentackedonrathercasually. **** Wehavealreadyspokenabouttheminimaltimeloop.Letustalknow,simply forthesakeofsymmetry,aboutthemaximalloops. A.E.vanVogthasapproachedthisconceptinTheWeaponShopsofIsher (1949/1951),butletsexpounditinourownway.Asisknown,thereisa hypothesis(itcanbefoundinFeynmansphysics)whichstatesthatpositronsare electronsmovingagainstthetideintheflowoftime.Itisalsoknownthatin principle,evengalaxiescanarisefromatomiccollisions,aslongasthecolliding atomsaresufficientlyrichinenergy.Inaccordancewiththesepresuppositionswe canconstructthefollowingstory:inaratherdistantfutureacelebrated cosmologistreaches,onthebasisofhisownresearchaswellasthatofallhis predecessors,theirrefutableconclusionthat,ontheonehand,thecosmoscame intobeingfromasingleparticleand,ontheother,thatsuchasingleparticle couldnothaveexistedwherecouldithavesprungfrom?Thusheisconfronted withadilemma:thecosmoshascomeintobeing,butitcouldnotcomeinto being!Heishorrifiedbythisrevelation,but,afterprofoundreflections,suddenly seesthelight:thecosmosexistsexactlyasmesonssometimesexist;mesons, admittedly,breakthelawofconservation,butdothissoquicklythattheydonot breakit.Thecosmosexistsoncredit!Itislikeadebenture,adraftformaterial

andenergywhichmustberepaidimmediately,becauseitsexistenceisthepurest onehundredpercentliabilitybothintermsofenergyandintermsofmaterial. Then,justwhatdoesthecosmologistdo?Withthehelpofphysicistfriendshe buildsagreatchronogunwhichfiresonesingleelectronbackwardagainstthe tideintheflowoftime.Thatelectron,transformedintoapositronasaresultof itsmotionagainstthegrainoftime,goesspeedingthroughtime,andinthe courseofthisjourneyacquiresmoreandmoreenergy.Finally,atthepointwhere itleapsoutofthecosmos,i.e.inaplaceinwhichtherehadasyetbeenno cosmos,alltheterribleenergiesithasacquiredarereleasedinthattremendously powerfulexplosionwhichbringsabouttheUniverse!Inthismannerthedebtis paidoff.Atthesametime,thankstothelargestpossiblecausalcircle,the existenceofthecosmosisauthenticated,andapersonturnsouttobetheactual creatorofthatveryUniverse!Itispossibletocomplicatethisstoryslightly,for example,bytellinghowcertaincolleaguesofthecosmologist,unpleasantand enviouspeople,meddledinhiswork,shootingontheirownsomelesserparticles backwardsagainstthetideoftime.Theseparticlesexplodedinaccuratelywhen thecosmologistspositronwasproducingthecosmos,andbecauseofthisthat unpleasantrashcameintobeingwhichbotherssciencesomuchtoday,namely theenigmaticquasarsandpulsarswhicharenotreadilyincorporatedintothe corpusofcontemporaryknowledge.Thesethenaretheartifactsproducedby thecosmologistsmaliciouscompetitors.Itwouldalsobepossibletotellhow humanitybothcreatedanddepraveditself,becausesomephysicistshotthe chronogunhurriedlyandcarelesslyandaparticlewentastray,explodingasa novainthevicinityofthesolarsystemtwomillionyearsago,anddamagingbyits hardradiancethehereditaryplasmaoftheoriginalanthropoidswhotherefore didnotevolveintomangoodandrationalasshouldhavehappenedwithout thenewparticle.Inotherwords,thenewparticlecausedthedegenerationof Homosapienswitnesshishistory. Inthisversion,then,wecreatedthecosmosonlyinamediocrefashion, andourownselvesquitepoorly.Obviouslyaworkofthissort,inwhichever variant,becomesironical,independentlyofitsbasicnotion(i.e.theselfcreative applicationofthemaximaltimeloop). Asonecansee,whatisinvolvedisanintellectualgame,actuallyfantasy makingwhichaltersinalogicalorpseudologicalmannercurrentscientific hypotheses.ThisispureScienceFiction,orScienceFantasyasitissometimes

called.Itshowsusnothingserious,butmerelydemonstratestheconsequencesof areasoningwhich,operatingwithintheguidelinesofthescientificmethod,is usedsometimesinunalteredform(inpredictingthecompositionpercentageof paternitywehaveinnowayalteredthescientificdata),andsometimessecretly modified.AndthusSFcanberesponsiblyorirresponsiblypluggedintothe hypothesiscreatingsystemofscientificthought. Theexampleofselfcreationrevealsfirstofallthemaximalproportions ofaselfperpetratingparadox:Petergavebirthonlytohimself,whereasinthe universalvariant,mankindconcocteditself,and,whatismore,perhapsnotinthe bestmanner,sothatitwouldbeevenpossibletouseManichaeanterminology. Furthermore,thisexampleatthesametimedemonstratesthattheconceptual premiseofessentialinnovationsinthestructureoftheobjectiveworldpresented iscentraltoasciencefictionalwork(inthecaseofjourneysintime,achangein causalityisinvolved,byadmittingthereversibilityofthatwhichweconsider todayasuniversallyandcommonlyirreversible).Thequalitiesoffictionalmaterial whichserveadominantconceptarethussubjecttoanassessmentbasedonthe usefulnesstothisconcept.Fictionalmaterialshouldinthatcasebean embodimentofapseudoscholarlyorsimplyscholarlyhypothesisandthatsall. ThuspureSFarises,appealingexclusivelytopurereason.Itispossibleto complicateaworkwithproblemslyingbeyondthescopeofsuchanintellectual game:when,e.g.,theManichaeismofexistenceisinterpretedasduetoan errorofanenviousphysicist,thenanopportunityforsarcasmorironyarisesasa harmonicovertoneabovethenarrativesmainaxis.Butbydoingthis,wehave forcedSFtoperformimpureservices,becauseitisthennotdeliveringscientific pseudorevelations,butfunctioninginthesamesemanticsubstratuminwhich literaturehasnormallyoperated.ItisbecauseofthisthatwecallSF contaminatedbysemanticproblemsrelationalSF. However,justasnormalliteraturecanalsoperformhighandlow servicesproducesentimentallovestoriesandepicsrelationalSFshowsan analogousamplitude.Aswasnoted,itispossibletointerpretitallegorically(e.g., Manichaeisminrelationtothecreationofthecosmos)andthiswillbethe directionofgrotesqueorhumorousdeparturesfromastateofintellectual puritywhichissomewhatanalogoustomathematicalvacuity.Itisalsopossible tooverlaythehistoryofcreatingthecosmoswithmelodrama,e.g.,tomakeit partofasensational,psychopathologicalintrigue(thecosmologistwhocreated

theUniversehasawickedwifewhomhenonethelesslovesmadly;or,the cosmologistbecomespossessed;oralso,facedwithhisdeeds,thecosmologist goesinsaneand,asamegalomaniac,willbetreatedslightinglyinaninsane asylum,etc.). **** Thus,intheend,therealisticwriterisnotresponsiblefortheoveralle.g.,the causalstructureoftherealworld.Inevaluatinghisworks,wearenotcentrally concernedwithassessingthestructureoftheworldtowhichtheynonetheless havesomerelation. Onthecontrary,theSFwriterisresponsiblebothfortheworldinwhichhe hasplacedhisaction,andfortheactionaswell,inasmuchashe,withincertain limits,inventsbothoneandtheother. However,theinventionofnewworldsinSFisasrareasapearlthesizeofa breadloaf.Andso99.9%ofallSFworksfollowcompositionallyascheme,oneof thethematicstructureswhichconstitutethewholeSFrepertoire.Foraworld trulynewinstructuralqualitiesisoneinwhichthecausalirreversibilityof occurrencesisdenied,oroneinwhichapersonsindividualityconflictswithan individualscientificallyproducedbymeansofanintellectronicevolution,orone inwhichEarthlycultureisincommunicationwithanonEarthlyculturedistinct fromhumanculturenotonlynominallybutqualitatively,andsoforth.However, justasitisimpossibletoinventasteamengine,oraninternalcombustionengine, oranyotheralreadyexistingthing,itisalsoimpossibletoinventoncemore worldswiththesensationalqualityofchronomotionorofareasoning machine.Asthedetectivestorychurnsoutunweariedlythesameplot stereotypes,sodoesSFwhenittellsusofcountlessperipetiesmerelytoshow thatbyinterposingatimelooptheyhavebeensuccessfullyinvalidated(e.g.in ThomasWilsonsTheEntrepreneur[1952]whichtalksaboutthedreadful CommunistshavingconqueredtheUSA,andtimetravellerswhostartbackwards atthenecessarypoint,invalidatingsuchaninvasionanddictatorship).Inlieuof Communists,theremaybeAliensoreventheSamePeopleArrivingfromthe Future(thankstothetimeloop,anyonecanbattlewithhimselfjustaslongashe pleases),etc.

Ifnewconcepts,thoseatomickernelsthatinitiateawholefloodofworks, correspondtothatgiganticdevicebywhichbioevolutionwasinventedi.e.,to theconstitutionalprincipleoftypesofanimalssuchasvertebratesand nonvertebrates,orfish,amphibians,mammals,andbirdsthen,intheevolution ofSF,theequivalentoftypecreatingrevolutionsweretheideasoftimetravel, ofconstructingarobot,ofcosmiccontact,ofcosmicinvasion,andofultimate catastropheforthehumanspecies.And,aswithintheorganizationofbiological typesanaturalevolutionimperceptiblyproducesdistinctivechangesaccordingto genera,families,races,andsoforthsimilarly,SFpersistentlyoperateswithina frameworkofmodest,simplyvariationalcraftsmanship. Thisverycraftsmanship,however,betraysasystematic,unidirectionalbias: aswestatedanddemonstrated,greatconceptsthatalterthestructureofthe fictionalworldareamanifestationofapureplayoftheintellect.Theresultsare assessedaccordingtothetypeofplay.Theplaycanalsoberelational,involved withsituationsonlylooselyornotatallconnectedwiththedominantprinciple. Whatconnectionisthere,afterall,betweentheexistenceofthecosmologistwho createdtheworld,andthefactthathehasabeautifulsecretarywhomhebeds? Or,bywhatifnotbyaretardationdevicewillthecosmologistbesnatchedaway beforehefiresthechronogun?Inthismanneranidealendingitselfto articulationinacoupleofsentences(aswehavedonehere)becomesapretext forwritingalongnovel(whereacosmoscreatingshotcomesonlyinthe epilogue,aftersomedelivererssentbytheauthorhavefinallysavedthe cosmologistfromhissorryplight).Thepurelyintellectualconceptisstretched thoroughlyoutofproportiontoitsinherentpossibilities.ButthisisjusthowSF proceedsusually. Ontheotherhand,rarelyisadeparturemadefromemptinessorpure playinthedirectionofdealingwithasetofimportantandinvolvedproblems. ForintheworldofSFitisstructurallyaspossibletosetupanadventureplotasa psychologicaldrama;itisaspossibletodealinsensationalhappeningsasitisto stimulatethoughtbyanontologicalimplicationcreatedbythenarrativeasa whole.Itispreciselythisslidetowardeasy,sensationalintriguewhichisa symptomofthedegenerationofthisbranchofliterature.Anideaispermittedin SFifitispackagedsothatonecanbarelyseeitthroughtheglitterofthe wrapping.Asagainstconventionsonlysuperficiallyassociatedtoinnovationsin theworldsstructureandwhichhaveworncompletelythreadbarefromcountless

repetitions,SFshouldbestimulatedandinducedtodeviatefromthistrendof development,namely,byinvolutionawayfromthesensationalpole.SFshould notoperatebyincreasingthenumberofblastersorMartianswhoimpedethe cosmologistinhiseffortstofirefromthechronogun;suchinflationisnot appropriate.Rather,oneshouldchangedirectionradicallyandheadforthe oppositepole.Afterall,inprinciplethesamebipolaroppositionalsoprevailsin ordinaryliterature,whichalsoshuttlesbetweencheapmelodramaandstories withthehighestaestheticandcognitiveaspirations. Itisdifficult,however,todetectinSFaconvalescenceoroutrightsalvation ofthissort.Anoddfateseemstoloomheavilyoveritsdomain,whichprompts writerswiththehighestambitionsandconsiderabletalent,suchasRayBradbury orJ.G.Ballard,toemploytheconceptualandrationaltoolsofSFinanattimes admittedlysuperbway,yetnotinordertoennoblethegenre,butinsteadtobring ittowardanoptimalpoleofliterature.Aiminginthatdirection,theyare simultaneously,ineachsuccessivestep,givinguptheprogrammaticrationalism ofSFinfavouroftheirrational;theirintellectfailstomatchtheirknowhowand theirartistictalent.Inpractice,whatthisamountstoisthattheydonotusethe signallingequipmentofSF,itsavailableaccessories,toexpressanytruly, intellectuallynewproblemsorcontent.Theytrytobringabouttheconversionof SFtothecreedofnormalliteraturethrougharticulating,byfantasticmeans, suchnonfantasticcontentwhichisalreadyoldfashionedinanethical, axiological,philosophicalsense.Therevoltagainstthemachineandagainst civilization,thepraiseoftheaestheticnatureofcatastrophe,thedeadend courseofhumancivilizationthesearetheirforemostproblems,theintellectual contentoftheirworks.SuchSFisasitwereapriorivitiatedbypessimism,inthe sensethatanythingthatmayhappenwillbefortheworse. Suchwritersproceedasiftheythoughtthat,shouldmankindacknowledge theexistenceofevenaoneinamillionoroneinabillionchancetranscending thealreadyknowncyclicalpulsationofhistory,whichhasoscillatedbetweena stateofrelativestabilizationandofcompletematerialdevastationsuchan approachwouldnotbeproper.Onlyinmankindssevere,resoluterejectionofall chancesofdevelopment,incompletenegation,inagestureofescapismor nihilism,dotheyfindthepropermissionofallSFwhichwouldnotbecheap. Consequentlytheybuildondeadendtragedy.Thismaybecalledintoquestion notmerelyfromthestandpointofoptimism,ofwhateverhueandintensity.

Rather,oneshouldcriticizetheirideologybyattemptingtoprovethattheytearto shredsthatwhichtheythemselvesdonotunderstand.Withregardtothe formidablemovementswhichshakeourworld,theynourishthesamefearof misunderstandingthemechanismsofchangethateveryordinaryformof literaturehas.Isntitclearwhatproportionstheirdefectionassumesbecauseof this?Cognitiveoptimismis,firstofall,athoroughlynonludicpremiseinthe creationofSF.Theresultisoftenextremelycheap,artisticallyaswellas intellectually,butitsprincipleisgood.Accordingtothisprinciple,thereisonly oneremedyforimperfectknowledge:betterknowledge,becausemorevaried knowledge.SF,tobesure,normallysuppliesnumeroussurrogatesforsuch knowledge.But,accordingtoitspremises,thatknowledgeexistsandis accessible:theirrationalismofBradburysorBallardsfantasynegatesboththese premises.Oneisnotallowedtoentertainanycognitivehopesthatbecomesthe unwrittenaxiomoftheirwork.Insteadofintroducingintotraditionalqualitiesof writingnewconceptualequipmentaswellasnewnotionalconfigurationsrelying onintellectualimagination,theseauthors,whileriddingthemselvesofthestigma ofcheapanddefectiveSF,inonefellswoopgiveupallthatconstitutesits cognitivevalue.Obviously,theyareunawareoftheconsequencesofsuch desertion,butthisonlyclearsthemmorally:somuchtheworseforliteratureand forculture,seriouslydamagedbytheirmistake. <<Contents>> ****

GenreCriticism: ScienceFictionandtheFantastic

byEricS.Rabkin1
Genrecriticismiscriticismofworksofartdistributedintoclasses.Inthe studyofart,genremeansclass.Inliterature,classesaredefinedindiverseways, manyinconsistentwitheachother.Forexample,onemightwishtostudythe genreofElizabethantragedies;thatis,workswritteninEnglish,duringthereign ofElizabethI,intendedforstageperformance,andhavingsomethingtodowith thefallofgreatpersonages.Elizabethdiedin1603;KingLearwaswrittenin1606. ButstillKingLearisElizabethan,ifnotindate,theninmoodandsurelyamatter ofthreeyearsshouldntpreventaworkfrombeingconsideredinitsproper context.Proprietyherereflectstheperspectivesofthereader,oftheobserverfor whomselectingworksalongcertainlinesseemsinterestingandprofitable.One couldaswelldefineagenreonlybythenumberofverselines,likethesonnet;or defineagenrebyitspoliticalcontent,likeMarxistliterature.Thechoiceofa genredefinition,achoicehabituallymadebothconventionallyandunconsciously, isachoicethatreflectstheperspectivesofthereader.Whenwerecommendone booktoafriendasbeinglikeanother,thegroundsforsimilaritycanbealmost anything,solongastheyincludethoseelementsoftheworkthatwebelievehave madethefirstbookvaluabletoourfriend.Sucharecommendationisanactof genrecriticism. Thewiderangeofworkswhichwehavealreadyseenfittocall,inone degreeoranother,fantastic,islarge,muchtoolargetoconstituteasinglegenre. Wehaveembracedwholeconventionalgenres,suchasfairytale,detectivestory, andfantasy2,andwehaveseenthatasgenrestheymayberelatedaccordingto
1

GenreCriticism:ScienceFictionandtheFantastic(editorstitle).SelectionfromChapterIV,TheFantasticand GenreCriticism,inEricS.Rabkin,TheFantasticinLiterature,pp.11733.Copyright1976byPrinceton UniversityPress.Somefootnoteshavebeenomitted.ReprintedbypermissionofPrincetonUniversityPress. 2 TheonlytheoreticalworkspecificallyonfantasyisTzvetanTodorov,TheFantastic:AStructuralApproachToA LiteraryGenre,RichardHoward,transl.,CaseWesternReserveUniversityPress,1973(1970).Thisisabookwith manyexcellenceswhich,innumerousways,complementsthecurrentstudy.However,inmanyregards,thesetwo worksareinseriousdisagreement.Anexhaustivecomparisonwouldneedlesslysidetrackthisinquiry,buttwo

thedegreeandkindoftheiruseofthefantastic.Forthisveryreason,studyof thoseelementsthatmakeaworkfantasticgivesusanewvantageonworks previouslyclassedonlyaccordingtoestablishedgenericdivisions Thetermsciencefictionhasbeenforcedintomanydifferentkindsof service.AlthoughcoinedbyHugoGernsbackin1926todenotetheallmale technologicaladventurestorieswhichhewaswritingandediting,thetermhas sincebeenmadetoincludethevoyagetoLaputainGulliversTravels(1726)and theIcaromenippusofLucianofSamosota(b.120A.D.);itincludesSwordand SorcerynovelslikeAPrivateCosmosbyPhilipJoseFarmerandrigorouslylogical talesliketheroboticsstoriesofIsaacAsimov;itincludesthesweetlylyrical romanticismofRayBradburyinTheMartianChroniclesandtheunashamed machismomilitarismofRobertA.HeinleininStarshipTroopers;itincludesnovels ofwarningandpredictionlikeNevilShutesOntheBeachandsuchhistoric impossibilitiesasnovelsofalternatetimestreamslikeMoorcocksWarlordofthe Air;itincludessuchenthusiasticallytechnologicaltalesastheStarTrekseries begunbyJamesBlishandsuchtechnologicaltalesasACanticleforLeibowitz, WalterM.Miller,Jr.sexplorationofinstitutionalstabilityandhistorical periodicity.Andthereareotherworksbytheseandotherauthorsthatslipinand outofthegenrewithhardlyanyonenoticing. Onedefinitionthatseemstoencompassthediverseworkswehave mentionedisthis:aworkbelongsinthegenreofsciencefictionifitsnarrative worldisatleastsomewhatdifferentfromourown,andifthatdifferenceis apparentagainstthebackgroundofanorganizedbodyofknowledge.Some qualificationsmaymakethisdefinitionclearer.

pointsmaybeworthmaking.First,TodorovradicallylimitsnotonlyFantasy,butthefantastic,totherealmofa singlegenre.Notallfictionsarelinkedtothefantastic,(p.75)hewrites,eventhoughherecognizesthatthe fantasticisgeneratedbyasif,whichIwouldsee,withWorringer,asinherentinallart.Second,Todorovlocates theaffectofthefantasticinthereadershesitation(p.32)indeterminingwhetheranarratedeventmustbe takenasmerelymetaphoric(movingthetextintoagenrehecallsthemarvelous)oractual(movingthetextintoa genrehecallstheuncanny).Thefantasticoccupiesthedurationofthisuncertainty.(p.25)Thisisanacuteand usefulinsight;however,itmustbemodifiedintwowaystocapitalizeonit.First,thishesitationshouldbeseennot inrelationtoexternalnorms,butratherinrelationtomicrocontextualvariations;second,onemustrealizethat keepingtrackofthisaffect,andlocatingitinotheraspectsofnarrativethanplot,cangiveusanorganizing principleforstudieslargerthanthoseofTodorovsliterarygenre.Hisisathoughtful,suggestive,anduseful bookonethatanticipatessomeoftheworkhere,butitisabookwhichultimatelyreflectsadifferentviewofthe fantastic.

Aswiththefantastic,thenotionofdifference,thoughgenerallydefinablein relationtoourworld,actuallymustbedefinedintermsoftheworldoutsidethe textasthattextrecreatesit.Althoughtodaywehavespeedyanddeadly submarines,20,000LeaguesUndertheSea(1869)isstillsciencefictionfortwo reasons:first,ProfessorAronnaxmakesclearthatthescienceofVernesday wouldneverexpectshipstobesunkbysubmarine(thetheoryofan underwaterMonitorwasdefinitivelyrejected1)andsecond,thegrapholectof thetextrecallsthepresubmarineera.Differencethen,indefiningsciencefiction, referstoamicrocontextualvariation.Whenthisvariationisafull180degree reversalofagroundrule(forexample,inaquantummechanicsdominatedtale, theactionmightsuddenlydependontheantiexpectedphenomenonofspeeds fasterthanthatoflight)thenthesciencefictiontaleisfantastic.Ifthevariationis merelyauseofthedisexpected(forexample,intelligentlifethatreproducesby fission),thenthetaleismuchlessfantastic.Thevariationfromaccepted knowledgeisoneofthedefiningcharacteristicsofthegenreofsciencefiction, anditisacharacteristicthatwecanusetocarefullysubdividethegenrefor purposesofanalysis. Asecondqualificationtoourdefinitionconcernsthenotionoforganized bodyofknowledge.Thetermsciencecallshardwaretomind,butmuchscience fictionreallymakesonlysubordinateuseoftechnology.Therealsciencebehind UrsulaK.LeGuinsstudyofthesocialimportanceofsexasaroleindicator(The LeftHandofDarkness,1969)isanthropology,notphysicsorchemistryoreven biology.InPavane(1966)byKeithRoberts,wehaveaworldsetinthemid1960s, butitconcernsthehistoryofaworldthatsharedourhistoryuntil1588,atwhich pointtheSpanishfleetconqueredtheEnglish.TheconsistencyofRoberts alternativeworlddependsonextrapolationsofthelawsofhistory,economic determinism,scientificevolution.Whatisimportantinthedefinitionofscience fictionisnottheappurtenancesofraygunsandlabcoats,butthescientific habitsofmind:theideathatparadigmsdocontrolourviewofallphenomena, thatwithintheseparadigmsallnormalproblemscanbesolved,andthat abnormaloccurrencesmusteitherbeexplainedorinitiatethesearchforabetter (usuallymoreinclusive)paradigm.Insciencefiction,thesehabitsofmindand theirassociatedbodiesofknowledgedeterminetheoutcomeofevents, regardlessofwhichsciencemostobviouslyinformsthenarrativeworld.Inthat

JulesVerne,20,000LeaguesUndertheSea,AnthonyBonner,transl.,Bantam,NewYork,1962(1869),p.20.

regard,likethepuzzletalesofdetectivefiction,allsciencefictionistosome extentfantastic. Aspecialcaseofthisdefinitionbydifferenceandorganizedbodyof knowledgeistheprescriptionthatagoodworkofsciencefictionmakeoneand onlyoneassumptionaboutitsnarrativeworldwhichviolatesthatwhichisknown aboutourownworldandthenextrapolatethewholenarrativeworldfromthat difference.InlettingtheSpanisharmadawin,Pavanesatisfiesthisreduced definition(thoughmanyotherworks,likeAVoyagetoArcturus,donot).This truncatedprescriptionhasgreatheuristicpower.Modernsciencefiction developedmoststronglyintheUnitedStatesandthenEngland.Forboththese communities,theprimaryantecedentwasH.G.Wells,andWellsfollowedthis prescriptioninstinctively.InTheTimeMachine(1895),forexample,wearetoldin italics:ThereisnodifferencebetweenTimeandanyofthethreedimensionsof Spaceexceptthatourconsciousnessmovesalongit. 1Grantedthisfantastic assumption,Wellsproceededtojourneytohisfamousfutureinwhich industrialismhasmadetheleisureclassintoeffeteanduselesschildren(Eloi)and theworkingclassintolovelessandruthlessmonsters(Morlocks).Wellshad studied(18841887)withevolutionistT.H.Huxleyandwastobeoneofthemost distinguishedmembers(19031908)ofthesocialistFabianSociety.TheTime Machineusesthefantasticideaoftimetravel(areversaloftheperspectivesof classicalmechanics)topresentavividsocialwarningbasedonorthodox extrapolationsofthebiologyandpoliticalsciencecurrentattheendofthe century. Understandingthatthefieldisbroaderthantheprescriptivedefinitionwe canusetolocatetheworksofWells,wecanstilltakeTheTimeMachineasa paradigmaticworkofsciencefiction.Anotherworkwhichsatisfieseventhe WellsianpuristdefinitionofsciencefictionisTheodoreSturgeonsMoreThan Human(1953),anoveloftheemergenceofmanssuperiorfuture.Acomparison ofthisworkwithArthurC.ClarkesChildhoodsEnd(1953)willshowoneofthe waysbywhichconsiderationofthefantasticcancomplementnormalgenre criticism. MoreThanHumanisaverywellwrittenwork.Intheyearfollowingits publication,itwasawardedtheInternationalFantasyAwardbyapanelofcritics
1

H.G.Wells,TheTimeMachine,BerkleyHighland,NewYork,1963(1895),p.7.

selectedattheBritish(sciencefiction)convention.Inthisnovel,wereadofthe emergenceofHomoGestalt,thenextstepupwardwhynotapsychicevolution insteadofthephysical?1Thisistheassumptionweneedtogrant.TheGestalt creatureweareprimarilyconcernedwithisacoordinatedtelepathicentitymade upoftwoteleports(BeanieandBonnie,theapparentlyidiotictwinoffspringofa janitor),atelekine(Janie,whocanmakeobjectsmovethroughspace,ornon space,atwill),acomputationalsuperbrain(Baby,anonverbal,nongrowing grotesquechangeoflifebabywhocommunicatesbydirecttelepathywithJanie andthroughherwiththenonsendersBeanieandBonnie),andaHead.Thestory proceedsaspuresciencefictionifwegrantthatpeople,especiallyemotional people,andespeciallychildren,havepotentialpsychicpowersifonlytheseare notobscuredbyeducation;thatis,ifthesepowersarenotrepressedbysocial traininganditsprimarytool,verbalcommunication. ThebookopenswithLone,anadultidiotwhoissensitivetothetelepathic signalsofchildrenbecauseheisawildcreaturehimself,havingescapedan orphanageandhavingsomehowlearnedtosurviveinthewoods.Janieis introducednext,achildwhoseenormoushatekeepshertelekineticpowers useable(forinstance,shethinksanashtrayatoneofhermothersloversand floorshim).Bygreatgoodchance,BeanieandBonniesfatheristhejanitorinthe buildinginwhichJanielives.Theteleportsandthetelekinecommunicate telepathically,becomefriendsandrunawaytogether. Bygreatgoodluckagain,thesewanderingchildrensomehowappeal emotionallytoLonesidiotictelepathicreceptors.Hetakestheminandthey begintofunctiontogether.LaterLonetakesinthefreakishandabandonedBaby, whobecomesthebrainofHomoGestalt.Janie,theonlyfulltelepathand thereforethecommunicationcenterofthegroup,plugsBabyintothenonverbal networkandshereportsthatBabywasmatchingeveryfactshefedhimwith everyotherfactthathehadbeenfedpreviously(p.57).HomoGestaltbeginsto function. Thevocabularyofteleportsandtelekines,thecomputationalabilitiesof Baby,andthecarefulreportingofthecoincidencesthatslowlywentintothe accumulationofHomoGestaltimplytheperspectivesofnormalmidtwentieth centuryscience.However,onequestionnagsthereader:whatisthevalueofan
1

TheodoreSturgeon,MoreThanHuman,Ballantine,NewYork,1971(1953),p.177.

apparentlyscientificexplanationiftheoddsagainstanyoneoftheseoccurrences (themereexistenceofteleports,forexample)seemsastronomical;howmuch lessscientifictheexplanationseemswhenoneconsidersthemultipliedodds againstJanielivingintherightapartmentbuilding,meetingLone,andsoon.This questionofcoincidenceseemstoundercutthenovelasanexampleofpure Wellsiansciencefiction. Inthesecondpartofthenovel,weconcentrateonGerryThompson,a hatingyoungmanwhofinallycomestobethenew,andmuchimproved,Head whenLonedies.Gerryalonecankillamanorabsorbhismemorybymereeye contact;hecanforcesomeonetodohiswill.WithGerryasHead,HomoGestalt hasmultipliedpower,andGerryswillisnowinformedbythecapabilitiesofthe groupentity.HomoGestaltisapotentiallyterriblebeast,butaterriblebeastwith nothingmuchtodo.Moneyiseasy,andthenwhat?Janierefusestocooperate whenGerrydecidestoexercisetheircollectivepowerforevilandtogetherthey havenocorporatevisionforgood. Inthelastpartofthebook,JanieonherownrehabilitatesHipBarrows, whosemindyearsearlierhadbeennearlydestroyedbyGerry.Hipis,once reconstructed,verybright,butnotpsychicinanyway.Still,heisconvincedthat hemustrevengehimselfagainstGerry.However,whentheshowdowncomes, andHiphasaknifeatGerrysthroat,hedropstheknifeinordertogiveGerrya moraleducation.TheshockofkindnessissostrongthatGerrypausestoread Hipsmindandmotives.Gerrythuslearnsshameandthescalesfallfromhiseyes. Hip,thenonpsychic,issuddenlyrevealedasanecessarypartofHomoGestalt, thestillsmallvoice(p.186)withoutwhichthenewbeingcannotproperlyexist. WithHippluggedinthroughJanie,andGerrychastenedbyHip,HomoGestaltcan begintofunction.Itsanappealingidea,appealingespeciallybecauseSturgeon hascreateditinsuchawaythatsomeonelikethereader,ratherthanatelepath, isthekeystoneofthisgloriousevolution.Aplaceismadeforus.Butthen,this placecanexistonlyiftheotherimprobablefiveexistand,againstfantasticodds, findeachother.Theunlikelihoodofthisseemstomakethebookillogical;seems tomakethebookfailasanescape;andseemstopreventthebookfromactually fulfillingtherequirementsofitsgenre.

AssoonasHiphasbecomeintegratedintoHomoGestalt,however,the narrativechangestoneasnewawarenessesflooduponGerryandtheother membersofhisGestalt:

ForalongtimetheonlysoundwasGerrysdifficultbreathing.Suddenlyeven thisstopped,assomethinghappened,somethingspoke. Itcameagain. Welcome. Thevoicewasasilentone.Andhere,another,silenttoo,butanotherforall that.Itsanewone.Welcome,child! Stillanother:Well,well,well!Wethoughtyoudnevermakeit Gerryclappedhishandstohismouth.Hiseyesbulged.Throughhismind cameahushofwelcomingmusic.Therewaswarmthandlaughterandwisdom,(p. 186)

GerrysGestalthasbeenacceptedbythecommunityofGestalts.We suddenlyrealizethatthecoincidenceshadnotbeenfarfetchedatall.The assertionthatthereareotherHomoGestaltsimpliesthattelepathsdoexist,but wejustdontknowaboutthem.OurknowledgehasbeenlimitedbyGerrys,and hishadbeenlimitedbytheotherGestalts.GerrysGestalthadthoughtthatitwas aloneintheworld,butonlybecausetheotherHomoGestaltswhohadcome togetherearlierforthegoodofhumanityhadquarantinedit.Oncemade completebytheadditionofthestillsmallvoice,GerrysGestaltcanlearn,and wecantoo,thatsuchGestaltshavebeenforming,indeed,guidingtheformation ofotherGestalts,allalong.Byasinglestroke,Sturgeonexplainslogicallytheone remainingdoubtthatmarstheorganicintegrityofthebookasaworkofscience fiction.Withcausationexplainedpreciselyonthegroundsthatwehaveaccepted allalongasthesingleallowabledeviationfromknownphenomena,thebook achievesunity.Thisemergentunityseemstojustifytheimmediatelyfollowing notionthatintheseHomoGestaltsatlastwaspowerwhichcouldnotcorrupt (p.188).Sincethepartsarereplaceable,theentityisimmortal,andtherefore HomoGestaltis,infact,angelic.Man,withusincludedastheHipBarrowsesof theworld,isshownavisionofheaven.ThelastlineofthebookreferstoGerryno longerthevengefultelepathbutGerrytheHomoGestalt:Andhumbly,hejoined theircompany(p.188).

 ChildhoodsEnd,publishedinthesameyearasMoreThanHuman,hasa greatdealincommonwithit.Althoughitwonnoawardinitstime,readersof ClarkewillassertthathisbookisaswellwrittenasSturgeons.Infact,Childhoods Endhasbecomeperhapsthemostpopularsinglebookofsciencefictiontoday.It certainlyoutranksMoreThanHuman. 1Likethatbook,ChildhoodsEndconcerns theemergenceofthenextstepinmansevolution,asteptakenbychildrenintoa newspeciesoftelepathiccommunionandoverwhelmingtelekineticpower. ClarkeisperhapsevenmoreinsistentthanSturgeonontheimportance,lessthe telepathyassumption,oftheruleofnormalscience.Manisheldinthrallbyan advancedandastonishinglylonglivedracecalledtheOverlords.Their technologicalpowerisawesomeand,throughRikkiStormgren,theSecretary GeneraloftheUnitedNations,theyruleearthutterly.Stormgrenspeakswithone Overlordonly,Karellen.
YouknowwhyWainwright[areligiousleader]andhiskindfearme,dontyou? askedKarellen.Hisvoicewassombernow,likeagreatorganrollingitsnotesfroma highcathedralnave.Youwillfindmenlikehiminalltheworldsreligions.They knowthatwerepresentreasonandscience,and,however,confidenttheymaybe intheirbeliefs,theyfearthatwewilloverthrowtheirgods.Notnecessarilythrough anydeliberateact,butinasubtlerfashion.Sciencecandestroyreligionbyignoring itaswellasbydisprovingitstenets.Nooneeverdemonstrated,sofarasIam aware,thenonexistenceofZeusorThor,buttheyhavefewfollowersnow.The Wainwrightsfear,too,thatweknowthetruthabouttheoriginsoftheirfaiths.How long,theywonder,havewebeenobservinghumanity?Havewewatched Mohammedbeginthehegira,orMosesgivingtheJewstheirlaws?Doweknowall thatisfalseinthestoriestheybelieve? 2

Scienceisclearlycentraltothisnovel.Thebasisofthestoryismodern Darwinianevolution.TheOverlordsarenursemaidsforthehumanrace.Given currenttrends,Overlordsciencepredicts,manwillsoonirradiatehimself.Man, however,ispotentiallyHomoGestalt(thoughClarkedoesntusethisterm)and forthesakeofthatnewerman,Karellenandcompanycontrolthelifeofcurrent man.Likechildren,wearetobeprotectedagainstourselves.WhenTotal Breakthroughoccurs,whenmanschildrensuddenlyallatonceandeverywhere ontheplanet,mutateintoHomoGestalt,wehavechildhoodsend.

1 2

JackWilliamson,ScienceFictionComesToCollege,privatelyprinted,1971,p.14. ArthurC.Clarke,ChildhoodsEnd,Ballantine,NewYork,1972(1953),p.23.

TherelationbetweentheOverlordsandHomosapiensisexplainedat lengthintermsofDarwinianevolution.
therearemanyracesintheuniverse,andsomeofthemdiscoveredthese [telepathic]powerslongbeforeyourspeciesormineappearedonthescene.They havebeenwaitingforyoutojointhem,andnowthetimehascomeprobably,like mostmen,youhavealwaysregardedusasyourmasters.Thatisnottrue.Wehave neverbeenmorethanguardians,doingadutyimposeduponusfromabovewe arethemidwives.Butweourselvesarebarren.(p.176) werepresenttheendsoftwodifferentevolutionsOurpotentialitiesare exhausted,butyoursarestilluntapped.(pp.18283)

TheOverlords,notonlytoservetheOvermind,but,inordertolearnhow theythemselvesmightmakeTotalBreakthrough,haverestrainedandguidedman forahundredyears.Theyhaveinterdictedmansprogresswiththeold antisciencefearsofthenineteenthcenturyThestarsarenotforman.(p.137) onlytohavemangrow,undertheruleofevolution,intoamindthingthatcan inhabitthestars,orthevoidsbetweenthem,withperfectease.LikeHipsrolein MoreThanHuman,theepidemicthataffectsallhumanchildren,butwhichcan neveraffecttheOverlords,showsordinarymansuperiortohisapparentmaster. UnlikeSturgeon,Clarkereversesthescienceonwhichhisbookrelies.Every studentofevolutionknowsthatalthoughonespeciesisthoughttoemergeby discontinuousmutationfromtheloinsofapreviousspecies,thisisseenalwaysas occurringinoneindividualatatime.Ifthetraitissuccessful,thenitspreadsand eventuallyanewspeciesemerges.Clarkethrowsallthattothewindsand, despitetalkaboutevolutionarylines,postulatesthewholehumanracemovingon intoanewandperfectlycommunalera.Wherethenaggingdoubtisscientizedin Sturgeon,scienceisspiritualizedinClarke.Fromthestandpointofaestheticunity withinthedecorumofthegenreofWellsiansciencefiction,Clarkesbookis clearlyinferiortoSturgeons;fromthestandpointofpopularity,however, SturgeonsbookisjustasclearlyinferiortoClarkes.Thisrelationbetweenthe twobookscanbeexplainedbyconsideringhoweachusesthefantastic. SturgeonusesthefantasticintheparadigmaticwayprescribedforWellsian sciencefiction.Theworldbecomesordered(asitdoesinfairytalesanddetective fiction),thatordertakingitsspecificrulesfromthebodyofnormalscienceknown atthetimeofwriting.Clarke,thoughstillfallingwellwithinourgeneraldefinition

forsciencefiction,fallsoutsideWellsiansciencefictionbyvirtueofhisrejection ofthenarrativelyoperativeassumptionofmodernevolution.Thisrejection,this suddenreversalofagroundruleofitsnarrativeworld,isacentralepisodein ChildhoodsEnd.Thisepisodeisparadigmaticallyfantastic.Theastonishmentof theadultsattheirmutatedchildrenprovidessignalsenough.Somehow,this novelwhichistoofantastictobepuresciencefiction,isaworkofsciencefiction morepopularthanitsbetterdone,awardwinningparallel. TheparticularfantasythatClarkeindulgesistheChristianfantasyofthe descentofGrace.ThecomingofTotalBreakthrough,liketheSecondComing, representssalvationforallmennotalreadycorrupt.SturgeonandClarkeagree thatchildrenareinnocentandadultscorrupt.However,Sturgeonseesordinary manachievingsalvationthroughindividualactsofbravery(aswhenHipreleases thelethalGerry),whileClarkeseesallmenachievingsalvationthroughdivine intercession.Sturgeonssalvationisacreedforthisworld;Clarkessalvationis eschatological.ChildhoodsEndisanaptlychosentitle. ThenotionoftheSecondComing,theideathatGodmayinterveneand saveusall,givesrisetotheantinomianheresythatwesawinC.S.Lewis childrensliteratureandthatrunsthroughouttheFantasiesofGeorge MacDonald.NorthWindtellsDiamondthatImeithernotadream,ortheres somethingbetterthatsnotadream.1WhenafatherinChildhoodsEndistold aboutthedreamsofoneofhismutatingchildren(mutatingnotatconceptionbut afterformation,thusagainviolatingnormalscience),heremarksthatInever believedthattheyweresimplytheimaginingsofachild.Theyweresoincredible thatIknowthissoundsridiculoustheyhadtobebasedonsomereality(p.173). ThisisafaithintheAestheticsofRedemption.WhenTotalBreakthrough occurs,thechildrenofManfloatoffintospace.Theyare,intermsofliterary structuralparallels,ontheirwaytoheaven. Clarkswork,then,sharessomethingofthetheologyofthefantasist MacDonald,althoughitsreadiestgenericlabelanditsmostvisiblestructural featuresalignitwithSturgeon.Whenwerecognizethereligiousunderstructure ofChildhoodsEnd,wechangetheemphasisweputonindividualincidents.For example,whenreadasastoryofquasiscientific,Utopiansciencefiction,the incidentscenteringonStormgrenseemtobemerelyembellishments,games
1

GeorgeMacDonald,AttheBackoftheNorthWind,Airmont,NewYork,1966(1871),p.275.

playedwithcharacterizationtohumanizethetale.However,viewedasarewrite oftheBible,thisjudgmentchanges.WhenStormgrenisneardeath,hevisits Karellenforthelasttime.Theyhavealwaysspokenthroughaonewaywindow andnomanhasever(tothatpoint)lookeduponanOverlord.Stormgren,the faithfulservant,asksthathebeallowedthis.Attheendoftheinterview,forthe firsttime,alightcomesononKarellenssideofthewindow:achair,twicethe sizeofaman,and,justgoingthroughaclosingdoor,thebackofabeing! Stormgrenisgratefulforthisprivilegedglimpse,musesonKarellens guardianship,andhopesthatinthefuturewhenKarellencancometoearthhe willstandbesidethegraveofthefirstmanevertobehisfriend(pp.645).In Exodus,GodandMosesarguefrequentlyaboutthebestwaytoeducatethose foolishpeoplewhowillpersistinmakinggoldencalves.Mosessays,
Ibeseechthee,shewmethygloryAndhesaid,Thoucanstnotseemyface:for thereshallnomanseeme,andlive. AndtheLordsaid,Behold,thereisaplacebyme,andthoushaltstandupon arock: Anditshallcometopass,whilemyglorypassethby,thatIwillputtheeina cliftoftherock,andwillcovertheewithmyhandwhileIpassby: AndIwilltakeawayminehand,andthoushaltseemybackparts:butmy faceshallnotbeseen.(Exodus33:1823)

JudgedbythestandardsofWellsiansciencefiction,MoreThanHumanisa betterbookthanChildhoodsEnd.ThisissopreciselybecauseClarkesnovelisin asignificantregardthemorefantastic.Oncethenarrativegroundrulesare created,thefantasticisproscribedfromWellsiansciencefiction.However, Clarkesbookisbyfarthemorepopular.Itwouldseemthateitherwethrowout thenotionoftheaestheticimportanceoforganicunityorelsewerecognizethat ourgenrelabelofsciencefictionhasledusastray.Thislatterconclusion,of course,isthecorrectone.WithinthedecorumofthemorefantasticChildhoods End,ClarkecreatesanorganicunityeverybitascompleteasSturgeons.One shouldrecallthatKarellensvoiceisinitiallydescribedaslikeagreatorganrolling itsnotesfromahighcathedralnave.Clarkehas,byparticipationinthe structuresandimagesofChristianity,prepareduswellfortheSecondComing,for TotalBreakthrough,andwhenitcomesthisfantasticeventmaycontradict normalscience,butitiseasilyaccommodatedbyareadertrainedinthe

underlyingimagestructureofthebook.Perhapsbecausethehopethat ChristianityandClarkeholdsoutissuchawholesomehope,theflawedscience fictionisperceivedasthebetterfiction. Thiscomparisonindicatesthatgenrelabels,evenwhencarefullyattached todefinitions,mayplayusfalse.Inthisexample,itwasimportanttoknownot onlythattheseworksweresciencefictionsbutthatonewasmorefantasticthan theother.Further,bycomparingtheuseofthefantasticnottoanotherworkin thegenrebuttoanotherwork(Exodus)thatmakesthesameuseofthefantastic, wecanbetterunderstandhowClarkesbookfunctions,betterseeitshidden artistry,andbetterunderstanditsaffectsonalargereadership. Onecanimagineacontinuumofthefantasticthatarrangesallworkswithin thegenreofsciencefictionaccordingtotheirdegreeofuseofthefantastic.At oneendofthescalewefindI,Robot,attheotherAVoyagetoArcturus.This exerciseinarrangementishardlyfrivolous.Justastheapplicationofgenre distinctionshasoftenledreaderstonewinsightsaboutliterature,soapplication ofcontinuumdistinctionsmayalso,asintheSturgeon/Clarkecomparison,yield newinsightsalso,insightsthatdirectlycomplementthoseofnormalgenre criticism. <<Contents>> ****

PARTTHREE

Approaches
****

OnScienceFiction

byC.S.Lewis 1
Sometimesavillageorsmalltownwhichwehaveknownallourlives becomesthesceneofamurder,anovel,oracentenary,andthenforafew monthseveryoneknowsitsnameandcrowdsgotovisitit.Alikethinghappensto onesprivaterecreations.Ihadbeenwalking,andreadingTrollope,foryears whenIfoundmyselfsuddenlyovertaken,asifbyawavefrombehind,byaboom inTrollopeandashortlivedcrazeforwhatwascalledhiking.AndlatelyIhave hadthesamesortofexperienceagain.Ihadreadfantasticfictionofallsortsever sinceIcouldread,including,ofcourse,theparticularkindwhichWellspractised inhisTimeMachine,FirstMenintheMoonandothers.Then,somefifteenor twentyyearsago,Ibecameawareofabulgeintheproductionofsuchstories.In Americawholemagazinesbegantobeexclusivelydevotedtothem.The executionwasusuallydetestable;theconceptions,sometimesworthyofbetter treatment.Aboutthistimethenamescientifiction,soonalteredtosciencefiction, begantobecommon.Then,perhapsfiveorsixyearsago,thebulgestill continuingandevenincreasing,therewasanimprovement:notthatverybad storiesceasedtobethemajority,butthatthegoodonesbecamebetterand morenumerous.Itwasafterthisthatthegenrebegantoattracttheattention (always,Ithink,contemptuous)oftheliteraryweeklies.Thereseems,infact,to beadoubleparadoxinitshistory:itbegantobepopularwhenitleastdeserved popularity,andtoexcitecriticalcontemptassoonasitceasedtobewholly contemptible. OfthearticlesIhavereadonthesubject(andIexpectIhavemissedmany) IdonotfindthatIcanmakeanyuse.Foronething,mostwerenotverywell informed.Foranother,manywerebypeoplewhoclearlyhatedthekindthey wroteabout.Itisverydangeroustowriteaboutakindyouhate.Hatredobscures alldistinctions.Idontlikedetectivestoriesandthereforealldetectivestories
1

OnScienceFictionbyC.S.Lewis.FromOfOtherWorlds:EssaysandStories,byC.S.Lewis,editedbyWalter Hooper(NewYork:Harcourt,BraceandWorld,1967),pp.5973.Copyright1966byTheExecutorsoftheEstate ofC.S.Lewis.ReprintedbypermissionofHarcourtBraceJovanovich,Inc.andWilliamCollinsSons&Co.Ltd.

lookmuchaliketome:ifIwroteaboutthemIshouldthereforeinfalliblywrite drivel.Criticismofkinds,asdistinctfromcriticismofworks,cannotofcoursebe avoided:Ishallbedriventocriticizeonesubspeciesofsciencefictionmyself.But itis,Ithink,themostsubjectiveandleastreliabletypeofcriticism.Aboveall,it shouldnotmasqueradeascriticismofindividualworks.Manyreviewsareuseless because,whilepurportingtocondemnthebook,theyonlyrevealthereviewers dislikeofthekindtowhichitbelongs.Letbadtragediesbecensuredbythose wholovetragedy,andbaddetectivestoriesbythosewholovethedetective story.Thenweshalllearntheirrealfaults.Otherwiseweshallfindepicsblamed fornotbeingnovels,farcesfornotbeinghighcomedies,novelsbyJamesfor lackingtheswiftactionofSmollett.Whowantstohearaparticularclaretabused byafanaticalteetotaller,oraparticularwomanbyaconfirmedmisogynist? Moreover,mostofthesearticleswerechieflyconcernedtoaccountforthe bulgeintheoutputandconsumptionofsciencefictiononsociologicaland psychologicalgrounds.Thisisofcourseaperfectlylegitimateattempt.Buthereas elsewherethosewhohatethethingtheyaretryingtoexplainarenotperhaps thosemostlikelytoexplainit.Ifyouhaveneverenjoyedathinganddonotknow whatitfeelsliketoenjoyit,youwillhardlyknowwhatsortofpeoplegotoit,in whatmoods,seekingwhatsortofgratification.Andifyoudonotknowwhatsort ofpeopletheyare,youwillbeillequippedtofindoutwhatconditionshavemade themso.Inthisway,onemaysayofakindnotonly(asWordsworthsaysofthe poet)thatyoumustloveiteretoyouitwillseemworthyofyourlove,butthat youmustatleasthaveloveditonceifyouareeventowarnothersagainstit. Evenifitisavicetoreadsciencefiction,thosewhocannotunderstandthevery temptationtothatvicewillnotbelikelytotellusanythingofvalueaboutit.Just asI,forinstance,whohavenotasteforcards,couldnotfindanythingveryuseful tosaybywayofwarningagainstdeepplay.Theywillbelikethefrigidpreaching chastity,miserswarningusagainstprodigality,cowardsdenouncingrashness. Andbecause,asIhavesaid,hatredassimilatesallthehatedobjects,itwillmake youassumethatallthethingslumpedtogetherassciencefictionareofthesame sort,andthatthepsychologyofallthosewholiketoreadanyofthemisthe same.Thatislikelytomaketheproblemofexplainingthebulgeseemsimpler thanitreallyis. Imyselfshallnotattempttoexplainitatall.Iamnotinterestedinthe bulge.Itisnothingtomewhetheragivenworkmakespartofitorwaswritten

longbeforeitoccurred.Theexistenceofthebulgecannotmakethekind(or kinds)intrinsicallybetterorworse;thoughofcoursebadspecimenswilloccur mostoftenwithinit. Iwillnowtrytodividethisspeciesofnarrativeintoitssubspecies.Ishall beginwiththatsubspecieswhichIthinkradicallybad,inordertogetitoutofour way. Inthissubspeciestheauthorleapsforwardintoanimaginedfuturewhen planetary,sidereal,orevengalactictravelhasbecomecommon.Againstthishuge backclothhethenproceedstodevelopanordinarylovestory,spystory,wreck story,orcrimestory.Thisseemstometasteless.Whateverinaworkofartisnot used,isdoingharm.Thefaintlyimagined,andsometimesstrictlyunimaginable, sceneandproperties,onlyblurtherealthemeanddistractusfromanyinterestit mighthavehad.Ipresumethattheauthorsofsuchstoriesare,sotospeak, DisplacedPersonscommercialauthorswhodidnotreallywanttowritescience fictionatall,butwhoavailedthemselvesofitspopularitybygivingaveneerof sciencefictiontotheirnormalkindofwork.Butwemustdistinguish.Aleapinto thefuture,arapidassumptionofallthechangeswhicharefeignedtohave occurred,isalegitimatemachineifitenablestheauthortodevelopastoryof realvaluewhichcouldnothavebeentold(ornotsoeconomically)inanyother way.ThusJohnCollierinTomsACold(1933)wantstowriteastoryofheroic actionamongpeoplethemselvessemibarbarousbutsupportedbythesurviving traditionofaliterateculturerecentlyoverthrown.Hecould,ofcourse,findan historicalsituationsuitabletohispurpose,somewhereintheearlyDarkAges.But thatwouldinvolveallmannerofarchaeologicaldetailswhichwouldspoilhisbook iftheyweredoneperfunctorilyandperhapsdistractourinterestiftheywere donewell.Heistherefore,onmyview,fullyjustifiedinpositingsuchastateof affairsinEnglandafterthedestructionofourpresentcivilization.Thatenables him(andus)toassumeafamiliarclimate,flora,andfauna.Heisnotinterestedin theprocesswherebythechangecameabout.Thatisalloverbeforethecurtain rises.Thissuppositionisequivalenttotherulesofhisgame:criticismappliesonly tothequalityofhisplay.Amuchmorefrequentuseoftheleapintothefuture,in ourtime,issatiricorprophetic:theauthorcriticizestendenciesinthepresentby imaginingthemcarriedout(produced,asEuclidwouldsay)totheirlogicallimit. BraveNewWorldandNineteenEightyFourleaptoourminds.Icanseeno objectiontosuchamachine.NordoIseemuchuseindiscussing,assomeone

did,whetherbooksthatuseitcanbecallednovelsornot.Thatismerelya questionofdefinition.Youmaydefinethenoveleithersoastoexcludeorsoasto includethem.Thebestdefinitionisthatwhichprovesitselfmostconvenient.And ofcoursetodeviseadefinitionforthepurposeofexcludingeitherTheWavesin onedirectionorBraveNewWorldinanother,andthenblamethemforbeing excluded,isfoolery. Iam,then,condemningnotallbookswhichsupposeafuturewidely differentfromthepresent,butthosewhichdosowithoutagoodreason,which leapathousandyearstofindplotsandpassionswhichtheycouldhavefoundat home. Havingcondemnedthatsubspecies,IamgladtoturntoanotherwhichI believetobelegitimate,thoughIhavenottheslightesttasteforitmyself.Ifthe formeristhefictionoftheDisplacedPersons,thismightbecalledthefictionof Engineers.Itiswrittenbypeoplewhoareprimarilyinterestedinspacetravel,or inotherundiscoveredtechniques,asrealpossibilitiesintheactualuniverse.They giveusinimaginativeformtheirguessesastohowthethingmightbedone.Jules VernesTwentyThousandLeaguesUndertheSeaandWellssLandIroncladswere oncespecimensofthiskind,thoughthecomingoftherealsubmarineandthe realtankhasalteredtheiroriginalinterest.ArthurClarkesPreludetoSpaceis another.Iamtoouneducatedscientificallytocriticizesuchstoriesonthe mechanicalside;andIamsocompletelyoutofsympathywiththeprojectsthey anticipatethatIamincapableofcriticizingthemasstories.Iamasblindtotheir appealasapacifististoMaldonandLepanto,oranaristocratophobe(ifImay cointheword)totheArcadia.ButheavenforbidthatIshouldregardthe limitationsofmysympathyasanythingsavearedlightwhichwarnsmenotto criticizeatall.ForallIknow,thesemaybeverygoodstoriesintheirownkind. IthinkitusefultodistinguishfromtheseEngineersStoriesathirdsub specieswheretheinterestis,inasense,scientific,butspeculative.Whenwe learnfromthesciencestheprobablenatureofplacesorconditionswhichno humanbeinghasexperienced,thereis,innormalmen,animpulsetoattemptto imaginethem.Isanymansuchadullclodthathecanlookatthemoonthrougha goodtelescopewithoutaskinghimselfwhatitwouldbeliketowalkamongthose mountainsunderthatblack,crowdedsky?Thescientiststhemselves,themoment theygobeyondpurelymathematicalstatements,canhardlyavoiddescribingthe

factsintermsoftheirprobableeffectonthesensesofahumanobserver.Prolong this,andgive,alongwiththatobserverssenseexperience,hisprobableemotions andthoughts,andyouatoncehavearudimentarysciencefiction.Andofcourse menhavebeendoingthisforcenturies.WhatwouldHadesbelikeifyoucouldgo therealive?HomersendsOdysseusthereandgiveshisanswer.Oragain,what woulditbelikeattheAntipodes?(Forthiswasaquestionofthesamesortso longasmenbelievedthatthetorridzonerenderedthemforeverinaccessible.) Dantetakesyouthere:hedescribeswithallthegustoofthelaterscientifictionist howsurprisingitwastoseethesuninsuchanunusualposition.Betterstill,what woulditbelikeifyoucouldgettothecentreoftheearth?Dantetellsyouatthe endoftheInfernowhereheandVirgil,afterclimbingdownfromtheshouldersto thewaistofLucifer,findthattheyhavetoclimbupfromhiswaisttohisfeet, becauseofcoursetheyhavepassedthecentreofgravitation.Itisaperfect sciencefictioneffect.ThusagainAthanasiusKircherinhisIterExtaticumCeleste (1656)willtakeyoutoalltheplanetsandmostofthestars,presentingasvividly ashecanwhatyouwouldseeandfeelifthiswerepossible.He,likeDante,uses supernaturalmeansoftransport.InWellssFirstMenintheMoonwehavemeans whicharefeignedtobenatural.Whatkeepshisstorywithinthissubspecies,and distinguishesitfromthoseoftheEngineers,ishischoiceofaquiteimpossible compositioncalledcavorite.Thisimpossibilityisofcourseamerit,notadefect.A manofhisingenuitycouldeasilyhavethoughtupsomethingmoreplausible.But themoreplausible,theworse.Thatwouldmerelyinviteinterestinactual possibilitiesofreachingtheMoon,aninterestforeigntohisstory.Nevermind howtheygotthere;weareimaginingwhatitwouldbelike.Thefirstglimpseof theunveiledairlesssky,thelunarlandscape,thelunarlevity,theincomparable solitude,thenthegrowingterror,finallytheoverwhelmingapproachofthelunar nightitisforthesethingsthatthestory(especiallyinitsoriginalandshorter form)exists. Howanyonecanthinkthisformillegitimateorcontemptiblepassesmy understanding.Itmayverywellbeconvenientnottocallsuchthingsnovels.If youprefer,callthemaveryspecialformofnovels.Eitherway,theconclusionwill bemuchthesame:theyaretobetriedbytheirownrules.Itisabsurdto condemnthembecausetheydonotoftendisplayanydeeporsensitive characterization.Theyoughtntto.Itisafaultiftheydo.WellssCavorand Bedfordhaverathertoomuchthantoolittlecharacter.Everygoodwriterknows thatthemoreunusualthescenesandeventsofhisstoryare,theslighter,the

moreordinary,themoretypicalhispersonsshouldbe.HenceGulliverisa commonplacelittlemanandAliceacommonplacelittlegirl.Iftheyhadbeen moreremarkabletheywouldhavewreckedtheirbooks.TheAncientMariner himselfisaveryordinaryman.Totellhowoddthingsstruckoddpeopleistohave anodditytoomuch:hewhoistoseestrangesightsmustnothimselfbestrange. HeoughttobeasnearlyaspossibleEverymanorAnyman.Ofcourse,wemust notconfuseslightortypicalcharacterizationwithimpossibleorunconvincing characterization.Falsificationofcharacterwillalwaysspoilastory.Butcharacter canapparentlybereduced,simplified,toalmostanyextentwithwholly satisfactoryresults.Thegreaterballadsareaninstance. Ofcourse,agivenreadermaybe(somereadersseemtobe)interestedin nothingelseintheworldexceptdetailedstudiesofcomplexhumanpersonalities. Ifso,hehasagoodreasonfornotreadingthosekindsofworkwhichneither demandnoradmitit.Hehasnoreasonforcondemningthem,andindeedno qualificationforspeakingofthematall.Wemustnotallowthenovelofmanners togivelawstoallliterature:letitruleitsowndomain.Wemustnotlistento Popesmaximabouttheproperstudyofmankind.Theproperstudyofmanis everything.Theproperstudyofmanasartistiseverythingwhichgivesafoothold totheimaginationandthepassions. ButwhileIthinkthissortofsciencefictionlegitimate,andcapableofgreat virtues,itisnotakindwhichcanendurecopiousproduction.Itisonlythefirst visittotheMoonortoMarsthatis,forthispurpose,anygood.Aftereachhas beendiscoveredinoneortwostories(andturnedouttobedifferentineach)it becomesdifficulttosuspendourdisbeliefinfavourofsubsequentstories. Howevergoodtheyweretheywouldkilleachotherbybecomingnumerous. MynextsubspeciesiswhatIwouldcalltheEschatological.Itisaboutthe future,butnotinthesamewayasBraveNewWorldorTheSleeperAwakes.They werepoliticalorsocial.Thiskindgivesanimaginativevehicletospeculations abouttheultimatedestinyofourspecies.ExamplesareWellssTimeMachine, OlafStapledonsLastandFirstMen,orArthurClarkesChildhoodsEnd.Itishere thatadefinitionofsciencefictionwhichseparatesitentirelyfromthenovel becomesimperative.TheformofLastandFirstMenisnotnovelisticatall.Itis indeedinanewformthepseudohistory.Thepace,theconcernwithbroad, generalmovements,thetone,areallthoseofthehistoriographer,notthe

novelist.Itwastherightformforthetheme.Andsinceweareheredivergingso widelyfromthenovel,Imyselfwouldgladlyincludeinthissubspeciesawork whichisnotevennarrative,GeoffreyDennissTheEndoftheWorld(1930).AndI wouldcertainlyinclude,fromJ.B.S.HaldanesPossibleWorlds(1927),the brilliant,thoughtomyminddepraved,papercalledTheLastJudgement. WorkofthiskindgivesexpressiontothoughtsandemotionswhichIthinkit goodthatweshouldsometimesentertain.Itissoberingandcatharticto remember,nowandthen,ourcollectivesmallness,ourapparentisolation,the apparentindifferenceofnature,theslowbiological,geological,andastronomical processeswhichmay,inthelongrun,makemanyofourhopes(possiblysomeof ourfears)ridiculous.Ifmementomoriissaucefortheindividual,Idonotknow whythespeciesshouldbesparedthetasteofit.Storiesofthiskindmayexplain thehardlydisguisedpoliticalrancourwhichIthoughtIdetectedinonearticleon sciencefiction.Theinsinuationwasthatthosewhoreadorwroteitwere probablyFascists.Whatlurksbehindsuchahintis,Isuppose,somethinglikethis. Ifwewereallonboardshipandtherewastroubleamongthestewards,Icanjust conceivetheirchiefspokesmanlookingwithdisfavouronanyonewhostoleaway fromthefiercedebatesinthesaloonorpantrytotakeabreatherondeck.Forup there,hewouldtastethesalt,hewouldseethevastnessofthewater,hewould rememberthattheshiphadawhitherandawhence.Hewouldrememberthings likefog,storms,andice.Whathadseemed,inthehot,lightedroomsdownbelow tobemerelythesceneforapoliticalcrisis,wouldappearoncemoreasatinyegg shellmovingrapidlythroughanimmensedarknessoveranelementinwhichman cannotlive.Itwouldnotnecessarilychangehisconvictionsabouttherightsand wrongsofthedisputedownbelow,butitwouldprobablyshowtheminanew light.Itcouldhardlyfailtoremindhimthatthestewardsweretakingforgranted hopesmoremomentousthanthatofariseinpay,andthepassengersforgetting dangersmoreseriousthanthatofhavingtocookandservetheirownmeals. StoriesofthesortIamdescribingarelikethatvisittothedeck.Theycoolus.They areasrefreshingasthatpassageinE.M.Forsterwheretheman,lookingatthe monkeys,realizesthatmostoftheinhabitantsofIndiadonotcarehowIndiais governed.Hencetheuneasinesswhichtheyarouseinthosewho,forwhatever reason,wishtokeepuswhollyimprisonedintheimmediateconflict.That perhapsiswhypeoplearesoreadywiththechargeofescape.Ineverfully understoodittillmyfriendProfessorTolkienaskedmetheverysimplequestion, Whatclassofmenwouldyouexpecttobemostpreoccupiedwith,andmost

hostileto,theideaofescape?andgavetheobviousanswer:jailers.Thecharge ofFascismis,tobesure,meremudflinging.Fascists,aswellasCommunists,are jailers;bothwouldassureusthattheproperstudyofprisonersisprison.But thereisperhapsthistruthbehindit:thatthosewhobroodmuchontheremote pastorfuture,orstarelongatthenightsky,arelesslikelythanotherstobe ardentororthodoxpartisans. IturnatlasttothatsubspeciesinwhichaloneImyselfamgreatly interested.Itisbestapproachedbyremindingourselvesofafactwhichevery writeronthesubjectwhomIhavereadcompletelyignores.Farthebestofthe AmericanmagazinesbearsthesignificanttitleFantasyandScienceFiction.Init(as alsoinmanyotherpublicationsofthesametype)youwillfindnotonlystories aboutspacetravelbutstoriesaboutgods,ghosts,ghouls,demons,fairies, monsters,etc.Thisgivesusourclue.Thelastsubspeciesofsciencefiction representssimplyanimaginativeimpulseasoldasthehumanraceworkingunder thespecialconditionsofourowntime.Itisnotdifficulttoseewhythosewho wishtovisitstrangeregionsinsearchofsuchbeauty,awe,orterrorastheactual worlddoesnotsupplyhaveincreasinglybeendriventootherplanetsorother stars.Itistheresultofincreasinggeographicalknowledge.Thelessknownthe realworldis,themoreplausiblyyourmarvelscanbelocatednearathand.Asthe areaofknowledgespreads,youneedtogofurtherafield:likeamanmovinghis housefurtherandfurtheroutintothecountryasthenewbuildingestatescatch himup.ThusinGrimmsMarchen,storiestoldbypeasantsinwoodedcountry, youneedonlywalkanhoursjourneyintothenextforesttofindahomeforyour witchorogre.TheauthorofBeowulfcanputGrendelslairinaplaceofwhichhe himselfsaysNispaetfeorheononMilgemearces.Homer,writingforamaritime peoplehastotakeOdysseusseveraldaysjourneybyseabeforehemeetsCirce, Calypso,theCyclops,ortheSirens.OldIrishhasaformcalledtheimmram,a voyageamongislands.Arthurianromance,oddlyatfirstsight,seemsusually contentwiththeoldMarchenmachineofaneighbouringforest.Chretienandhis successorsknewagreatdealofrealgeography.Perhapstheexplanationisthat theseromancesarechieflywrittenbyFrenchmenaboutBritain,andBritaininthe past.HuonofBordeauxplacesOberonintheEast.Spenserinventsacountrynot inouruniverseatall;SidneygoestoanimaginarypastinGreece.Bythe eighteenthcenturywehavetomovewelloutintothecountry.PaltockandSwift takeustoremoteseas,VoltairetoAmerica.RiderHaggardhadtogoto unexploredAfricaorTibet;BulwerLytton,tothedepthsoftheEarth.Itmight

havebeenpredictedthatstoriesofthiskindwould,soonerorlater,havetoleave Tellusaltogether.WeknownowthatwhereHaggardputSheandKorweshould reallyfindgroundnutschemesorMauMau. Inthiskindofstorythepseudoscientificapparatusistobetakensimplyas amachineinthesensewhichthatwordborefortheNeoClassicalcritics.The mostsuperficialappearanceofplausibilitythemerestsoptoourcriticalintellect willdo.Iaminclinedtothinkthatfranklysupernaturalmethodsarebest.Itooka herooncetoMarsinaspaceship,butwhenIknewbetterIhadangelsconvey himtoVenus.Norneedthestrangeworlds,whenwegetthere,beatallstrictly tiedtoscientificprobabilities.Itistheirwonder,orbeauty,orsuggestivenessthat matter.WhenImyselfputcanalsonMarsIbelieveIalreadyknewthatbetter telescopeshaddissipatedthatoldopticaldelusion.Thepointwasthattheywere partoftheMartianmythasitalreadyexistedinthecommonmind. Thedefenceandanalysisofthiskindare,accordingly,nodifferentfrom thoseoffantasticormythopoeicliteratureingeneral.Butheresubspeciesand subsubspeciesbreakoutinbafflingmultitude.Theimpossibleorthingsso immenselyimprobablethattheyhave,imaginatively,thesamestatusasthe impossiblecanbeusedinliteratureformanydifferentpurposes.Icannothope todomorethansuggestafewmaintypes:thesubjectstillawaitsitsAristotle. Itmayrepresenttheintellect,almostcompletelyfreefromemotion,at play.ThepurestspecimenwouldbeAbbottsFlatland,thoughevenheresome emotionarisesfromthesense(whichitinculcates)ofourownlimitationsthe consciousnessthatourownhumanawarenessoftheworldisarbitraryand contingent.Sometimessuchplaygivesapleasureanalogoustothatofthe conceit.Ihaveunluckilyforgottenboththenameandauthorofmybestexample: thestoryofamanwhoisenabledtotravelintothefuture,becausehimself,in thatfuturewhenheshallhavediscoveredamethodoftimetravel,comesbackto himselfinthepresent(then,ofcourse,thepast)andfetcheshim. 1Lesscomic,but amorestrenuousgame,istheveryfineworkingoutofthelogicalconsequences oftimetravelinCharlesWilliamssManyDimensions:where,however,this elementiscombinedwithmanyothers.
1

[Lewisisthinking,Ibelieve,ofRobertA.HeinleinsByHisBootstrapsinSpectrum:AScienceFictionAnthology (1961).WalterHooper.]

Secondly,theimpossiblemaybesimplyapostulatetoliberatefarcical consequences,asinF.AnsteysBrassBottle.ThegarundastoneinhisViceVersa isnotsopureanexample;aseriousmoraland,indeed,somethingnotfarfrom pathos,comeinperhapsagainsttheauthorswish. Sometimesitisapostulatewhichliberatesconsequencesveryfarfrom comic,and,whenthisisso,ifthestoryisgooditwillusuallypointamoral,of itself,withoutanydidacticmanipulationbytheauthorontheconsciouslevel. StevensonsDrJekyllandMrHydewouldbeanexample.AnotherisMarc BrandelsCasttheFirstShadow,whereaman,longsolitary,despised,and oppressed,becausehehadnoshadow,atlastmeetsawomanwhoshareshis innocentdefect,butlaterturnsfromherindisgustandindignationonfindingthat shehas,inaddition,theloathsomeandunnaturalpropertyofhavingno reflection.Readerswhodonotwritethemselvesoftendescribesuchstoriesas allegories,butIdoubtifitisasallegoriesthattheyariseintheauthorsmind. Inallthesetheimpossibilityis,asIhavesaid,apostulate,somethingtobe grantedbeforethestorygetsgoing.Withinthatframeweinhabittheknown worldandareasrealisticasanyoneelse.Butinthenexttype(andthelastIshall dealwith)themarvellousisinthegrainofthewholework.Weare,throughout, inanotherworld.Whatmakesthatworldvaluableisnot,ofcourse,mere multiplicationofthemarvellouseitherforcomiceffect(asinBaronMunchausen andsometimesinAriostoandBoiardo)orformereastonishment(as,Ithink,in theworstoftheArabianNightsorinsomechildrensstories),butitsquality,its flavour.Ifgoodnovelsarecommentsonlife,goodstoriesofthissort(whichare verymuchrarer)areactualadditionstolife;theygive,likecertainraredreams, sensationsweneverhadbefore,andenlargeourconceptionoftherangeof possibleexperience.Hencethedifficultyofdiscussingthematallwiththosewho refusetobetakenoutofwhattheycallreallifewhichmeans,perhaps,the groovethroughsomefarwiderareaofpossibleexperiencetowhichoursenses andourbiological,social,oreconomicinterestsusuallyconfineusor,iftaken,can seenothingoutsideitbutachingboredomorsickeningmonstrosity.They shudderandasktogohome.Specimensofthiskind,atitsbest,willneverbe common.IwouldincludepartsoftheOdyssey,theHymntoAphrodite,muchof theKalevalaandTheFaerieQueene,someofMalory(butnoneofMalorysbest work)andmoreoiHuon,partsofNovalissHeinrichvonOfterdingen,TheAncient MarinerandChristabel,BeckfordsVathek,MorrissJasonandthePrologue(little

else)oftheEarthlyParadise,MacDonaldsPhantastes,Lilith,andTheGoldenKey, EddisonsWormOuroboros,TolkiensLordoftheRings,andthatshattering, intolerable,andirresistiblework,DavidLindsaysVoyagetoArcturus.AlsoMervyn PeakesTitusGroan.SomeofRayBradburysstoriesperhapsmakethegrade.W. H.HodgsonsTheNightLandwouldhavemadeitineminencefromthe unforgettablesombresplendouroftheimagesitpresents,ifitwerenot disfiguredbyasentimentalandirrelevanteroticinterestandbyafoolish,andflat archaismofstyle.(Idonotmeanthatallarchaismisfoolish,andhaveneverseen themodernhatredofitcogentlydefended.Ifarchaismsucceedsingivingusthe senseofhavingenteredaremoteworld,itjustifiesitself.Whetheritiscorrectby philologicalstandardsdoesnotthenmatterarap.) Iamnotsurethatanyonehassatisfactorilyexplainedthekeen,lasting,and solemnpleasurewhichsuchstoriescangive.Jung,whowentfurthest,seemsto metoproduceashisexplanationonemoremythwhichaffectsusinthesame wayastherest.Surelytheanalysisofwatershouldnotitselfbewet?Ishallnot attempttodowhatJungfailedtodo.ButIwouldliketodrawattentiontoa neglectedfact:theastonishingintensityofthedislikewhichsomereadersfeelfor themythopoeic.Ifirstfounditoutbyaccident.Alady(and,whatmakesthestory morepiquant,sheherselfwasaJungianpsychologistbyprofession)hadbeen talkingaboutadrearinesswhichseemedtobecreepingoverherlife,thedrying upinherofthepowertofeelpleasure,thearidityofhermentallandscape. Drawingabowataventure,Iasked,Haveyouanytasteforfantasiesandfairy tales?Ishallneverforgethowhermusclestightened,herhandsclenched themselves,hereyesstartedasifwithhorror,andhervoicechanged,asshe hissedout,Iloathethem.Clearlyweherehavetodonotwithacriticalopinion butwithsomethinglikeaphobia.AndIhaveseentracesofitelsewhere,though neverquitesoviolent.Ontheotherside,Iknowfrommyownexperience,that thosewholikethemythopoeiclikeitwithalmostequalintensity.Thetwo phenomena,takentogether,shouldatleastdisposeofthetheorythatitis somethingtrivial.Itwouldseemfromthereactionsitproduces,thatthe mythopoeicisrather,forgoodorill,amodeofimaginationwhichdoessomething tousatadeeplevel.Ifsomeseemtogotoitinalmostcompulsiveneed,others seemtobeinterrorofwhattheymaymeetthere.Butthatisofcourseonly suspicion.WhatIfeelfarmoresureofisthecriticalcaveatwhichIpropoundeda whileago.Donotcriticizewhatyouhavenotasteforwithoutgreatcaution.And aboveall,donotevercriticizewhatyousimplycantstand.Iwilllayallthecards

onthetable.Ihavelongsincediscoveredmyownprivatephobia,thethingIcant bearinliterature,thethingwhichmakesmeprofoundlyuncomfortable,isthe representationofanythinglikeaquasiloveaffairbetweentwochildren.It embarrassesandnauseatesme.ButofcourseIregardthisnotasacharterto writeslashingreviewsofbooksinwhichthehatedthemeoccurs,butasawarning nottopassjudgementonthematall.Formyreactionisunreasonable:suchchild lovesquitecertainlyoccurinreallifeandIcangivenoreasonwhytheyshould notberepresentedinart.Iftheytouchthescarofsomeearlytraumainme,that ismymisfortune.AndIwouldventuretoadviseallwhoareattemptingto becomecriticstoadoptthesameprinciple.Aviolentandactuallyresentful reactiontoallbooksofacertainkind,ortosituationsofacertainkind,isadanger signal.ForIamconvincedthatgoodadversecriticismisthemostdifficultthing wehavetodo.Iwouldadviseeveryonetobeginitunderthemostfavourable conditions:thatis,whereyouthoroughlyknowandheartilylikethethingthe authoristryingtodo,andhaveenjoyedmanybookswhereitwasdonewell. Thenyouwillhavesomechanceofreallyshowingthathehasfailedandperhaps evenofshowingwhy.ButifourrealreactiontoabookisUgh!Ijustcantbear thissortofthing,thenIthinkweshallnotbeabletodiagnosewhateverreal faultsithas.Wemaylabourtoconcealouremotion,butweshallendinawelter ofemotive,unanalysed,voguewordsarch.facetious.bogus.adolescent. immature,andtherest.Whenwereallyknowwhatiswrongweneednoneof these. <<Contents>> ****

TheImaginationofDisaster

bySusanSontag1
ThetypicalsciencefictionfilmhasaformaspredictableasaWestern,and ismadeupofelementswhich,toapracticedeye,areasclassicasthesaloon brawl,theblondeschoolteacherfromtheEast,andthegunduelonthedeserted mainstreet. Onemodelscenarioproceedsthroughfivephases. (1)Thearrivalofthething.(Emergenceofthemonsters,landingofthe alienspaceship,etc.)Thisisusuallywitnessedorsuspectedbyjustoneperson,a youngscientistonafieldtrip.Nobody,neitherhisneighborsnorhiscolleagues, willbelievehimforsometime.Theheroisnotmarried,buthasasympathetic thoughalsoincredulousgirlfriend. (2)Confirmationoftheherosreportbyahostofwitnessestoagreatactof destruction.(Iftheinvadersarebeingsfromanotherplanet,afruitlessattemptto parleywiththemandgetthemtoleavepeacefully.)Thelocalpoliceare summonedtodealwiththesituationandmassacred. (3)Inthecapitalofthecountry,conferencesbetweenscientistsandthe militarytakeplace,withtheherolecturingbeforeachart,map,orblackboard.A nationalemergencyisdeclared.Reportsoffurtherdestruction.Authoritiesfrom othercountriesarriveinblacklimousines.Allinternationaltensionsare suspendedinviewoftheplanetaryemergency.Thisstageoftenincludesarapid montageofnewsbroadcastsinvariouslanguages,ameetingattheUN,andmore conferencesbetweenthemilitaryandthescientists.Plansaremadefor destroyingtheenemy.
1

TheImaginationofDisasterbySusanSontag.FromAgainstInterpretationbySusanSontag(NewYork:Farrar, Straus&Giroux,1966),pp.20925.Copyright1961,1962,1963,1964,1965,1966bySusanSontag.Reprinted withthepermissionofFarrar,Straus&Giroux,Inc.

(4)Furtheratrocities.Atsomepointtheherosgirlfriendisingravedanger. Massivecounterattacksbyinternationalforces,withbrilliantdisplaysofrocketry, rays,andotheradvancedweapons,areallunsuccessful.Enormousmilitary casualties,usuallybyincineration.Citiesaredestroyedand/orevacuated.Thereis anobligatoryscenehereofpanickedcrowdsstampedingalongahighwayorabig bridge,beingwavedonbynumerouspolicemenwho,ifthefilmisJapanese,are immaculatelywhitegloved,preternaturallycalm,andcalloutindubbedEnglish, Keepmoving.Thereisnoneedtobealarmed. (5)Moreconferences,whosemotifis:Theymustbevulnerableto something.Throughouttheherohasbeenworkinginhislabtothisend.The finalstrategy,uponwhichallhopesdepend,isdrawnup;theultimateweapon oftenasuperpowerful,asyetuntested,nucleardeviceismounted.Countdown. Finalrepulseofthemonsterorinvaders.Mutualcongratulations,whilethehero andgirlfriendembracecheektocheekandscantheskiessturdily.Buthavewe seenthelastofthem? **** ThefilmIhavejustdescribedshouldbeinTechnicolorandonawidescreen. Anothertypicalscenario,whichfollows,issimplerandsuitedtoblackandwhite filmswithalowerbudget.Ithasfourphases. (1)Thehero(usually,butnotalways,ascientist)andhisgirlfriend,orhis wifeandtwochildren,aredisportingthemselvesinsomeinnocentultranormal middleclasssurroundingstheirhouseinasmalltown,oronvacation(camping, boating).Suddenly,someonestartsbehavingstrangely;orsomeinnocentformof vegetationbecomesmonstrouslyenlargedandambulatory.Ifacharacteris pictureddrivinganautomobile,somethinggruesomeloomsupinthemiddleof theroad.Ifitisnight,strangelightshurtleacrossthesky. (2)Afterfollowingthethingstracks,ordeterminingthatItisradioactive,or pokingaroundahugecraterinshort,conductingsomesortofcrude investigationtheherotriestowarnthelocalauthorities,withouteffect;nobody believesanythingisamiss.Theheroknowsbetter.Ifthethingistangible,the houseiselaboratelybarricaded.Iftheinvadingalienisaninvisibleparasite,a

doctororfriendiscalledin,whoishimselfratherquicklykilledortaken possessionofbythething. (3)Theadviceofwhoeverfurtherisconsultedprovesuseless.Meanwhile, Itcontinuestoclaimothervictimsinthetown,whichremainsimplausiblyisolated fromtherestoftheworld.Generalhelplessness. (4)Oneoftwopossibilities.Eithertheheropreparestodobattlealone, accidentallydiscoversthethingsonevulnerablepoint,anddestroysit.Or,he somehowmanagestogetoutoftownandsucceedsinlayinghiscasebefore competentauthorities.They,alongthelinesofthefirstscriptbutabridged, deployacomplextechnologywhich(afterinitialsetbacks)finallyprevailsagainst theinvaders. **** Anotherversionofthesecondscriptopenswiththescientistheroinhis laboratory,whichislocatedinthebasementoronthegroundsofhistasteful, prosperoushouse.Throughhisexperiments,heunwittinglycausesafrightful metamorphosisinsomeclassofplantsoranimalswhichturncarnivorousandgo onarampage.Orelse,hisexperimentshavecausedhimtobeinjured(sometimes irrevocably)orinvadedhimself.Perhapshehasbeenexperimentingwith radiation,orhasbuiltamachinetocommunicatewithbeingsfromotherplanets ortransporthimtootherplacesortimes. Anotherversionofthefirstscriptinvolvesthediscoveryofsome fundamentalalterationintheconditionsofexistenceofourplanet,brought aboutbynucleartesting,whichwillleadtotheextinctioninafewmonthsofall humanlife.Forexample:thetemperatureoftheearthisbecomingtoohighor toolowtosupportlife,ortheearthiscrackingintwo,oritisgraduallybeing blanketedbylethalfallout. Athirdscript,somewhatbutnotaltogetherdifferentfromthefirsttwo, concernsajourneythroughspacetothemoon,orsomeotherplanet.Whatthe spacevoyagersdiscovercommonlyisthatthealienterrainisinastateofdire emergency,itselfthreatenedbyextraplanetaryinvadersornearingextinction throughthepracticeofnuclearwarfare.Theterminaldramasofthefirstand

secondscriptsareplayedoutthere,towhichisaddedtheproblemofgetting awayfromthedoomedand/orhostileplanetandbacktoEarth. **** Iamaware,ofcourse,thattherearethousandsofsciencefictionnovels(their heydaywasthelate1940s),nottomentionthetranscriptionsofsciencefiction themeswhich,moreandmore,providetheprincipalsubjectmatterofcomic books.ButIproposetodiscusssciencefictionfilms(thepresentperiodbeganin 1950andcontinues,considerablyabated,tothisday)asanindependent subgenre,withoutreferencetoothermediaand,mostparticularly,without referencetothenovelsfromwhich,inmanycases,theywereadapted.For,while novelandfilmmaysharethesameplot,thefundamentaldifferencebetweenthe resourcesofthenovelandthefilmmakesthemquitedissimilar. Certainly,comparedwiththesciencefictionnovels,theirfilmcounterparts haveuniquestrengths,oneofwhichistheimmediaterepresentationofthe extraordinary:physicaldeformityandmutation,missileandrocketcombat, topplingskyscrapers.Themoviesare,naturally,weakjustwherethescience fictionnovels(someofthem)arestrongonscience.Butinplaceofanintellectual workout,theycansupplysomethingthenovelscanneverprovidesensuous elaboration.Inthefilmsitisbymeansofimagesandsounds,notwordsthathave tobetranslatedbytheimagination,thatonecanparticipateinthefantasyof livingthroughonesowndeathandmore,thedeathofcities,thedestructionof humanityitself. Sciencefictionfilmsarenotaboutscience.Theyareaboutdisaster,whichis oneoftheoldestsubjectsofart.Insciencefictionfilmsdisasterisrarelyviewed intensively;itisalwaysextensive.Itisamatterofquantityandingenuity.Ifyou will,itisaquestionofscale.Butthescale,particularlyinthewidescreen Technicolorfilms(ofwhichtheonesbytheJapanesedirectorInoshiroHondaand theAmericandirectorGeorgePalaretechnicallythemostconvincingandvisually themostexciting),doesraisethemattertoanotherlevel. Thus,thesciencefictionfilm(likethatofaverydifferentcontemporary genre,theHappening)isconcernedwiththeaestheticsofdestruction,withthe peculiarbeautiestobefoundinwreakinghavoc,makingamess.Anditisinthe

imageryofdestructionthatthecoreofagoodsciencefictionfilmlies.Hence,the disadvantageofthecheapfilminwhichthemonsterappearsortherocketlands inasmalldulllookingtown.(Hollywoodbudgetneedsusuallydictatethatthe townbeintheArizonaorCaliforniadesert.InTheThingFromAnotherWorld [1951]therathersleazyandconfinedsetissupposedtobeanencampmentnear theNorthPole.)Still,goodblackandwhitesciencefictionfilmshavebeenmade. Butabiggerbudget,whichusuallymeansTechnicolor,allowsamuchgreaterplay backandforthamongseveralmodelenvironments.Thereisthepopulouscity. Thereisthelavishbutasceticinteriorofthespaceshipeithertheinvadersor oursrepletewithstreamlinedchromiumfixturesanddialsandmachineswhose complexityisindicatedbythenumberofcoloredlightstheyflashandstrange noisestheyemit.Thereisthelaboratorycrowdedwithformidableboxesand scientificapparatus.Thereisacomparativelyoldfashionedlookingconference room,wherethescientistsunfurlchartstoexplainthedesperatestateofthings tothemilitary.Andeachofthesestandardlocalesorbackgroundsissubjectto twomodalitiesintactanddestroyed.Wemay,ifwearelucky,betreatedtoa panoramaofmeltingtanks,flyingbodies,crashingwalls,awesomecratersand fissuresintheearth,plummetingspacecraft,colorfuldeadlyrays;andtoa symphonyofscreams,weirdelectronicsignals,thenoisiestmilitaryhardware going,andtheleadentonesofthelaconicdenizensofalienplanetsandtheir subjugatedearthlings. Certainoftheprimitivegratificationsofsciencefictionfilmsforinstance, thedepictionofurbandisasteronacolossallymagnifiedscalearesharedwith othertypesoffilms.Visuallythereislittledifferencebetweenmasshavocas representedintheoldhorrorandmonsterfilmsandwhatwefindinscience fictionfilms,except(again)scale.Intheoldmonsterfilms,themonsteralways headedforthegreatcity,wherehehadtodoafairbitoframpaging,hurling bussesoffbridges,crumplingtrainsinhisbarehands,topplingbuildings,andso forth.ThearchetypeisKingKong,inSchoedsacksgreatfilmof1933,running amok,firstintheAfricanvillage(tramplingbabies,abitoffootageexcisedfrom mostprints),theninNewYork.Thisisreallynodifferentinspiritfromthescene inInoshiroHondasRodan(1957)inwhichtwogiantreptileswithawingspanof 500feetandsupersonicspeedsbyflappingtheirwingswhipupacyclonethat blowsmostofTokyotosmithereens.OrthedestructionofhalfofJapanbythe giganticrobotwiththegreatincineratingraythatshootsforthfromhiseyes,at thebeginningofHondasTheMysterians(1959).Or,thedevastationbytherays

fromafleetofflyingsaucersofNewYork,Paris,andTokyo,inBattleinOuter Space(1960).Or,theinundationofNewYorkinWhenWorldsCollide(1951).Or, theendofLondonin1966depictedinGeorgePalsTheTimeMachine(i960). Neitherdothesesequencesdifferinaestheticintentionfromthedestruction scenesinthebigsword,sandal,andorgycolorspectacularssetinBiblicaland RomantimestheendofSodominAldrichsSodomandGomorrah,ofGazainDe MillesSamsonandDelilah,ofRhodesinTheColossusofRhodes,andofRomeina dozenNeromovies.GriffithbeganitwiththeBabylonsequenceinIntolerance, andtothisdaythereisnothinglikethethrillofwatchingallthoseexpensivesets cometumblingdown. Inotherrespectsaswell,thesciencefictionfilmsofthe1950stakeup familiarthemes.Thefamous1930smovieserialsandcomicsoftheadventuresof FlashGordonandBuckRogers,aswellasthemorerecentspateofcomicbook superheroeswithextraterrestrialorigins(themostfamousisSuperman,a foundlingfromtheplanetKrypton,currentlydescribedashavingbeenexploded byanuclearblast),sharemotifswithmorerecentsciencefictionmovies.But thereisanimportantdifference.Theoldsciencefictionfilms,andmostofthe comics,stillhaveanessentiallyinnocentrelationtodisaster.Mainlytheyoffer newversionsoftheoldestromanceofallofthestronginvulnerableherowitha mysteriouslineagecometodobattleonbehalfofgoodandagainstevil.Recent sciencefictionfilmshaveadecidedgrimness,bolsteredbytheirmuchgreater degreeofvisualcredibility,whichcontrastsstronglywiththeolderfilms.Modern historicalrealityhasgreatlyenlargedtheimaginationofdisaster,andthe protagonistsperhapsbytheverynatureofwhatisvisiteduponthemnolonger seemwhollyinnocent. Thelureofsuchgeneralizeddisasterasafantasyisthatitreleasesone fromnormalobligations.ThetrumpcardoftheendoftheworldmovieslikeThe DaytheEarthCaughtFire(1962)isthatgreatscenewithNewYorkorLondonor Tokyodiscoveredempty,itsentirepopulationannihilated.Or,asinTheWorld, TheFlesh,andTheDevil(1957),thewholemoviecanbedevotedtothefantasyof occupyingthedesertedmetropolisandstartingalloveragain,aworldRobinson Crusoe. Anotherkindofsatisfactionthesefilmssupplyisextrememoral simplificationthatistosay,amorallyacceptablefantasywhereonecangive

outlettocrueloratleastamoralfeelings.Inthisrespect,sciencefictionfilms partlyoverlapwithhorrorfilms.Thisistheundeniablepleasurewederivefrom lookingatfreaks,beingsexcludedfromthecategoryofthehuman.Thesenseof superiorityoverthefreakconjoinedinvaryingproportionswiththetitillationof fearandaversionmakesitpossibleformoralscruplestobelifted,forcrueltyto beenjoyed.Thesamethinghappensinsciencefictionfilms.Inthefigureofthe monsterfromouterspace,thefreakish,theugly,andthepredatoryallconverge andprovideafantasytargetforrighteousbellicositytodischargeitself,andfor theaestheticenjoymentofsufferinganddisaster.Sciencefictionfilmsareoneof thepurestformsofspectacle;thatis,wearerarelyinsideanyonesfeelings.(An exceptionisJackArnoldsTheIncredibleShrinkingMan[1957].)Wearemerely spectators;wewatch. Butinsciencefictionfilms,unlikehorrorfilms,thereisnotmuchhorror. Suspense,shocks,surprisesaremostlyabjuredinfavorofasteady,inexorable plot.Sciencefictionfilmsinviteadispassionate,aestheticviewofdestructionand violenceatechnologicalview.Things,objects,machineryplayamajorrolein thesefilms.Agreaterrangeofethicalvaluesisembodiedinthedecorofthese filmsthaninthepeople.Things,ratherthanthehelplesshumans,arethelocusof valuesbecauseweexperiencethem,ratherthanpeople,asthesourcesofpower. Accordingtosciencefictionfilms,manisnakedwithouthisartifacts.Theystand fordifferentvalues,theyarepotent,theyarewhatgetdestroyed,andtheyare theindispensabletoolsfortherepulseofthealieninvadersortherepairofthe damagedenvironment. **** Thesciencefictionfilmsarestronglymoralistic.Thestandardmessageistheone abouttheproper,orhumane,useofscience,versusthemad,obsessionaluseof science.Thismessagethesciencefictionfilmsshareincommonwiththeclassic horrorfilmsofthe1930s,likeFrankenstein,TheMummy,IslandofLostSouls,Dr. JekyllandMr.Hyde.(GeorgeFranjusbrilliantLesYeuxSansVisage[1959],called hereTheHorrorChamberofDoctorFaustus,isamorerecentexample.)Inthe horrorfilms,wehavethemadorobsessedormisguidedscientistwhopursueshis experimentsagainstgoodadvicetothecontrary,createsamonsterormonsters, andishimselfdestroyedoftenrecognizinghisfollyhimself,anddyinginthe successfulefforttodestroyhisowncreation.Onesciencefictionequivalentof

thisisthescientist,usuallyamemberofateam,whodefectstotheplanetary invadersbecausetheirscienceismoreadvancedthanours. ThisisthecaseinTheMysterians,and,truetoform,therenegadeseeshis errorintheend,andfromwithintheMysterianspaceshipdestroysitand himself.InThisIslandEarth(1955),theinhabitantsofthebeleagueredplanet Metalunaproposetoconquerearth,buttheirprojectisfoiledbyaMetalunan scientistnamedExeterwho,havinglivedonearthawhileandlearnedtolove Mozart,cannotabidesuchviciousness.Exeterplungeshisspaceshipintothe oceanafterreturningaglamorouspair(maleandfemale)ofAmericanphysicists toearth.Metalunadies.InTheFly(1958),thehero,engrossedinhisbasement laboratoryexperimentsonamattertransmittingmachine,useshimselfasa subject,exchangesheadandonearmwithahouseflywhichhadaccidentally gottenintothemachine,becomesamonster,andwithhislastshredofhuman willdestroyshislaboratoryandordershiswifetokillhim.Hisdiscovery,forthe goodofmankind,islost. Beingaclearlylabeledspeciesofintellectual,scientistsinsciencefiction filmsarealwaysliabletocrackuporgooffthedeepend.InConquestofSpace (1955),thescientistcommanderofaninternationalexpeditiontoMarssuddenly acquiresscruplesabouttheblasphemyinvolvedintheundertaking,andbegins readingtheBiblemidjourneyinsteadofattendingtohisduties.The commandersson,whoishisjuniorofficerandalwaysaddresseshisfatheras General,isforcedtokilltheoldmanwhenhetriestopreventtheshipfrom landingonMars.Inthisfilm,bothsidesoftheambivalencetowardscientistsare givenvoice.Generally,forascientificenterprisetobetreatedentirely sympatheticallyinthesefilms,itneedsthecertificateofutility.Science,viewed withoutambivalence,meansanefficaciousresponsetodanger.Disinterested intellectualcuriosityrarelyappearsinanyformotherthancaricature,asa maniacaldementiathatcutsoneofffromnormalhumanrelations.Butthis suspicionisusuallydirectedatthescientistratherthanhiswork.Thecreative scientistmaybecomeamartyrtohisowndiscovery,throughanaccidentorby pushingthingstoofar.Buttheimplicationremainsthatothermen,less imaginativeinshort,technicianscouldhaveadministeredthesamediscovery betterandmoresafely.Themostingrainedcontemporarymistrustoftheintellect isvisited,inthesemovies,uponthescientistasintellectual.

Themessagethatthescientistisonewhoreleasesforceswhich,ifnot controlledforgood,coulddestroymanhimselfseemsinnocuousenough.Oneof theoldestimagesofthescientistisShakespearesProspero,theoverdetached scholarforciblyretiredfromsocietytoadesertisland,onlypartlyincontrolofthe magicforcesinwhichhedabbles.Equallyclassicisthefigureofthescientistas satanist(DoctorFaustus,andstoriesofPoeandHawthorne).Scienceismagic,and manhasalwaysknownthatthereisblackmagicaswellaswhite.Butitisnot enoughtoremarkthatcontemporaryattitudesasreflectedinsciencefiction filmsremainambivalent,thatthescientististreatedasbothsatanistandsavior. Theproportionshavechanged,becauseofthenewcontextinwhichtheold admirationandfearofthescientistarelocated.Forhissphereofinfluenceisno longerlocal,himselforhisimmediatecommunity.Itisplanetary,cosmic. **** Onegetsthefeeling,particularlyintheJapanesefilmsbutnotonlythere,thata masstraumaexistsovertheuseofnuclearweaponsandthepossibilityoffuture nuclearwars.Mostofthesciencefictionfilmsbearwitnesstothistrauma,and,in away,attempttoexorciseit. Theaccidentalawakeningofthesuperdestructivemonsterwhohasslept intheearthsinceprehistoryis,often,anobviousmetaphorfortheBomb.But therearemanyexplicitreferencesaswell.InTheMysterians,aprobeshipfrom theplanetMysteroidhaslandedonearth,nearTokyo.Nuclearwarfarehaving beenpracticedonMysteroidforcenturies(theircivilizationismoreadvanced thanours),ninetypercentofthosenowbornontheplanethavetobedestroyed atbirth,becauseofdefectscausedbythehugeamountsofStrontium90intheir diet.TheMysterianshavecometoearthtomarryearthwomen,andpossiblyto takeoverourrelativelyuncontaminatedplanetInTheIncredibleShrinkingMan, theJohnDoeheroisthevictimofagustofradiationwhichblowsoverthewater, whileheisoutboatingwithhiswife;theradiationcauseshimtogrowsmallerand smaller,untilattheendofthemoviehestepsthroughthefinemeshofawindow screentobecometheinfinitelysmall.InRodan,ahordeofmonstrous carnivorousprehistoricinsects,andfinallyapairofgiantflyingreptiles(the prehistoricArcheopteryx),arehatchedfromdormanteggsinthedepthsofamine shaftbytheimpactofnucleartestexplosions,andgoontodestroyagoodpartof theworldbeforetheyarefelledbythemoltenlavaofavolcaniceruptionInthe

Englishfilm,TheDaytheEarthCaughtFire,twosimultaneoushydrogenbomb testsbytheUnitedStatesandRussiachangeby11degreesthetiltoftheearthon itsaxisandaltertheearthsorbitsothatitbeginstoapproachthesun. Radiationcasualtiesultimately,theconceptionofthewholeworldasa casualtyofnucleartestingandnuclearwarfareisthemostominousofallthe notionswithwhichsciencefictionfilmsdeal.Universesbecomeexpendable. Worldsbecomecontaminated,burntout,exhausted,obsolete.InRocketshipXM (1950)explorersfromtheearthlandonMars,wheretheylearnthatatomic warfarehasdestroyedMartiancivilization.InGeorgePalsTheWaroftheWorlds (1953),reddishspindlyalligatorskinnedcreaturesfromMarsinvadetheearth becausetheirplanetisbecomingtoocoldtobeinhabitable.InThisIslandEarth, alsoAmerican,theplanetMetaluna,whosepopulationhaslongagobeendriven undergroundbywarfare,isdyingunderthemissileattacksofanenemyplanet. Stocksofuranium,whichpowertheforcefieldshieldingMetaluna,havebeen usedup;andanunsuccessfulexpeditionissenttoearthtoenlistearthscientists todevisenewsourcesfornuclearpower.InJosephLoseysTheDamned(1961), nineicycoldradioactivechildrenarebeingrearedbyafanaticalscientistinadark caveontheEnglishcoasttobetheonlysurvivorsoftheinevitablenuclear Armageddon. **** Thereisavastamountofwishfulthinkinginsciencefictionfilms,someofit touching,someofitdepressing.Againandagain,onedetectsthehungerfora goodwar,whichposesnomoralproblems,admitsofnomoralqualifications. Theimageryofsciencefictionfilmswillsatisfythemostbellicoseaddictofwar films,foralotofthesatisfactionsofwarfilmspass,untransformed,intoscience fictionfilms.Examples:thedogfightsbetweenearthfighterrocketsandalien spacecraftintheBattleofOuterSpace(1959);theescalatingfirepowerinthe successiveassaultsupontheinvadersinTheMysterians,whichDanTalbot correctlydescribedasanonstopholocaust;thespectacularbombardmentofthe undergroundfortressofMetalunainThisIslandEarth. Yetatthesametimethebellicosityofsciencefictionfilmsisneatly channeledintotheyearningforpeace,orforatleastpeacefulcoexistence.Some scientistgenerallytakessententiousnoteofthefactthatittooktheplanetary

invasiontomakethewarringnationsoftheearthcometotheirsensesand suspendtheirownconflicts.Oneofthemainthemesofmanysciencefiction filmsthecoloronesusually,becausetheyhavethebudgetandresourcesto developthemilitaryspectacleisthisUNfantasy,afantasyofunitedwarfare.(The samewishfulUNthemecroppedupinarecentspectacularwhichisnotscience fiction,FiftyFiveDaysinPeking[1963].There,topicallyenough,theChinese,the Boxers,playtheroleofMartianinvaderswhounitetheearthmen,inthiscasethe UnitedStates,England,Russia,France,Germany,Italy,andJapan.)Agreat enoughdisastercancelsallenmitiesandcallsupontheutmostconcentrationof earthresources. Sciencetechnologyisconceivedofasthegreatunifier.Thusthescience fictionfilmsalsoprojectaUtopianfantasy.IntheclassicmodelsofUtopian thinkingPlatosRepublic,CampanellasCityoftheSun,MoresUtopia,Swifts landoftheHouyhnhnms,VoltairesEldoradosocietyhadworkedoutaperfect consensus.Inthesesocietiesreasonablenesshadachievedanunbreakable supremacyovertheemotions.Sincenodisagreementorsocialconflictwas intellectuallyplausible,nonewaspossible.AsinMelvillesTypee,theyallthink thesame.Theuniversalruleofreasonmeantuniversalagreement.Itis interesting,too,thatsocietiesinwhichreasonwaspicturedastotallyascendant werealsotraditionallypicturedashavinganasceticormateriallyfrugaland economicallysimplemodeoflife.ButintheUtopianworldcommunityprojected bysciencefictionfilms,totallypacifiedandruledbyscientificconsensus,the demandforsimplicityofmaterialexistencewouldbeabsurd. **** Yetalongsidethehopefulfantasyofmoralsimplificationandinternationalunity embodiedinthesciencefictionfilmslurkthedeepestanxietiesabout contemporaryexistence.IdontmeanonlytheveryrealtraumaoftheBombthat ithasbeenused,thatthereareenoughnowtokilleveryoneonearthmanytimes over,thatthosenewbombsmayverywellbeused.Besidesthesenewanxieties aboutphysicaldisaster,theprospectofuniversalmutilationandeven annihilation,thesciencefictionfilmsreflectpowerfulanxietiesaboutthe conditionoftheindividualpsyche.

Forsciencefictionfilmsmayalsobedescribedasapopularmythologyfor thecontemporarynegativeimaginationabouttheimpersonal.Theotherworld creaturesthatseektotakeusoverareanit,notathey.Theplanetary invadersareusuallyzombielike.Theirmovementsareeithercool,mechanical,or lumbering,blobby.Butitamountstothesamething.Iftheyarenonhumanin form,theyproceedwithanabsolutelyregular,unalterablemovement (unalterablesavebydestruction).Iftheyarehumaninformdressedinspace suits,etc.thentheyobeythemostrigidmilitarydiscipline,anddisplayno personalcharacteristicswhatsoever.Anditisthisregimeofemotionlessness,of impersonality,ofregimentation,whichtheywillimposeontheearthiftheyare successful.Nomorelove,nomorebeauty,nomorepain,boastsaconverted earthlinginTheInvasionoftheBodySnatchers(1956).Thehalfearthling,half alienchildreninTheChildrenoftheDamned(1960)areabsolutelyemotionless, moveasagroupandunderstandeachothersthoughts,andareallprodigious intellects.Theyarethewaveofthefuture,maninhisnextstageofdevelopment. Thesealieninvaderspracticeacrimewhichisworsethanmurder.Theydo notsimplykilltheperson.Theyobliteratehim.InTheWaroftheWorlds,theray whichissuesfromtherocketshipdisintegratesallpersonsandobjectsinitspath, leavingnotraceofthembutalightash.InHondasTheHMan(1959),the creepingblobmeltsallfleshwithwhichitcomesincontact.Iftheblob,which lookslikeahugehunkofredjelloandcancrawlacrossfloorsandupanddown walls,somuchastouchesyourbarefoot,allthatisleftofyouisaheapofclothes onthefloor.(Amorearticulated,sizemultiplyingblobisthevillainintheEnglish filmTheCreepingUnknown[1956].)Inanotherversionofthisfantasy,thebodyis preservedbutthepersonisentirelyreconstitutedastheautomatizedservantor agentofthealienpowers.Thisis,ofcourse,thevampirefantasyinnewdress. Thepersonisreallydead,buthedoesntknowit.Heisundead,hehasbecome anunperson.IthappenstoawholeCaliforniatowninTheInvasionoftheBody Snatchers,toseveralearthscientistsinThisIslandEarth,andtoassorted innocentsinItCameFromOuterSpace,AttackofthePuppetPeople(1958),and TheBrainEaters(1958).Asthevictimalwaysbacksawayfromthevampires horrifyingembrace,soinsciencefictionfilmsthepersonalwaysfightsbeing takenover;hewantstoretainhishumanity.Butoncethedeedhasbeendone, thevictimiseminentlysatisfiedwithhiscondition.Hehasnotbeenconverted fromhumanamiabilitytomonstrousanimalbloodlust(ametaphoric exaggerationofsexualdesire),asintheoldvampirefantasy.No,hehassimply

becomefarmoreefficienttheverymodeloftechnocraticman,purgedof emotions,volitionless,tranquil,obedienttoallorders.(Thedarksecretbehind humannatureusedtobetheupsurgeoftheanimalasinKingKong.Thethreatto man,hisavailabilitytodehumanization,layinhisownanimality.Nowthedanger isunderstoodasresidinginmansabilitytobeturnedintoamachine.) Therule,ofcourse,isthatthishorribleandirremediableformofmurder canstrikeanyoneinthefilmexceptthehero.Theheroandhisfamily,while greatlythreatened,alwaysescapethisfateandbytheendofthefilmtheinvaders havebeenrepulsedordestroyed.Iknowofonlyoneexception,TheDayThat MarsInvadedEarth(1963),inwhichafterallthestandardstrugglesthescientist hero,hiswife,andtheirtwochildrenaretakenoverbythealieninvadersand thatsthat.(Thelastminutesofthefilmshowthembeingincineratedbythe Martiansraysandtheirashsilhouettesflusheddowntheiremptyswimming pool,whiletheirsimulacradriveoffinthefamilycar.)Anothervariantbutupbeat switchontheruleoccursinTheCreationoftheHumanoids(1964),wherethe herodiscoversattheendofthefilmthathe,too,hasbeenturnedintoametal robot,completewithhighlyefficientandvirtuallyindestructiblemechanical insides,althoughhedidntknowitanddetectednodifferenceinhimself.He learns,however,thathewillshortlybeupgradedintoahumanoidhavingallthe propertiesofarealman. Ofallthestandardmotifsofsciencefictionfilms,thisthemeof dehumanizationisperhapsthemostfascinating.For,asIhaveindicated,itis scarcelyablackandwhitesituation,asintheoldvampirefilms.Theattitudeof thesciencefictionfilmstowarddepersonalizationismixed.Ontheonehand,they deploreitastheultimatehorror.Ontheotherhand,certaincharacteristicsofthe dehumanizedinvaders,modulatedanddisguisedsuchastheascendancyof reasonoverfeelings,theidealizationofteamworkandtheconsensuscreating activitiesofscience,amarkeddegreeofmoralsimplificationarepreciselytraitsof thesaviorscientist.Itisinterestingthatwhenthescientistinthesefilmsis treatednegatively,itisusuallydonethroughtheportrayalofanindividual scientistwhoholesupinhislaboratoryandneglectshisfianceorhislovingwife andchildren,obsessedbyhisdaringanddangerousexperiments.Thescientistas aloyalmemberofateam,andthereforeconsiderablylessindividualized,is treatedquiterespectfully.

Thereisabsolutelynosocialcriticism,ofeventhemostimplicitkind,in sciencefictionfilms.Nocriticism,forexample,oftheconditionsofoursociety whichcreatetheimpersonalityanddehumanizationwhichsciencefiction fantasiesdisplaceontotheinfluenceofanalienIt.Also,thenotionofscienceasa socialactivity,interlockingwithsocialandpoliticalinterests,isunacknowledged. Scienceissimplyeitheradventure(forgoodorevil)oratechnicalresponseto danger.And,typically,whenthefearofscienceisparamountwhenscienceis conceivedofasblackmagicratherthanwhitetheevilhasnoattributionbeyond thatoftheperversewillofanindividualscientist.Insciencefictionfilmsthe antithesisofblackmagicandwhiteisdrawnasasplitbetweentechnology,which isbeneficent,andtheerrantindividualwillofaloneintellectual. Thus,sciencefictionfilmscanbelookedatasthematicallycentralallegory, repletewithstandardmodernattitudes.Thethemeofdepersonalization(being takenover)whichIhavebeentalkingaboutisanewallegoryreflectingtheage oldawarenessofmanthat,sane,heisalwaysperilouslyclosetoinsanityand unreason.Butthereissomethingmoreherethanjustarecent,popularimage whichexpressesmansperennial,butlargelyunconscious,anxietyabouthis sanity.Theimagederivesmostofitspowerfromasupplementaryandhistorical anxiety,alsonotexperiencedconsciouslybymostpeople,aboutthe depersonalizingconditionsofmodernurbanlife.Similarly,itisnotenoughtonote thatsciencefictionallegoriesareoneofthenewmythsaboutthatis,oneofthe waysofaccommodatingtoandnegatingtheperennialhumananxietyabout death.(Mythsofheavenandhell,andofghosts,hadthesamefunction.)For, again,thereisahistoricallyspecifiabletwistwhichintensifiestheanxiety.Imean, thetraumasufferedbyeveryoneinthemiddleofthe20thcenturywhenit becameclearthat,fromnowontotheendofhumanhistory,everypersonwould spendhisindividuallifeunderthethreatnotonlyofindividualdeath,whichis certain,butofsomethingalmostinsupportablepsychologicallycollective incinerationandextinctionwhichcouldcomeatanytime,virtuallywithout warning. Fromapsychologicalpointofview,theimaginationofdisasterdoesnot greatlydifferfromoneperiodinhistorytoanother.Butfromapoliticalandmoral pointofview,itdoes.Theexpectationoftheapocalypsemaybetheoccasionfor aradicaldisaffiliationfromsociety,aswhenthousandsofEasternEuropeanJews inthe17thcentury,hearingthatSabbataiZevihadbeenproclaimedtheMessiah

andthattheendoftheworldwasimminent,gaveuptheirhomesandbusinesses andbeganthetrektoPalestine.Butpeopletakethenewsoftheirdoomin diverseways.Itisreportedthatin1945thepopulaceofBerlinreceivedwithout greatagitationthenewsthatHitlerhaddecidedtokillthemall,beforetheAllies arrived,becausetheyhadnotbeenworthyenoughtowinthewar.Weare,alas, moreinthepositionoftheBerlinersof1945thanoftheJewsof17thcentury EasternEurope;andourresponseisclosertotheirs,too.WhatIamsuggestingis thattheimageryofdisasterinsciencefictionisabovealltheemblemofan inadequateresponse.Idontmeantobeardownonthefilmsforthis.They themselvesareonlyasampling,strippedofsophistication,oftheinadequacyof mostpeoplesresponsetotheunassimilableterrorsthatinfecttheir consciousness.Theinterestofthefilms,asidefromtheirconsiderableamountof cinematiccharm,consistsinthisintersectionbetweenanaiveandlargely debasedcommercialartproductandthemostprofounddilemmasofthe contemporarysituation. **** Oursisindeedanageofextremity.Forweliveundercontinualthreatoftwo equallyfearful,butseeminglyopposed,destinies:unremittingbanalityand inconceivableterror.Itisfantasy,servedoutinlargerationsbythepopulararts, whichallowsmostpeopletocopewiththesetwinspecters.Foronejobthat fantasycandoistoliftusoutoftheunbearablyhumdrumandtodistractusfrom terrorsrealoranticipatedbyanescapeintoexotic,dangeroussituationswhich havelastminutehappyendings.Butanotherofthethingsthatfantasycandois tonormalizewhatispsychologicallyunbearable,therebyinuringustoit.Inone case,fantasybeautifiestheworld.Intheother,itneutralizesit. Thefantasyinsciencefictionfilmsdoesbothjobs.Thefilmsreflectworld wideanxieties,andtheyservetoallaythem.Theyinculcateastrangeapathy concerningtheprocessesofradiation,contamination,anddestructionwhichIfor onefindhauntinganddepressing.Thenaivelevelofthefilmsneatlytempersthe senseofotherness,ofalienness,withthegrosslyfamiliar.Inparticular,the dialogueofmostsciencefictionfilms,whichisofamonumentalbutoften touchingbanality,makesthemwonderfully,unintentionallyfunny.Lineslike Comequickly,theresamonsterinmybathtub.Wemustdosomethingabout this.Wait,Professor.Theressomeoneonthetelephone.Butthats

incredible,andtheoldAmericanstandby,Ihopeitworks!arehilariousinthe contextofpicturesqueanddeafeningholocaust.Yetthefilmsalsocontain somethingthatispainfulandindeadlyearnest. Thereisasenseinwhichallthesemoviesareincomplicitywiththe abhorrent.Theyneutralizeit,asIhavesaid.Itisnomore,perhaps,thantheway allartdrawsitsaudienceintoacircleofcomplicitywiththethingrepresented. Butinthesefilmswehavetodowiththingswhichare(quiteliterally) unthinkable.Here,thinkingabouttheunthinkablenotinthewayofHerman Kahn,asasubjectforcalculation,butasasubjectforfantasybecomes,however inadvertently,itselfasomewhatquestionableactfromamoralpointofview.The filmsperpetuateclichsaboutidentity,volition,power,knowledge,happiness, socialconsensus,guilt,responsibilitywhichare,tosaytheleast,notserviceablein ourpresentextremity.Butcollectivenightmarescannotbebanishedby demonstratingthattheyare,intellectuallyandmorally,fallacious.Thisnightmare theonereflected,invariousregisters,inthesciencefictionfilmsistoocloseto ourreality. <<Contents>> ****

HowtoPlayUtopia:SomeBrief NotesontheDistinctiveness ofUtopianFiction

byMichaelHolquist1
God alone is worthy of supreme seriousness, but man is made Gods plaything, and that is the best part of him. Therefore every man and woman should live life accordingly, and play the noblest games, and be of another mind from whattheyareatpresentPlato,Laws RogerCailloishaswrittenthatforalongtimethestudyofgameswas hardlymorethanahistoryoftoys.Particularattentionwaspaidtothetoolsor accessoriesofgamesratherthantothegamesthemselvestheircharacteristics, theirlaws,theinstinctstheypresuppose,thekindofsatisfactiontheyprocure.2 Manyhistoriesofgamescanbesodismissed. 3Butlegendsabouttheoriginsof certaingamescansometimesrevealpreciselythosequalitieswhichCailloisseeks. Take,forexample,theChineselegendconcerningtheinventionofchess: Three hundred and seventynine years after the time of Confucius, HungKoChu, king of KiangNan, sent an expedition into ShenSi under the command of HanSing. After a successful campaign the soldiers were put into winter quarters, where they became impatient and demanded to be sent home. HanSing realized the urgent necessity of calming them if he was to finish his operations in the following year; he was a man of genius as well as a good soldier, and after
1

HowtoPlayUtopiabyMichaelHolquist.FromYaleFrenchStudies,XLI(1968),pp.10623.Reprintedby permissionofYaleFrenchStudies. 2 UnityofPlay:DiversityofGames,Diogenes,no.19(Fall,1957),p.93. 3 Foraclassicexampleofsuchhistory,seeH.J.R.Murray,AHistoryofBoardGamesOtherThanChess(Oxford, 1952).

considerable contemplation he invented the game of chess which would serve as an amusement in times of leisure and, being founded on the principles of war, would excite their military ardor. The stratagem fulfilled his expectations; the soldiers were delighted and in their daily contests forgot the inconveniences of their position. In the spring the general tookthefieldagain andinafewmonthsaddedtherichShen SiterritorytothekingdomofKiangNan. ChineseAnnals 1 ThislegendhasessentiallythesamepatternasisfoundinthePersian, Indian,andJapaneselegends,apatterninwhichthegameisinventedasa substituteforbattle.Inherentinthisprocessofsubstitutionarethe characteristics,laws,presupposedinstincts,andthenatureofsatisfactionwhich areinvolvedinthegameofchess,inmanyrespectsthegameofgames.Inwhat followsIshallspeakinmoredetailabouttheseimplicationsinchessinorderto developananalogywiththestructureofUtopianfiction.Baldlystated,mythesis isthattherelationshipofchesstobattleisroughlyparalleltotherelationship whichobtainsbetweenUtopiaandactualsociety.Themostobviousthingabout therelationshipofchesstobattleisthatthegameisanabstraction,ahighly stylizedmodeofcombat.Insidetheplaygroundanabsoluteandpeculiarorder reigns[play]createsorder,isorder.Intoanimperfectworldandintothe confusionoflifeitbringsatemporary,alimitedperfection.Playdemandsorder absoluteandsupreme.2Thereisnomoregraphicanimageofconfusionthana realbattle(onethinksofStendhal,orTolstoyorthelatestdispatchesfromViet Nam).Thereisnomoregraphicanimageoforderthanthegameofchess(one thinks,perhaps,ofthealmostgodlikeperfectionofsuchencountersasthe1892 matchgameinHavanabetweenSteinitzandTchigorin).Itisnotwithout significancethatthefirstcomputer(althoughitwasahoax)wasdesignedto playchess,3orthatafavoritepastimeofcomputerprogrammerstodayistoplay chesswiththeirmachines.Byperceivingtheparticulardynamicanddegreeof stylizationwhichrulesinchess,theorderofthegamecanbereconciledwiththe chaosofbattle.Thisstylizationisgroundedinborders,orexclusions.Theseare dennedbyrules,whichdeterminefurniture,time,place,andobject.
1 2

Quotedin:R.N.Coles,TheChessPlayersWeekendBook(London,1950),p.54. JohanHuizinga,HomoLudens(Boston,1964),p.10. 3 Thereferencehereis,ofcourse,tothevonKempelenrobotof1770.

 Whatcharacterizestherulesofchessistheirinflexibility.Ifyoubreakthe rules,youceasetodochess.Warhasitsrules,sometimesrigidlycodified,asin thechivalriccode,ortheGenevaConvention,buttheycanbebrokenbyparties whotherebydonotceasetobeatwar.Itisliterallytruethatallisfairinloveand war. Thefurnitureconsistsintheboardandpieces.Therelationshipto battlefieldandopposingarmiesisclearenoughinthese,andtheirhistory,notto requirefurthercomment.Exceptperhapstostresstheclosenessofthe relationshipbetweenvarioustypesofpiecesandthesocietyinwhichtheyare employed.MostgamesintheWestarenowplayedwithfiguresoftheStaunton design,whichbearonlythemosttenuousandsketchilyiconicrelationshipto actualfigures.Ifchesswererhetoric,theStauntonking,forinstance,wouldbe calledasynecdoche.Butinthepast,andasweshallsee,evennow,insome strikinginstances,thepieceshavereflectedtheirhistoricalhourinmuchgreater particularity:thebishopshavebeencarvedinfullregalia,theking,queen, knights,andpawnshavebeenmodelledontheparticularrulersandwarriorsof theplaceandtimeinwhichthesetwasmade.Inshort,theyowetheirdesign moretothesocialhierarchythantothetechnologyoftheiractualmanufacture. TheStauntonsetis,ontheotherhand,bornofthelathe.Thecloserelationshipof setsinthepasttoactualcostumesandpoliticshasimportantimplicationswhich weshallrefertolater.Atthispointwhatisimportanttonoteistheprocessby whichvastarmiesarereducedto32pieces,theblindmovementsoftroopstothe inflexiblesymmetryofthepermissiblemoves,allofwhichisaccomplishedon64 perfectsquares. Somuchhasbeenwrittenonthepeculiartimeandplaceofgames,thatit isunnecessarytorehearsetheargumentshere. 1Inordertoproceeditwillsuffice torememberthatthetimeandplacearesetoutsidetheeverydayrhythmsof experience,andassucharefreefromthecontingencywhichhauntsactual engagementsofarmies.Whathasbeensaidofthearbitrarinessofthegames spaceandtimeappliesalsotoitsobject:toplacetheopposingkingintothat situationinwhichhemustbecaptured.Checkmateisthemoreneutralwayof
1

CailloisandHuizingaaregoodonthis,butpossiblythemostsuccinctstatementofthepeculiartimeandspaceof gamesistobefoundin:FriedrichGeorgjunger,DieSpiele:einSchlvsselzuihrerBedeutung(FrankfurtamMain, 1953),pp.9197.HansGeorgGadamerisalsoverysuggestiveonthistopicin:WahrheitundMethode(Tubingen, 1965),pp.97105.

describingthis,butthestylizedparallelwiththedefeatofanactualruleror generalshouldnotbeforgotten. Nowthattheseelementaryconsiderationshavebeenestablished,Iwould liketosuggestsomeparallelsbetween,first,chessandUtopia,andthenbetween Utopiaandsociety. InbookIIofMoresUtopia,HythlodaydescribesthegamesoftheUtopians. Theonehedwellsonlongestisagameinwhichthevicesfightapitchedbattle withthevirtues.Inthelatterisexhibitedverycleverly,tobeginwith,boththe strifeoftheviceswithoneanotherandtheirconcertedoppositiontothevirtues; then,whatvicesareopposedtowhatvirtues,bywhatforcestheyassailthem openly,bywhatstratagemstheyattackthemindirectly,bywhatsafeguardsthe virtuescheckthepowerofthevices,bywhatartstheyfrustratetheirdesigns,and finally,bywhatmeanstheonesidegainsthevictory.1Thisisnotonlyagamein Utopia.ItisthegameofUtopia.WhatMoreisheredescribingsuggeststhe underlyingstructureofalmostallUtopianfiction.WhatGailloisisseekingforina truedescriptionofparticulargames,mayservealsoasthecriteriaofwhatone looksforinthedescriptionofgenres:theircharacteristics,theirlaws,the instinctstheypresuppose,thekindofsatisfactiontheyprocure.Inconnection withUtopianliteratureitmaybesaidthatthesequestionsarebestansweredby firstperceivingthateachgivenpieceofutopianismisakindofgame,oratleast sharesmanyrevealingcharacteristicswithgames.Thiscanbeseenbythe confrontationofparallelsinatypicalgamechess,withthoseinatypicalUtopia Mores. Utopiahasincommonwithchessfirstofallthegeneralcharacteristicthat itisasimplification,aradicalstylizationofsomethingwhichinexperienceisof enormouscomplexity,oftenlackinganyapparentsymmetry.Chesssubstitutesfor war,Utopiaforsociety.Ineachcasewhatwasroughismadesmooth,whatwas chaoticismadeorderly.Thechessgamehasrules,theUtopialaws.Thechess gamehasitsdistinctivefurniture,derivedfrombattle.Utopiahasitscharacteristic counters,derivedfromsociety.Insteadofknightsandbishops,theUtopiadeploys morecomplexunits.Thisisbecausethatwhichchessreflectsingameisinitself morecomprehensible,lesstotalthanthatwhichUtopiamirrorsinplay.Themost involvedbattlewillengageasmalleramountofagivenculturesaffectsthanthe
1

SirThomasMore,Utopia,ed.EdwardSurtz,S.J.(NewHaven,Conn.,1964),p.71.

simplestsocialhierarchywillofitsculture.Thiscaneasilybeseenbyrecognizing thatwarisonlyoneaspectofsomethinglargernamely,inthiscase,society.Since Utopiastrivestoreflectthemorecomplexentityofthetwo,itsfurnituremustbe correspondinglymorenumerousanddiffuse.Itmustfindcountersnotonlyfor rulersandwarriors,butalsoforfarmers,lawyers,philosophers,etc.MostUtopias containtheseelements,buttheyareallreducedtomanageableessentials.When criticscomplainthattherearenogreatUtopiastheyusuallymeanthatthereare noUtopiannovelswhichcontainplotsorcharactersofthedepthandcomplexity foundinmoreconventionalworksoffiction.Thisistomissthepointcompletely, tocomplainthatchessisinferiorbecauseitlacksthebodycontactoffootball. Whatsuchcriticsaskforisagamewithdifferentpresuppositionsand satisfactions.Theintentionoftheutopististhepolaroppositeoftheconventional novelist.Theformerintendsthetypical,thestylized,themanageable.The difficultiesattheheartof,say,apsychologicalnovelarepreciselythosewhichthe utopistseekstoavoid.People,likeeverythingelseinutopia,mustbeshrivenof theiridiosyncrasies,mustbetransformedintounitsthatcanbemanipulated accordingtoarestrictedsetoflawsandpresuppositions.InUtopia,surpriseisa heresy.WhenliterarycriticsdismissasmerepawnsthecharactersinUtopian fiction,theysimplyvalorizeanobjectivefact. Utopia,likechess,hasitsowntimeandplace,whicharesetoveragainst theworldofexperience.Justaschessisseparatedfromlifebyitsconventions, Utopiacutsitselfofffromlifebyconventionsofitsown.Theseconventionsvary fromworktowork,buttherearecertainfrequentlyrecurringtechniquesof bordercreation,twoofwhichareespeciallydefining:settingtheimaginary societyinadistanttimeorplace,orboth.Ishallreturninamomenttothese methods,butinconnectionwithMoreonefurtherpossibilityformarkingthe boundariesshouldbementioned.TheUtopiabristleswithnameinversions,or whatmightbecalledprivatenouns.Thesenamesdeprivewhattheypurportto describeoftheveryqualitywhichistheiressence.Thereisthenameoftheplace itself,somewherewhichisnowhere.TheAchoreans,apeoplewithoutaplace; Anydrusisariverwithoutwater;andAdemusisaleaderwithnopeopletolead. SamuelButlersErewhonisinthesametradition,andtheplayondigits,vowels, andconsonantsinZamyatinsWeisafurtherchangerungonthistendency.This issimplyonemoreexampleofthegenerallyplayfulqualitytobefoundineven thegrimmestUtopianliterature.

MorecommonlyUtopianliteraturehasinsistedonitsfictionalitybysetting uptemporalorspatialbordersbetweenitselfandactualexperience.Thespaceof utopia,theboardonwhichthegameisplayed,hasmoreoftenthannotbeena continentorisland,whatHansFreyerhasthepoliticalisland.1Thisisastrueof PlatosAtlantisasitisofMoresUtopiaorDiderotsTahiti.Morerecently distantplanetshavebecomethegeographicallocusforsuchspeculation. Theconventionaltimeofutopiaisamorecomplexboundary.Thetimein whichthefictionissetmaybepast,present,orfuturerelativetothedateof composition.GoldenAgesaresetinthepast;Moresutopiaexists contemporaneouslywithMoresEngland;LookingBackwardandmostanti utopiasaresetinthefuture.WhatisdistinctiveaboutalltheseUtopiantimes, however,istheirsubsumingqualityofarbitrariness.Utopiantimeismoreutterly aconventionthanisevenourartificialclocktime.Thusitisinasensemisleading tospeakofpast,present,andfutureinutopia.IfweconceiveofUtopiantimeasa singleentity,itsdistinguishingfeaturebecomesmorereadilyapparent:itexists onlyasanenablingdeviceforacertainkindofspeculation.W.H.Audenhas writtensomewherethatoperaisthesustainedexpressionofthosemomentsin lifewhenwesayIfeltlikesinging.Byanalogy,wemaysaythatutopiaisthe extensionofthosemomentswhenwesayWhatifUtopiasaretheliterature ofthesubjunctivemood.Moreoftenthannotsetinaputativefuture,they reverse,however,theartificialtimeofthegrammaticalsubjunctivewhich,in mostEuropeanlanguages,issomeformofthepast.Butofcoursethepastwhen usedinthiswaydoesnotrefertoatemporalpast.Thereferenceistopresentor undefinedtime,ormoretruly,nottotimeatall(andespeciallynottoaparticular pasttime)buttoUtopia,therealmofnonfact.2TimeinUtopiaisdeployedin muchthesameway,notasrealtime,orevenasliterarytime,butasaconvention ofitsownforarticulatingconditionalpossibilities.Itishypotheticalorheuristic time.Itisatimemarkedofffromclocktimejustassurelyasthetimeofachess game.3 WehavebeenspeakingofthevariouswaysinwhichUtopiaishedgedoff fromactualexperience.Butinsodoingwehavealsoestablishedsomeofthose conditionswhichsetUtopiasofffromotherfictionontheonehand,andpolitical
1 2

DiePolitischeInset(Berlin,1936). H.W.Fowler,Subjunctives,ADictionaryofModemEnglishUsage(Oxford,1965). 3 Itshouldnotbenecessarytopointoutthattheclocksusedtotimematchgamesderivefromtheexigenciesof thisparticularkindofcompetitionandnotfromsomethinginherentinthegameofchessitself.

programsontheother.Beforeproceedingfurtherthesedistinctionsshouldbe mademorespecific.IndiscussingtheanalogiesbetweengameandUtopialisted above,theobjectionhasfrequentlyandsometimesdisconcertinglybeenraised thatthereisasenseinwhichallfictionhasitsownrules,itsowntime,space,etc. Thisobjectionfirstofallfailstotakeintoaccountthespecificqualityofthese attributesastheyarepresentinUtopianfiction.IntheaboveparagraphsIhave attemptedtoshowinwhatthisspecificityconsists.Beyondthis,itisnecessaryto addthatafurtherdistinctionbetweentheworldsofconventionalandUtopian fictionisthecompletenesswithwhichtheutopiastrivestodescribethevarious necessarysocietalfunctionsandinstitutions.Societyin,say,AnnaKarenina,or better,LaComedieHumaineisrichlyandbroadlypresent.ButwhilemostUtopias areinfinitelylessrepletewithsmalldetails,thebetterofthemwill,nomatter howsketchily,atleastalludetoawiderrangeofsocietalinstitutions.Thereason forthisliesintheUtopianimpulse,whichcanbesaidtohaveitssourceina distinctiveanthropology.Theutopist,beforehewritesaline,beginsby postulatingwhatthebestmanwouldbe;hethenproceedstoarticulatethose conditionswhichwouldbestinsuretheriseandthecontinuedexistenceofsucha man.Hisanthropology,leadsnecessarilytoecology,theecologyofperfection. Thustheutopiststrivestodescribethatworldwhichismostconduciveto nurturingthevalueswhichdefinetheidealmanheposits.Justasnobattle,no matterhowstrategicallysound,iseverasneatasachessgame,soisnosocietyas coherentasUtopia.Justasallthemovesandelementsofthechessgameare directedtowardoneend,soaretheplotandinstitutionsofaUtopianfiction aimedattheonegoalthewritersidealman.Thisimpulsehasseveral consequences.TwoofthesereflectbackonthedifferencesbetweenUtopianand moreconventionalliterature.One,societyceasestobealiveorganisminthe Utopia.Itbecomesratheramachineformanufacturingthattypeofmanwhich theauthorseesasthebestman.Two,itfollowsfromthisthatifUtopian charactersarerobotsstampedoutbythemoldofUtopiansociety,the relationshipbetweenthetwoisofafixed,determinedkind.Balzacsrooming housesandcountinghouses,indeedhisFrance,haveacertaincompleteness,but lackthecoherencewhichisavailableonlytothestaticsocietyofUtopia.This societyisbydefinitionperfect,sothatanychangesinitcanresultonlyinafalling away,adecline.ThusinnovationisacrimeinUtopia,asinagainstperfection.Itis theorganic,theshiftingqualityofTolstoysorBalzacsworldwhichpermitstheir charactersthecomplexityofindividualbeings,partof,butnotdefinedby,their society.Byspeakingofecologyinutopiaoneseekstounderlinethefactthatin

theperfectstate,manishisenvironment.Thustheaestheticsofthenovelare wronglyappliedtoUtopias.Itisnotinferiortoconventionalfiction,itisdifferent fromit.AnotherconsequenceisthatthedistinctionsbetweenvariousUtopiascan beexplainedasbeingbasicallytheresultofconflictinganthropologies.Butmore significantly,thisviewofwhatutopiadoesdramatizessomewhatmoreeffectively thanotherconceptionsthefactthatUtopianfictionisjustwhatMoresuggestsin hisgamealludedtoabove:theplayofwhatagivenutopistcallsvirtuesagainst whathefeelstobevices.Itisinthisqualityofopposition,andtheextended shapethedialecticassumesinUtopias,thatthedifferencebetweenthemand othertypesofsocialprogramsistobefound.Theutopiadramatizes,suggests, themanifestodictates.Thereareother,evenmorefundamental,differences,and theseshallbedealtwithintheconclusion. Atthispointitisnecessarytodelvefurtherintotheemblematicor allegoricalpossibilitiesinherentinUtopias.Oneoftheconsequencesoftheorder whichreignsinutopiaisitspervasivesenseoflogic.Butthelogicisofaparticular, contrapuntalsort.Itadvancesbymeansofcontrasts,theconstantlyshiftingpoles ofwhichcreateapatternofsuperiorversusinferiormenandinstitutions.For instance,inThomasMorethereareseveralexplicitcomparisonsbetweenUtopia andEurope,andseveralcomparisonsbetweenUtopiaandotherimaginary nationswhichsurroundit.TheRepublicisonevastfabricofsuchcomparisons betweenthevariousstagesofPlatosmodelcommunity,aswellasbetweenthem andGreeksociety.Astrikingexampleofthiscompulsiontocontrastisfoundin VoltairesZadig,whereinchapterXIIanEgyptian,anIndian,aChinese,aCelt,a Greek,etc.cometogetherfordinner,andthewholeactionconsistsofasatirical confrontationoftheirvariousreligiousprejudices.Thelistcouldbeextended,but suchacourseisnodoubtunnecessary.ThetruththateachUtopiaexistsasa valuesystemtochallengeothersuchsystemsisselfevident.Inthecaseofmost Utopianfictionsthetensionisbetweentheworldoutsidethework,andtheworld itencloses,thusthecontrastisoftenimplicit.Butinsomeexamples,suchas thosejustcited,andinallantiutopias,theconflictingsystemsarecontainedin thefictionsthemselves.1984,forinstance,isalmostcompletelyanalogoustothe gameThomasMoredescribes:thetaleittellsismadefromtheattemptsofthe virtuousrebelstoovercomethestratagemsoftheThoughtPolicevices. Nowitwillprobablyalreadyhaveoccurredtothereaderthatthis allegoricalqualityofUtopiaseemstoflyinthefaceofremarksmadeearlier

concerningtheseparatenessofUtopiafromactualexperience.Agameispure, allegoryisimpure.Butitisalsotruethatgamesareplayedbypeople,whoonly indirectlyandambiguouslyshareintheperfectorderoftheirgames.Itisatjust thispointoftheseemingmostirreconcilableconflictbetweenthenatureofchess andUtopiathatafurtheranalogybetweenthetwowillmostaidus.Beforegoing on,twomorefactsaboutchessshouldberemembered.Thefirstisthatin medievalEuropethereexistedanimportantbodyofliteraturereferredtonowas chessmoralities.Itwillbeamatterfornosurprisetoanyonefamiliarwith characteristicsoftheEuropeanliteratureoftheMiddleAgestodiscoverthat workswerewritteninwhichattemptsweremadetogiveasymbolicalor allegoricalexplanationofthegameofchess,ortofindparallelsbetweenthe organizationofhumanlifeandactivitiesandthedifferentnamesandpowersof thechessmen 1OneofthesemoralitieswastraditionallyassociatedwithPope InnocentIII,andtheyarealsotobefoundinthepagesofthewidelyreadGesta Romanorum.Murray,inthedefinitivehistoryofthegameinEnglish,devotes thirtyfourcloselypackedpagestothesubject.Thesecondfactwhichshouldbe rememberedIhavehintedatearlier:theintentionofmedievalschoolmenwho usedchessforallegorydidnotconfineitselftoliterature,butwasreflectedinthe designforthepiecesofsomesets:WhenCaxtonprintedthesecondbookin English,TheGameandPlayeoftheChesse,atranslationofCessolis,hegavea longdescriptionofeachpieceandpawn,andthegoodorbadqualitiesdenoted bytheattributesofthechessman.2Atleastonesuchsetsurvives, 3togetherwith anothermoralityset,evenmoreexplicit,representingtheforcesofgoodandevil (CrusadersandMoslems,AngelsandDevils). 4ThustheManicheangameThomas Moredescribesisnomereinvention. But,itwillbesaid,Utopiasshownotsimplytheconflictofabstractvirtues andvices,suchasGluttonyandAbstinence,PrideandModesty,whichisthecase inchessmoralities.Utopiasdealwithmuchmoreconcretetensions,problems thatbearamuchcloserrelationshiptospecifichistoricalconflictsbetween variouseconomic,legal,religioussystems,etc.Butthesametendencyisalsoto beobservedinthehistoryofchess,[wherewefrequentlyfindsetswhich exemplify]theurgetoreadspecificvaluesintothetemptingwhiteandblack possibilitiesofthechessmen.[CertainSovietsets,forexample,attempt]toturn
1 2

H.J.R.Murray,AHistoryofChess(Oxford,1913),p.529 DonaldM.Liddell,etal,Chessman(NewYork,1937),p.19. 3 Seep.23ofLiddellsbook. 4 Illustratedonp.82inLiddell.

thebattlesettingofchessintoamodelofclasswarfare.Thevicesarespecifically identifiedhereasexcessivewealthinthequeen,ashouseholdtroopsofthe Czarslifeguardinthebishops,andthepawnsarechainedlaborers.The virtuousqueenisafarmwomaninnativecostume,andthebishopsareRed Armycavalrymen.Thelistofattemptstoreflectevenmorespecificsituations, suchasactualbattles,couldbeextendedindefinitely:thereexistsetsmodelled ontheAmericanCivilWar;Clovisvs.Alaric,NapoleonsEgyptiancampaign(at leastelevenofthesesetsareknown);GustavusAdolphusvs.Ferdinandof Austria;Napoleonvs.FrancisIofAustria;Napoleonvs.FredericktheGreat; Waterloo;Saratoga;thereisevenasetwithBritishsoldiersopposingZulus!A logicalextensionofthisimpulseistoleavethestricturesofchessbehindinorder morecompletelytocapturethedetailsofthebattlerepresentedintheplayitself. Thishasinfactbeendone,asinthecaseofthechesslikegameinventedby FrancoisGilotin1855,modelledonthetakingofSevastopolduringtheCrimean War,andthestrategygamespopularamongcollegestudentsareacurrent manifestationofthesameimpulse:Stalingrad.Gettysburg,etc. Inbothsetsofexampleslistedabove,thoseconcerningchessmoralities andthoseconcerningsetsdesignedtomirrorhistoricalbattles,thereisacommon denominatortobeobserved.Ineachcasemenhaveattemptedtomakethe abstractmodelofcombatwhichisthegameintoasetofspecificoppositions. More,theyhavesoughttogivevaluetothatwhichisinitsessencewithoutvalue. ThefactthatonekingisapiecemodelledafterNapoleonandtheotheris representedbyafiguremodelledontheDukeofWellingtondoesnotaffectthe natureofthechesscontestitself.InsuchagameNapoleonisjustaslikelyto winthestylizedbattleofWaterlooasWellington.Thegameitselfisakindof langue;suchhistoricallybasedchesssetsaresimplyanattempttomakemore particulartheparoleofthecontestingamesthatareactuallyplayed.Themodel ofbattleinchessis,however,sopurethatitcanbefilledoutinanactualinstance withanyvalueswithouttherealnatureofthegamebeinginanywayaffected. Whatisimportanttonote,however,isthatwhenchessisplayedwithsuch figures,thegamemaybesaidnolongertobeastylizationofjustanybattle,but giventhespecificfurniturewithwhichitisplayed,astylizationofthebattleof Waterloo,Saratoga,Gettysburg,etc.Bysoreducingthehistoricalbattle,theissue thatwastheredecidedinlife,becomesanopenpossibilityagaininthegame.In themodelisthefreedomwhichonlyplaygives,andthestylizedbattleof Waterloomayhaveadifferentoutcomeeachtimethegameisplayed.

 InUtopiasananalogousdynamiccanbeperceived.InthestudyofUtopias itisacommonplacethatthereexistsabondbetweentheimaginaryland presentedinagivenfiction,andtheactualsocietyinwhichitwaswritten.Swift, Voltaire,andevenDiderotsettheirsatiricalnovelsinaneverandnowhere whichneverthelessfaithfullyreflectstheessentialcharacteristicsof contemporaryEnglandandFrance. 1Thisrelationshipwill,ofcourse,bemuch closerinsatiricalUtopiasthaninlessspecificallyorientedexamplesofthegenre, but,eveninMoresUtopiawehavethewordofErasmusthatMorerepresented chieflyBritain.2WhatthenatureoftherelationshipbetweenaUtopia,andthe actualsocietyfromwhichitsprings,trulyis,shouldnowbeclear.Itis,toagreater orlesserextent,thesameasthatwhichobtainsbetweentheconcrete representationsofhistoricalfiguresinthechessmenandtheabstractstructureof thegameitself.ThusthegeographyofMoresimaginarylandinitsinsular configuration,initsarchitecturaldetails(abridgemuchlikeTowerBridge,etc.),is similartotheactualitiesofEngland,muchastheNapoleon,Wellington,andother piecesinthesetalludedtoabovearesimilartoactualitiesoftheBattleof Waterloo.Butjustasthesefiguresaresubsumedbyasetoflawspeculiarto chesswhenagameisplayedusingthem,sodotheprojectedartifactsfrom EnglishrealitybecomesubordinatedtotherulesofMoresUtopia.Thecomplex social,economic,andreligiousfactorswhichareinthegripofthecourseof Englishhistoryinreality,whenreducedandstylizedintocounters,become accessibletothefreedomofplayintheUtopia.Theirreversibilityofhistoryis stemmed,andoutcomesdeterminedbythecontingencyofactualexperience, can,inUtopia,bereversedinthefreedomoftheutopistsimagination.Another setoflawsobtainsintheUtopia,arbitrarybutinfinitelyopentorecombination. Utopiaisplaywithideas. Therewillbethosewhosay,ButachessgameisfreeinawaythatUtopias arenot.Evenifonetakesintoaccountthelimitlesscombinationsavailabletothe utopistbeforehedescribeshisimaginarysociety,oncehehasdoneso,theshape ofthatsocietyisfixed,itcannotbeplayedagaininthewaychessmaybe replayed.Thisobjectionmaybeansweredbypointingoutthatnotonlydoesthe authorofUtopiasplaythegame,sodoesthereaderofUtopias.Andthebest examplesofthegenrearearrangedinsuchawaythattheymaybeplayed
1 2

GeorgLukacs,TheHistoricalNovel,tr.H.andS.Michell(Boston,1963),p.20. OpusepistolarumDes.ErasmiRoterodami,ed.P.S.Allenetal.(12vols.,Oxford,190658),vol.4,p.21.

againasoftenastheyareread.Thatis,mostUtopiashaveopenendings.After thestruggleofvicesandvirtueshasbeendescribed,theutopistleavesituptothe readertodecidewholost,whowon.Twoexamplesofsuchendingsshouldmake thepoint.AfterHythlodayhasconcludedhisdescriptionofUtopia,ThomasMore, orratherthecounterinthebookwhichbearsthisname,says,Meanwhile, thoughinotherrespectsheisamanofthemostundoubtedlearningaswellasof thegreatestknowledgeofhumanaffairs,Icannotagreewithallthathesaid.ButI readilyadmitthatthereareverymanyfeaturesintheUtopianCommonwealth whichitiseasierformetowishforinourcountriesthantohaveanyhopeof seeingrealized.Thesearethelastwordsinthebook,especiallyfittinginone thathasasitssubtitleATruelyGoldenHandbook,NolessBeneficialthan Entertaining.ForthatispreciselywhatMorehasdonegiventhereaderideasto entertain.TheconclusionofDiderotsSupplementtoBougainvillesVoyagehas thesameopenquality.Afterreadinganddiscussingtheputativenotesofa chaplainwhoaccompaniedtheFrenchadmiraltoTahiti,andinwhicharather goldenimageofthoseislandsisgiven,Bsays,Letusfollowthegoodchaplains examplebemonksinFranceandsavagesinTahiti.TowhichAreplies,Puton thecostumeofthecountryyouvisit,butkeepthesuitofclothesyouwillneedto gohomein.Thisstatementgoesalongwaytowardexplainingthepattern,so oftenremarkedinUtopias,ofvoyageandreturn.HythlodaygoestoUtopia,but hecomesbacktoHolland.DiderotschaplaingoestoTahiti,butreturnstoFrance. AftersymbolicallydwellingforsolonginthecitySocratesspinsoutofwordsin theRepublic,thelistenersarebroughtbacktotheirvilla.Insodoing,thereturned voyagersleaveopenthecontrastbetweenthetwoworldsbetweenwhichthey shuttle,anditisthereaderwho,havingobservedthevicesfightapitchedbattle withthevirtues,asMoresays,decidesbywhatmeanstheonesidegainsthe victory. Agameis,aswehaveseen,somethingsetoff,thebordersbetweenwhat is,andwhatisnotthegamearealwaysclear,andwhentheyareviolatedtheplay ceases.ButtherearethosewhohaveforgottenthatUtopiaisagame,andin transgressingthelimitsofwhatmarksitoffasplay,havewroughtgreatharmto themselvesandothers.Theyhaveattemptedintheworldofexperiencewhatis possibleonlyinthefreedomofthesecondworld.OnesuchisEtienneCabet,who in1840publishedhisSocialistUtopiaVoyageenIcarie.Notcontentwithhis imaginedsociety,Cabetin18489attemptedtofoundanactualcommunitybased ontheprinciplesofhisbook.Whatensuedisahistoryofdisasters,andCabet

diedabrokenmaninSt.Louis,Missourisevenyearslater.Otherexamples abound,butineachcasetheattempttotranslateasocietyenactedinthemind intopraxis(acommunityinTexasorCalifornia)hasendedinchaos.Thereason,in eachcase,isthesame:justasyoucannotorderrealbattlesaccordingtothelogic ofchess,soyoucannoterectactualcommunitiesbasedonthelogicofUtopia. Notrecognizingtheboundsbetweenstylizedgameandcausalrealityistodo violencetothecomplexityofexistence.Thefunctionofplayinthehigher formscanlargelybederivedfromthetwobasicaspectsunderwhichwemeet it:asacontestforsomethingorarepresentationofsomething.Thesetwo functionscanuniteinsuchawaythatthegamerepresentsacontest,orelse becomesacontest,forthebestrepresentationofsomething.1Thus,inthegame ofUtopia,menmaybereducedtopawnsforthesakeofabetterrepresentation; toattemptthesamereductioninlifeleadstothepolicestate.Itisimportantto knowhowtoplayUtopia. IhavestressedthroughoutcertainparallelsbetweenchessandUtopia.In ordertoforestalltheobjectionthatthisisabaroqueexercise,orafurthertwist onchessmoralities,letmehastentoaddthatindoingsoonehasnotlosthis senseoftheenormousdisparitiesbetweenthetwoarmsoftheanalogy.One mightbestaccedetotheobjectionbysimplypointingoutthatchessandUtopia arebothaformofplay,butdifferentkindsofgames.InthispaperIhave attemptedtoshowonlythesimilaritiesbetweenthetwo,believingthe differencestobeobviousenoughnottorequirecomment.Beyond,thatis, pointingouttheobviousfactthatchessismuchlesscomplex,muchlessaffective andmorepurelyagame,thanUtopia.ButitisinjustthisqualityoftheUtopias greatercomplexity,and,onemightadd,seriousness,thatitspowertomoveus lies. Beforeleavingthesubject,onemoreparallelbetweenchessandutapia mustbementioned.Inspeakingofthetwoaswehave,thedesirethroughouthas beentoanswerthequestionsfromCailloiswithwhichwebegan.Thusmy remarkshavebeenaddressed,inconnectionwithboth,totheircharacteristics, theirlaws,theinstinctstheypresuppose;itistimenowtoconsiderthekindof satisfactiontheyprocure.Inordertodothiswemustbeawarethateachhasa doubleobject,onewhichsatisfiestherequirementsofthegameitself,andone whichsatisfiestheplayers.Theobjectofthegameofchessisdifferentfromthe
1

Huizinga,p.13.

gameofUtopia,butthereasonwhypeopleplaybothisthesame.Theobjectof thegameofchessistocheckmateonesopponent.Theobjectofthegameof Utopiaistoshowwhyonesetofsocialvirtues,workedoutincomprehensive institutions,issuperiortoothers.Inthistheydiffer.Butthereisanendtheplayer ofeachhaswhichtranscendsthatofthegameitself.Theplayersendisto achieveaparticularkindoffreedom.WhatHarryBergerhaswrittenaboutthe GreenWorldofRenaissanceliteraturewillserveasapartialevocationofwhat thisfreedomis:itistorevelinasecondworld,theplayground,laboratory, theater,orbattlefieldofthemind,amodelorconstructwhichthemindcreates,a timeorplacewhichitclearsinordertowithdrawfromtheactualworld separatingitselffromthecasualandconfusedregionofeverydayexistence,it promisesaclarifiedimageoftheworlditreplaces. 1 Speculationaboututopiaismoreimportantnowthaniteverwas.Wehave recentlyalltoooftenforgotten,andtooursorrow,thatperfectionisagame, somethingavailabletothemind,butnottothestate.Whenwehavestopped playing,whenwehaveattemptedtoinstrumenttheseductivebutinhumanlogic ofgamesinactualprograms,theconsequencehasinevitablybeenpogroms. Thus,utopiaperceivedasgameisakindofspeculativeinstrument.Inthe codifiablelawsofutopiasounderstood,wemayspeculateontheunchartable lawsofhistory.Wemayevenbearoffthatpalm,arriveatthattimewhichPlato invokesinthelastlinesofhisRepublic,whenweshallbeatpeacewithHeaven andwithourselves,bothduringoursojournhereandwhen,likevictorsinthe Gamescollectinggiftsfromtheirfriends,wereceivetheprizeofjustice;andso, nothereonly,butinthejourneyofathousandyearsofwhichIhavetoldyou,we shallfarewell. <<Contents>> ****

TheRenaissanceImagination:SecondWorldandGreenWorld,CentennialReview,vol.IX,no.1(Winter,1965), p.46.

TheApocalypticImagination, ScienceFiction,and AmericanLiterature

byDavidKetterer1

I
If,atitsmostexaltedlevel,apocalypticliteratureisreligious,theconcerns ofsuchaliterature,atitsmostpopularlevel,findexpressioninthegothicmode andespeciallyinsciencefiction.Clearly,theintroductionoftheother,theoutr, whetherintermsofsupernaturalmanifestationsorcreaturesfromouterspace,is goingtoupsetmansconceptionofhisownsituationandprompthimtorelatehis existencetoabroaderframework.Itistheparticularfunctionofallworthwhile sciencefictiontoexplorethephilosophicalconsequencesofanysuchradical disorientation. Theapocalypticimagination,Isubmit,findsitspurestoutletinscience fiction.Andinsofarassciencefictionconcernsitselfwiththesenseofan ending,Kermodesunderstandingoftheapocalypticimpulseacquiresanew relevance.2IndeedwhileW.H.Audentalksaboutdetectivefictionintermsofthe phantasyofbeingreturnedtotheGardenofEden,LeslieFiedleradducesthat thedreamofapocalypseisthemythofsciencefiction,themythoftheendof man,ofthetranscendenceortransformationofthehumanavisionquite differentfromthatoftheextinctionofourspeciesbytheBomb,whichseems

TheApocalypticImagination,ScienceFiction,andAmericanLiterature.FromDavidKetterer,NewWorldsfor Old:TheApocalypticImagination,ScienceFiction,andAmericanLiterature(Bloomington,Indiana:Indiana UniversityPress,1974),pp.1525.Somefootnoteshavebeenshortened.Copyright1974byDavidKetterer. ReprintedbypermissionofDoubleday&Company,Inc. 2 ThetitleofStephenandLoisRosesbookTheShatteredRing:ScienceFictionandtheQuestforMeaning (Richmond,Va.,1970),butnothingelseaboutit,issuggestivehere.MoresuggestiveisafootnoteR.W.B.Lewis includesinTrialsoftheWord:Thehugecontributionofsciencefictiontomodernapocalypticliteraturewouldbe verymuchworthinvestigating(p.193).

stereotyperatherthanarchetype 1WhenFryespeaksoftheFloodarchetype, thecosmicdisaster,ascharacteristicofsciencefiction,heisinsufficiently sensitivetothesubsequenttransformation. 2 Forthereader,anapocalyptictransformationresultsfromthecreationofa newcondition,baseduponaprocessofextrapolationandanalogy,whereby manshorizonstemporal,spatial,scientific,andultimatelyphilosophicare abruptlyexpanded.Sciencefictionstoriesmayberoughlygroupedintothree categories,dependinguponthebasisoftheextrapolationinvolved.Awritermay extrapolatethefutureconsequencesofpresentcircumstances,inwhichcasehe willprobablyproducesociologicalsciencefictionwithintheutopia/dystopia range. 3Secondly,andthisisafrequentlyrelatedcategory,typifiedbymuchofH. G.Wellswork,hemayextrapolatetheconsequencesfollowingthemodification ofanexistentcondition. 4Thismodification,asKingsleyAmisnotes,frequently takestheformofsomeinnovationinscienceorpseudoscienceorpseudo technologyorsomechangeordisturbanceorlocalanomalyinphysical conditions.5Thirdly,themostphilosophicallyorientedsciencefiction, extrapolatingonwhatweknowinthecontextofourvasterignorance,comesup withastartlingdonne,orrationale,thatputshumanityinaradicallynew perspective.Inthesecondandthirdcategories,theelementofanalogybecomes increasinglyevident.Needlesstosay,thethreecategoriesoverlap,anddistinction dependsuponemphasis.

W.H.Auden,TheGuiltyVicarage,HarpersMagazine,CXCVI(May1948),p.412.LeslieA.Fiedler,TheNew Mutants,PartisanReview,XXXII(fall1965),p.508. 2 AnatomyofCriticism,p.203.Itis,ofcourse,truethatagoodmanysciencefictionalideasderive,however unconsciously,fromarationalisticappropriationofarchetypesintheBookofRevelation.Forexample,theimage ofaninsectwithahumanhead,whichfiguresinthefilmTheFly,hassomeaffinitywiththeapocalypticplagueof locustswithhumanfaces.Certainlythevariousmonstersthatsciencefictionfilmshaveenvisagedasdevastating theglobearegenericallyconnectedwiththebeastsoftheApocalypse. 3 See,forexample,JohnBrunnersHugoawardwinnerStandonZanzibar(NewYork,1969),inwhichoneofthe protagonists,DonaldHogan,priortohisveryliteraltransformation,findshimselfsuspendedbetweenthewreck offormerconvictionsandthesolidificationofnewones(p.198). 4 See,forexample,FritzLeibersTheWanderer(NewYork,1964),whichdetailstheconsequenceswhenanew planetcomesliterallywithinhumanken 5 NewMapsofHell(NewYork,1960),pp.18,24.Theeffectofscienceispreeminent.J.O.Bailey,inPilgrims ThroughSpaceandTime:TrendsandPatternsinScientificandUtopianFiction(NewYork,1947),notes,theFirst MenofStapledonsLastandFirstMen(London,1930)thinkofscienceasareligion,notmerelybecauseitwas throughsciencethatmenhadgainedsomeinsightintothenatureofthephysicalworld,butratherbecausethe applicationofscientificprincipleshadrevolutionizedtheirmaterialcircumstance(p.296).

Inspiteofanoverallemphasisonideasinsciencefiction,theauthors extrapolativestructuresrarelylendthemselvestoovertallegoricalends,because ofthedangerofjeopardizingtheillusionofasurfaceverisimilitude.1Whatall sciencefictionaimsatisdestroyingoldassumptionsandsuggestinganew,and oftenvisionary,reality.Theextenttowhichsciencefictionissatiricisparticularly apparentinthedystopiastreatedbyMarkR.Hillegas.2Asfortheothersideofthe coin,SamuelR.Delanywrites:

The vision that sf tries for seems to me very close to the vision of poetry, particularly poetry as it concerned the nineteenth century Symbolists. No matter how disciplined its creation, to move into an unreal world demands a brush with mysticism. Virtually all the classics ofspeculativefictionaremystical. 3

Butthemysticismmustneverexceedtheboundsofplausibility,orthe workssatiricedgewillbeblunted.Thetechniqueofextrapolationdemandsa commitmenttologic.4 Indetailingsomeexamples,Iamgoingtoconfinemyselftomythird sciencefictioncategory,inwhichastartlingrationaleisinvolved,becauseIfind thethirdtypethemostsignificantasanexpressionofthephilosophicalsenseof theapocalypticimaginationandbecausethiscategoryhasnotpreviouslybeen isolatedbycriticsofthegenre.OneAmericanexampleisprovidedbyH.P. Lovecraftsstories,which,oscillatinguncertainlybetweenthegothicandscience fiction,areheldtogetherbyamythologythattakesasitsstartingpointthe assumptionthatmanisonlythelatestofaseriesofbeingswhohaveinhabited theEarth.Amongtheearlierdenizenswerearacewhodiscoveredthesecretof timetravel.Lovecraftsmythologyisquitecomplicatedinallitsramifications,but
1

C.S.LewisallegoricaltrilogyOutoftheSilentPlanet,VoyagetoVenus,ThatHideousStrength(London,1938, 1943,1946),isamixoffantasyandsciencefiction. 2 TheFutureasNightmare:H.G.WellsandtheAntiUtopians(NewYork,1967),passim.Insofarasacademic criticismhasgrappledwithanunderstandingofsciencefictionasagenre,thetendencyhasbeentoconsiderits satiricaspects.SeeRobertM.Philmus,IntotheUnknown:TheEvolutionofScienceFictionfromGodwintoH.G. Wells(BerkeleyandLosAngeles,1970),forarecentexample. 3 AboutFiveThousandOneHundredandSeventyFiveWords,Extrapolation:AScienceFictionNewsletter,X (May1969),p.63. 4 Theplausibilityissuepointstoanimportantdistinctionbetweensciencefictionandfantasy,hingingonwhat Delanycallsthelevelofsubjunctivity,ibid.,pp.6164.H.BruceFranklindistinguishesbetweentypesoffictionon asimilarbasisinFuturePerfect:AmericanScienceFictionoftheNineteenthCentury(NewYork,1966),p.3.The lackofaplausiblerelationshipbetweenfantasyandtherealworldmakesitimpossibletospeakaboutworksof fantasyeffectingaphilosophicalapocalypse.

whathebasicallysuggestsisthatmanyghostlyphenomenamaybeexplainedas thematerializationsofEarthsearlytimetravelers.Ishallhavemoretosayabout Lovecrafttowardtheconclusionofthisstudy.Thesamegoesforanother Americanwriter,KurtVonnegut,Jr.,who,inTheSirensofTitan(1959),tellsus thateonsagoaspaceshipcontainingarobotlikealiencrashlandedononeofthe moonsofSaturn.Itturnsoutthatthehistoryofhumanityhasbeenmanipulated byrelatedaliensfromadistantgalaxy,inordertoallowforthattimewhena spaceshipfromEarthreachesTitanaccidentallycarryingapieceofmaterialthat willfunctionasasparepart!ArthurC.ClarkeprovidesanEnglishexampleofthis speciesofsciencefictionin2001:ASpaceOdyssey(1968).Itisspeculatedthatwe oweourpresentstageofevolutiontotheinterferenceofspiritualbeingswhile wewereattheapestage.Butfortheappearanceofthemysteriousslab,the humanracewouldhavediedoutinitsinfancy.Theresultofentertainingthese revolutionarynotionsisthesensation,howevermomentary,ofaphilosophical apocalypse. ****

II
Iwantnowtosuggestthatcertaincharacteristicsofsciencefiction, particularlythephilosophicalapocalyptickind,arepresentinAmericanliterature generallyand,secondly,trytoexplainwhy.H.BruceFranklinhasdonemuchof thegroundworkinpreparinghisanthologyFuturePerfect:AmericanScience FictionoftheNineteenthCentury.Heconcludes:Therewasnomajornineteenth centuryAmericanwriteroffiction,andindeedfewinthesecondrank,whodid notwritesomesciencefictionoratleastoneUtopianromance. RipvanWinkle,henotes,isatimetravelstory,whileotherexamples includeCoopersTheMonikins(1835)andTheCrater(1848),MelvillesMardi, TwainsAConnecticutYankeeinKingArthursCourt,and(lessconvincingly) StephenCranesTheMonster. 1TheinclusionoftheallegoricalHawthorneisalso questionable,butPoe,FitzJamesOBrien,EdwardBellamy,andAmbroseBierce consistentlywrotesciencefiction.Itisonlynecessarytothinkoftheaffinity betweenMelvillesAhabandJulesVernesNemoandthedegreetowhich2001:A SpaceOdysseyisindebtedtoMobyDick(particularlyinbasingmetaphysical
1

Franklin,op.cit,p.x.

speculationontechnology)torecognizethesciencefictionalelementoperational inthelatterwork. 1 Tospeakmoregenerally,characterizationisgenerallyslightedinAmerican fictioninfavoroftheexpressionofideasandmetaphysicalabstractions.The samebiasistrueofsciencefiction.Aconcernforthemeaningofexistence invariablyreachesitslimitswithanawarenessofcyclicalprocess.Inthis connectionitisinterestingtorelatethecyclicalpatterningofmanysciencefiction stories,typifiedperhapsbyH.G.WellsTheTimeMachine,tosuchAmerican worksasIrvingsRipVanWinkle,ThoreausWalden,FitzgeraldsTheGreat Gatsby,andHemingwaysTheSunAlsoRises,inwhichcyclicaltheoryis particularlypertinent.Thefactthatmuchspaceoperasciencefictionisa displacedformoftheWesternisindisputable,butthereisalsosome relationshipbetweenthemysticalimpulseofsciencefictionandAmerican transcendentalism.Furthermore,likemuchsciencefiction,Americanliteratureis notableforitspropheticcharacter,perhapsattributabletotheAmericanimpetus towardoriginality:sophisticatedsymbolictechniquesinthenovel,and experimentalmethodologyinpoetry,developedinAmericalongbeforethey becamestandardizedinEurope.ThesharpjuxtapositioninAmericanliterature, notedpreviously,ofpragmatismandmaterialismwiththetranscendentaland speculativeisimplicitinthetermsciencefictionandsuggestssomethingabout theparadoxicalnatureofthegenrethatislostintermslikespeculativefiction orspeculativefabulation. 2 Thenthereisthequalityofwonder,whichTonyTanner,inTheReignof Wonder(1965),findsinAmericanliterature.However,itisevenmore characteristicofsciencefiction,asisapparentfromthetitleofDamonKnights bookonthesubject,InSearchofWonder(1967).Delanytalksaboutasenseof wonderandthesevioletnetsofwondercalledspeculativefiction. 3Andasan epigraphtoTheMartianChronicles(1950),RayBradburyhastheselines:Itis goodtorenewonessenseofwonder,saidthephilosopher.Spacetravelhas againmadechildrenofusall.
1

NotealsothatRayBradburywrotethescriptforthelatestfilmversionofMobyDickandtheexistenceofPhilip JoseFarmerssciencefictionsequel,TheWindWhalesoflshmael(NewYork,1971). 2 Iwouldspeculatethatdissatisfactionwiththetermsciencefictionislessareflectionofdoubtconcerningits descriptiveappropriatenessthantheresultofadesiretodisassociatefromthatbodyofliteraturecalledscience fictiontheauraofopprobriumfrequentlyengenderedbytheterm.Notethatsciencefictionworksofobvious literarymerit,suchasBraveNewWorldand1984arenotgenerallythoughtofassciencefiction. 3 Op.cit.,p.63.

 ****

III
Thequestionremains:whyshouldmanyofthecharacteristicsofscience fictionbeinalignmentwithmanyofthefeaturesthatdistinguishAmerican literature?Inlargemeasure,theanswerliesinthefactthatsciencefictionderives fromtheromance,which,thankslargelytoRichardChase,wenowrecognizeas thebasicformoftheAmericannovel. 1Worksthatwecallsciencefictionwere originallycalledscientificromances.Actuallyallpopularescapistliteraturethe gothichorrorstory,romanticfiction,theWestern,detectiveandthrillerfiction, pornographyandsciencefictionderivesfromtheromance,andgiventhe prevalenceoftheromanceinAmericanliterature,itisnotsurprisingthatall formsofthepopularizedromancehaveflourishedwithparticularintensityin America.BothFiedlerandHarryLevinhavearguedthatitisthegothicoffshootof theromancethatbestexpressestheAmericanimagination.2Noone,tomy knowledge,hasexaminedindetailtheextenttowhichsciencefictionhas functionedasanoutletfortheAmericanwriter,althoughFiedler,indefining sciencefictionasaneogothicform,includesitinhisthesis. IfbiblicalmythhasprovidedAmericanwriterswithawayoforderingtheir subjectmatter,theromance,particularlythegothicandsciencefictional offshoots,hasprovidedthecharacteristicmode.Mypointisthatmostofthe reasonsadducedbyChasetoexplaintheprominenceoftheromanceinparticular itslatitude,itsbeinginHawthornestermsaneutralterritory,somewhere betweentherealworldandfairyland,anditssuitabilityasanexpressionofthe incongruityoftheAmericansituationalsoexplaintheexistenceofsciencefiction andsciencefictionalelementsinAmericanliterature.3

1 2

SeeTheAmericanNovelandItsTradition(NewYork,1957). SeeHarryLevin,ThePowerofBlackness(NewYork,1958),andLeslieA.Fiedler,LoveandDeathintheAmerican Novel(NewYork,1960).Fiedlerconsiderssciencefictiononlyintherevisededition(1967),pp.500,502.Certainly theevasionofheterosexualrelationships,whichFiedlerobservesinAmericanliterature,isalsonotableinscience fiction,whichisgenerallycharacterizedbyanextremepurityofsubjectmatterunless,ofcourse,onewantstosee sciencefictionasdisguisingfantasiesofareturntothewomb! 3 TheCentenaryEditionoftheWorksofNathanielHawthorne(Columbus,Ohio,1962),p.36.

Butthereareotherfactors,whichrelatespecificallytosciencefiction.To somedegree,surely,thelackofausablepastmusthaveencouragedAmerican writerstolooktothefuturefortheirmyths.Afterall,Americahasalwaysbeena landofpromises.IndeedAmerica,withitssurrealisticskyscrapers,providesone alternativeblueprintofthefuturefortherestoftheworld.Thenotionofthe AmericanAdamiscommonenough.Lesscommonistherecognitionthattheidea ofasecondAdam,orasecondEveforthatmatter,isgenerallytheprovinceof sciencefiction.Whatusuallyhappensisthat,afterthenuclearholocaust,two survivorssee,themselvesastheprogenitorsofanewworld. 1Utopiasand dystopiasareregularsciencefictionfodder,and,asA.N.KaularguesinThe AmericanVision(1963),fodderfortheAmericanimagination,whichisobsessed withdreamsofaUtopia.Americansocietyis,infact,aprojectedUtopiathatnow seemstohaveturnedintoadystopia.Notealsothattheareabeyondthefrontier andtheIndianoncerepresentedthatunknownandalienexoticsobelovedof sciencefiction.Inasense,theexplorationofspacehassuppliedAmericawitha furtheroutletforitstraditionoffrontiersmanship.Americasfallfromgrace,Leo MarxsuggestsinTheMachineintheGarden,mayhavesomethingtodowiththe industrialrevolutionandthegrowthoftechnology. 2And,asthetermscience fictionimplies,tosomepeopleithasseemedthatthegenrederivesitssubject matterfromscientificadvances.Certainlysciencefictionflourishedinthethroes oftheindustrialrevolution.Butthetremendouscontemporaneousinfluenceof CharlesDarwinshouldalsobeappreciated,bothuponmainstreamAmerican literatureandalsoupontheopeningupofatemporalandcyclicalcanvasdirectly amenableonlytosciencefiction. Ingeneralterms,theproliferationofsciencefictionisaresponseto abruptlychangingsocialconditions.Duringtimesofstability,whenchange neitherhappensnorisexpected,orhappenssograduallyastobebarely noticeable,writersareunlikelytospendtimedescribingthefutureconditionof society,becausethereisnoreasontoexpectanysignificantdifference.Withthe nineteenthcentury,thingsspeededup,andnowchangeisaconstantand unnervingfactorinourdailylives.Ifwearetoliverationally,andnotjustforthe
See,forexample,myconcludingremarksonRayBradburysTheMartianChroniclesinthenextchapter. SeeTheMachineintheGarden:TechnologyandthePastoralIdealinAmerica(FairLawn,N.J.,1964).Incidentally, itisinterestingtonotethat,inTheTempest,whichMarxrelatestothepastoralattractionofNorthAmerica(pp. 3572),KingsleyAmisfindssciencefictionalprototypes:scientistandattractivedaughter,anearlymutantinthe shapeofCaliban,whileArielfunctionsasananthropomorphisedmobilescanner(NewMapsofHell,p.30).Can wethenspeakofTheTempestasasciencefictionvisionofAmerica?
2 1

moment,someattemptmustbemadetoanticipatefuturesituations.Hence writersaredrawntosciencefiction;itisanoutgrowthandanexpressionofcrisis. ThusRobertHeinleinatteststothevalueofsciencefiction:Wecannotdrive safelybylookingonlyintherearviewmirror[shadesofMcLuhan];itismore urgenttowatchtheroadahead.1Theanalogyisimperfect,butHeinleinspointis soundenough,althoughsciencefictionisnotprimarilyvaluableasprediction. Rather,itteachesadaptabilityandelasticityofmindinthefaceofchange. Afinalandmostimportantexplanationofthesciencefictionalelementsin Americanliteratureistherealizationthatthediscoveryandcolonizationof Americaareimaginativelyequivalenttotheconquestofspaceandthefuture colonizationof;say,themoonorMars.Sincethecolonizationofotherworlds belongstotherealmofsciencefiction,onemightindeedexpecttodiscoverthat certainaspectsofAmericanliteraturehavesomethingincommonwithscience fiction.Theessentialelementthattheyhaveincommon,Iseeastheapocalyptic imagination. <<Contents>> ****

SeeTheScienceFictionNovel,ed.byBasilDavenport(Chicago,1959),p.54

ScienceFictionandtheFuture

byJohnHuntington1
FromtheverybeginningofmodernSF,enthusiasts,apparentlyunsatisfied withthemerepopularityoftheform,perceivingthatatsomelevelitdoesmore thansimplygivepleasure,haveassertedthatSFservesanimportanteducational purpose:byengagingusintheactofimaginingtheunknown(theytellus)SF preparesusforthefuture.WilliamRupptakesitasafavorablesignthat48 percentofasamplingofEnglishprofessorsdefinedSFasatypeofstorythat triestoanticipatetheimpactoffuturetechnologicaldevelopmentsonsociety. Somerecentguidestothefuturegosofarastoinsistthatanyonewhoexpectsto copewiththefutureatallmustreadSF.Sciencefictionshouldberequired readingforFutureI,declaresAlvinToffler.ArthurC.ClarkemaintainsthatA criticalreadingofsciencefictionisessentialtrainingforanyonewishingtolook morethantenyearsahead.2Thoughthesefuturologistsrefrainfromclaiming thekindofliteralprophesypopularwithSFapologiststhirtyyearsago,they neverthelessagreewiththeearlierdefendersinbelievingthatSFtrainsits readerstoanticipatetheunexpectedandhelpsthemtoencounterchangeanda futurethatwillcertainlydifferradicallyfromthepresent. Thereis,tobesure,agenuineintellectualpleasuretobederivedfrom imagininginthefullestdetailpossibleapreviouslyunknownorunthoughtof machine,society,race,orenvironment,butthispleasureprobablydoesnothave theeducationalvaluethatisclaimedforit.ThoughSFoftengivesusasenseof facingtheunknown,itstrueinsightsaregenerallyintotheknown,anditsprimary valueliesnotinitsabilitytotrainusforthefuturebutinitsabilitytoengagea particularsetofproblemstowhichscienceitselfgivesriseandwhichbelong,not tothefuture,buttothepresent.AtitscoreSFisapowerfullyconventionaland
1

ScienceFictionandtheFuturebyJohnHuntington.FromCollegeEnglish,XXXVII(December,1975),34552. Copyright1975bytheNationalCouncilofTeachersofEnglish.Reprintedbypermissionofthepublisherandthe author. 2 Rupp,ScienceFictionandtheLiteraryCommunity,RiversideQuarterly,5(1972),21011.Toffler,FutureShock (1970:rpt.NewYork:Bantam,1971),p.425.Clarke,ProfilesoftheFuture(1963:rpt.NewYork:Bantam,1964),p. xiii.

deeplyconservativethoughnotnecessarilyrightwingformofliteraturewhich, ratherthanassaultingtheunknownbyboldrisksoftheimagination,tamesthe threatofthefutureandindoingsoarticulatesoneaspectofourpresenthuman situationinawaynootherliteraryformcan.InassertingthatSFdoesnotopen upthefutureinthewayitsdefenderswishitdid,Imayseemtobemerely repeatingwhatthedebunkersofsuchliteraturehavealwaysclaimed.The debunkers,ofcourse,havenotbeenentirelywithouttruth.Wheretheyhave goneastrayisinthinkingthatsinceSFisnotwhatsomeofitsloudesttouterssay, itisacheapfraud.Onthecontrary,thoughoneregretsthatSFisnotalwaysall thatitmightbe,onecanperceiveavalueineventhemediocrehackwork.My concern,therefore,isnottodisavowtypicalSF,buttoreinterpretitsfunction. BytypicalSFImeanSFofthesortpublishedintheUnitedStatesinthe 1930s,forties,andfifties,theproductofwhatisnowcalled,eitherfondlyor scornfully,TheGoldenAgeofSF.Iam,therefore,excludingfromspecific considerationsomegoodSFwritteninthepastfifteenyearswhich,however muchitmayfitinwithsomeofwhatIamsaying,makesapointofbreakingwith thetraditionsandconventionsthatflourishedearlier.Theideaofscienceinthis recentSFismuchlooserthanthatwhichdominatestheearlierwork,andmanyof thenewwritershaveevenrebelledagainstthenamesciencefictionitselfin favorofthebroaderandlessrestrictivetitleofspeculativefiction.TypicalSF, however,constitutesacoherentandnarrowgenrewithsomequiterigorous boundaries.Inordertounderstanditsvalueweneedtobeginbyconsidering whatitmeanstoclaimtotreatscienceinfiction.Thenwecangoontoconsider howandwhypowerfulandoftenclichdliteraryconventionsholdthefirmplace theydoinaformwhichbragsofitsfreedomfromoldwaysofthought.Finally, wecanexaminewhythissupposedlyfutureorientedfictionmustbeconservative ifitisgoingtoremaintruetoitsscientificpremises.Againletmestressthatmy aimisnottoattackSF.ItseemstomethattheconservativeactivitythatmostSF engagesinisinfactmorevaluablethanthemindexpandingactivitythatis popularlyclaimedforit. ****

Wemustbeginourconsiderationswiththefactofaddiction.Unlikethe generallyliteratereaderwhooccasionallyandselectivelyreadsaworkclassified onthecoverasSFandwhoevaluateswhathehasreadaccordingtoascaleof fairlywellformulated,wellunderstood,andwidelyacceptedvalues,theSFaddict isindiscriminateandseemstosatisfyhiscravingsimplybybeingintheworldof SF.TheSFaddictisnotaconnoisseur;hemayhavefavoriteauthorsorbooks,but heoftenreadswhateverSFhecangethishandson.Hehasexpectationsthat drivehim,andhegainssatisfactionsfromtheexperienceofawidevarietyof quiteforgettablestories.InreadingSFtheaddictparticipatesinaworldinwhich theliteraryexperienceissecondarytosomelargerpleasure. Astowhatitisthatparticularlyattractstheaddict,itisimportanttonote that,thoughfancymachinesaboundinSF,themerepresenceofyetunknown technologydoesnotsatisfyhiscraving.Whileclichssuchasraygunssomehow holdhiminthrall,theingeniousmachinesthatmakeislandsflyinBookIIIof GulliversTravelsborehim.Thereasonis,Isuggest,thattheaddictisinterested notonlyinexercisinghisingenuity,butalsointryingtocopewiththecontrolling presenceofscience,andSwiftissimplytoosafefromhisscientistsandtheir productions.Thoughmodernideasofscienceareclearlypresentintheearlypart oftheeighteenthcentury,toSwifttheyofferarepellentalternative,nota necessarycontext;theydonotshapehislife. Ontheotherhand,sinceitisthisscientificcontextratherthanthesurface detailsoftechnologythatappealstotheaddict,thepresenceofobsoleteor impossiblemachinesneednotdiscouragehisenthusiasm.Thoughaccurate scientificdetailhelpstoestablishthecontext,amistakesuchastherampup PikesPeakwhichlaunchesoneofRobertHeinleinsearlyrockets,whileitmay provokeasmile,doesnotseriouslymarthestoryssatisfactions.Asitactually functionsinastory,technologyisusuallyasmagicalasitisscientific.MichelButor wiselyobservesthatthedifferencebetweenaspaceshipandaflyingcarpetisnot thatwereallyunderstandonebetterthantheother,butthatthespaceship signifiesaworldofscience.1Anyparticulartechnologicaldevelopmentisan arbitraryevent;itsabsencemightchangethesurfaceshapeoftheworld somewhat,butitwouldnotcreatecontradictionorconfusion.Thedeepstructure oftheworld,asinterpretedbyscienceitself,remainsunchangedinspiteofthe randomcreationsoftheengineers.
1

ScienceFiction:TheCrisisofitsGrowth,trans.RichardHoward,PartisanReview,34(1967),595.

 SFanswersacraving,notforanewandplausibletechnology,butfora sciencewhichwillmediatebetweenaconvictionofthenecessityofeventsthat is,astrictdeterminismandabeliefincreativefreedom.Ontheonehand,the lawsofphysicsarethedecreesoffate.Byinvestigatingtheremorseless workingsofthings, 1scientistsunderstandnecessity.But,ontheotherhand, scienceconvertsthatunderstandingintoameansforfreedom,forthevery regularityofnature,asrevealedandinterpretedbyscience,permitsusto transcendnatureslimitationsthroughcontrol,prediction,andinvention.By understandingthelawofgravitywecanescapeEarth.Thus,toapartialextent, sciencefunctionslikereligion.Alawofphysicsiseverybitasabsoluteasalaw ofGod,andbothlawspromisesecurityandperhapseventranscendenceto thosewhounderstandandobey.Unlikereligion,however,scienceadvanceswith mansacquiescenceandcontribution.Thefinalcatastrophe,formerlyGodsto initiateorforestall,isnowmans.Theproblemisthatwedonotexperiencein actualitytheawesomefreedomthatthisideaofsciencepromises.Forthe scientisthimself,sciencerepresents,notheroicchallengeandfreedom,butan abstract,narrowpursuitwhichresultsin,atbest,minorvictorieswonatthecost ofenormousdrudgeryandfrustration.Eventhemostmajorindividual contributiontosciencechangesthecourseofthingsonlyslightly.Forthe nonscientisttheeaseofignorancedoesnotmakeanylighterthesenseof inexorabledestinythatscienceimparts.Theunderstandingofnecessitydoesnot liberate.Science,asweexperienceit,oppresses. BymeansoffictionSFrestorestothemythofsciencethepromiseof freedomandcontrolthatexperiencefailstogiveit.Whereassciencedealswith necessities,fictionoffersfreedoms.Whereasscienceexploresandexplainswhat absolutelymusthappen,fictioncreatesitsownsequencesandconsequences.The paradoxofthename,sciencefiction,encompasses,therefore,awiderangeof fictionthat,whileostensiblytreatingoftheinevitable,offersfancy.Thisparadox is,Isuggest,initself,animportantsourceofpleasurefortheaddict.Hecanread andsincerelyenjoystoriesthatengagethisparadoxeventhoughbyconventional literarystandardstheyareworthyofcontempt.Heenjoysonalevelotherthan thattowhichtheusualcriticalquestionsprobe.
1

AlfredNorthWhitehead,ScienceandtheModemWorld(1925:rpt.NewYork:FreePress,1967),pp.1011.

Whereasconventionalfictionisboundbythelawsoftheprobable,SF, thoughitssubjectisjustthatrealitythatbindsnormalfiction,isfreefromthat bond.Paradoxically,SFisoneoftheleastscientificoffictionsbecauseitowes hardlyanythingtothefactsofexperience.Unlikeconventionalfiction,which acceptsthenecessitiesofexperienceasgivenandfantasizesfromthere,SFsets upfictionalnecessitiesandthenobeysthem.SFcloselyresemblespurefantasyin thatitescapesnaturesrulesandmakesitsown.SFaddicts,however,insistthat thereisanimportantdifferencebetweenSFandfantasy.Whatseemstopacify theSFaddictisthebowtoscience,evenifitisameregesture,thatSFmakes,and whatdisturbshimaboutfantasyisthatitacknowledgesnolawthatpreventsthe freedomofimaginationfromseemingarbitrary.TheSFaddictwantstofeelthe tensionoftheparadoxoffreedomwithinastructuredimperative.Itmaybethe desireforthisparadoxthataccountsfortherepeatedattemptsofwritersand readersofSFtodefineprescriptiverulesforthegenre. Thoughthesurfacemessageofanovelorstorymayassertasimple ideology,theparadoxofscienceasaliberatingunderstandingofnecessitystill functionsatadeeplevelinSF.OptimisticSF,which(whilepromulgatingaviewof theeasyfreedomsciencewillbring)oftenexultsinbrutepowerandtotalitarian control,mightseemtodenytheelementoffreedomintheparadox.Asfiction aboutscience,however,itstillengagesthewholeparadoxevenasitssurface vulgarizesandtrivializesit.Inasimilarway,pessimisticSF,byattackingscienceas simplyoppressive,onitssurfacelimitstherangeoftheparadox,butinitsdeeper formreassertsit.ThetwoideologicalpolesofSFdifferinwhatpublicattitudes theyengage:pessimisticSFappealstotheaudiencesanxietiesaboutscience, optimistictoitsaudienceshopesforscience.Buttheystillshareadeepstructure thatunitesinsomewayscientificnecessityandimaginativefreedom. ****

II
GiventheparadoxthatliesattheheartofSFandtheimportanceofthe freedomrepresentedbyfiction,itmayseeminconsistentthatthegenre,which onemightexpecttoexplorethepossibilitiesoffictionalstylesandforms,has traditionallyconformedcloselytoaclearandpowerfulsetofstylisticand narrativeconventions.ToacertainextenttheconventionalityofmuchSFcanbe

attributedtothenarrowviewsoftheeditorsofthepulpmagazinesthat dominatedthefieldinitsearlyyearsofpopularity.JohnW.Campbell,thevery influentialeditorofAstounding,advisedwritersthattheendingofastorymust solvetheproblemsdirectlyraisedinthestoryanddoitsuccinctly.Quickand sharp. 1Nowonder,givensuchanarrowconceptionoffictionalform,thatpunch linestoriesaboundintheSFoftheGoldenAge.Butsincemanyaddictsseemto getmorepleasurefromconventionalworkthanfromexperimentalwork,wemay suspectthat,farfrombeinganobstructiontotheaddictsenjoyment,the conventionsthatgrowoutofsuchdogmasasCampbellsactuallyaddtothe appealoftheform. Wemustdistinguishtheinherentconsequencesoftheformfromthe conventions.Theformerdevelopnaturallyfromtheimportanceofsciencetothe genreandentailanemphasisonideaandadeemphasisoncharacter.The conventions,however,arepurelyliterary;theyderivefromtheexperienceof worksofSFratherthanfromanyintrinsicqualityofscienceoroffiction.Onthe mostobviouslevel,theconventionsconsistofagroupofplotsandsituationsthat arefrequentlyrepeated,andonecaneasilyunderstandwhymostofthemare popular.Moreimportantforourpurposesaretheconventionsthattheformhas takenonfornoapparentreason,thegratuitousinsigniathatmarkastoryas hardcoreSFandtowhichanaddictimmediatelyresponds.Themostpowerfulof thesearbitraryandselfchosenconventionsarealimitedandstereotypedcastof charactersandalimitedsetoflanguages. Conventionsofferthesecurityoftherecognizableandtherebycushionthe impactofanynewidea,ofanythingunknown.Theaddict,therefore,usually experiencesanewideagraduallyratherthansuddenly;hebeginsastoryby settlingintotheknownworldofSFandthendiscoveringwhatisnewhere.The nonaddictdoesntexperiencethisgradual,attimesquitesubtle,developmentof thenewidea;forhimtheveryconventionsareunknown,andhemaygetthe impressionthatSFismoredaringthanitactuallyis.Ontheotherhand,the mechanicalwaytheconventionsareofteninvokedwillprobablyoffendthe newcomermorethantheaddict,forthenewcomerwillseeonlythe awkwardnessandnotexperiencetheconsolationsthatcompensatetheaddict.
1

TheScienceofScienceFictionWriting,inOfWorldsBeyond,ed.LloydArthurEshbach(Chicago:Advent,1947), p.100.

Oncethefieldofconventionisstrongenough,theskillfulwritercancreate thefeelingoftheunknownsimplybybreakingtheconvention.Thepowerfulaura ofmysteryattheendofClarkesChildhoodsEndowesmuchtothesolid conventionalityofthefirsthalfofthenovel.Theaddictssenseofconfusionand newunderstandinginthelastpartsofthenoveliscausedinlargepartbythe collapseoftheconventionsoriginallyinvokedandthediscoveryofanewset. WhetherornotoneactuallyconceivesanythingnewinChildhoodsEnd,onegets asenseofwhatitisliketocomprehendarealityandamindbeyondtherangeof normalhumanperceptionandthought. SFthatreliesstronglyonconventionsmayjustlybetermedconservative, fortheconventions,whatevertheirvirtues,imposelimitationsonthe imagination.Theydefinetheareasinwhichtheunknowncanappearanddelimit therestructuringofrealitythatcantakeplace.ThosewhoattackSFoftenseizeon thisaspecttojustifytheirscorn,buttheaddictisnotbeingsimplyunimaginative whenheengagesinthisconventionboundactivity.Infact,insofarastheaddict takespleasureinexploringtheunknowninthecontextoftheknown,thatis withintheframedefinedbytheconventions,heisrecapitulatinginsignificant waystheactivityofnormalscientists.Scienceitself,intheformulationofThomas S.Kuhn, 1isatraditionboundactivity;thenormalscientistdoesnotdiscovernew realmsofknowledge;hesolvespuzzlesthataredefinedbytheparadigmthat thereigningtheoriespostulate.Insolvingsuchapuzzleascientistmakesa previouslyunaccountedforeventconformtothedominanttheory.Ascientific revolutioninvolvesconstructinganewparadigm;ittakesplaceonlywhenthe oldparadigmprovesitselfincapableofexplainingtheobservationsitengenders. Likethescientistwhoworkswithinaparadigmanddependsonitforhis questionsandhisgoals,theSFaddicthasaparadigmwhichconsistsofthe conventionsoftheform,andheknowshowtodiscoverpleasureinthepuzzles thattheconventionsallow.Likeagoodparadigm,astrongconventiontellsthe readerwheretolook,howtolook,andwhattolookfor,and,asinthesituationof thenormalscientist,therewardsarenotnewstructuresbywhichtoorganize experienceorunderstanding,butareinforcementoftheparadigmorofthe conventions.TheSFaddictisapuzzlesolverjustasthenormalscientistis;like thatscientist,theaddictdoesnotreallydiscovernewframeworks;heexhibitsand enjoyshismasteryoverwhathealreadyknows.
1

TheStructureofScientificRevolutions,2nded.,enlarged(Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1970).

Normalsciencecan,ofcourse,becomestultifying;similarly,inSFthe conventionscaneasilybecomesimplyandonlyalimitationthatinsuresthatno trulyimaginativeorcreativeactwilloccur.NotallconventionalSFisso complacent,however.Whenitisstimulatedbyconstantcontactwithnewideas, theconventionalbecomesanexpandingcontextthatdevelopswitheachnew workintheformandwhichgraduallygrowsintoincreasinglyaccurateandsubtle modesofdepictingrealities.But,evenatitsmostlively,theconventionalways defineslimitswhichSFcannotcompletelyabandonwithoutlosingmuchofthe realpleasureandattractionithasfortheaddict.TheconventionsanchorSF,give itaformofbelievability,thoughthedependableaspectthattheSFaddict recognizesandtrustsisnotasemblancetoaknownphysicalrealityasinordinary fiction,butasetofpurelyliterarymannerisms.Theconventionsstampaworkas SFandtherebyassuretheaddictthathishabitwillbesatisfied.Andlikethe tensionsintheconceptofsciencefictionitself,theplayofliteraryconvention againstscientificingenuitygeneratesaparadoxwhosepressurestheaddictfinds pleasurable. ****

III
TheconservatismofSF,whichwehavelikenedtothatofnormalscience,is easilyconfusedwithpoliticalconservatism,aconnectionencouragedbythe politicsofsomeofthemainwritersofSF.InanessayinRampartsonthepolitics ofSF,RichardLupoffsuggestsasageneralrulethatthosewriterswhoare optimisticaboutthepossibilitiesofsciencetendtoberightwingandthatthose pessimisticaboutsciencespossibilitiestendtobeleftwing.Again,thestrong influenceofJohnW.Campbell,optimisticaboutscienceandpolitically conservative,maybepartlyresponsible.ButLupoffderivesthedichotomyfrom somethingmoreessential,somethinginherentinamodeofthought.Whatever elsedividesthesetraditionalists,heargues,theyareunitedbytheirengineering mentalityanditspreferenceforviolent,repressivesolutionstothepolitical problemsposedinitsnovels.Thesepeopleseemconvincedthattheapplication oftherightmaterialsandtherightforceswillsolveanyproblem.Itisobviousin theirfiction.Thissameengineeringmentality,Lupoffclaims,leadstofiction thatbyvirtueofitsdedicationtocontrol,topredictability,tothefinite,closed

endsolutionisunabletocopewithhumans,onlywithmachines. 1Theword engineerdoesalotofhardworkhere,notallofitrespectable.Also,though LupoffstheoryisclearlyaccurateifappliedtoaselectgroupofSFwriters,and thoughhiscriticismofthesewritersiswelltaken,thegeneralizationdoesnot standup.Tousehisowntestofpoliticalposition(theattitudeexpressedtowards theVietnamwarinadsinIfmagazinein1967)anumberofwritersclearly belongingtotheoptimistic,engineeringmentalityturnouttobeleftwing.The optimismaboutscienceandthepoliticalconservatismofmuchSFdonotseemto befunctionallyrelated. Thereis,however,anelementofconservatism,notpolitical,whichis inescapableforthoseSFwriterswhomakeanyclaimtodealinwhattheywould callaresponsiblewaywiththefutureandwhichintrudesevenintheirmost grandioseandfarfetchedvisions.Whethertheaimistoexplorefictional possibilitiesoractuallytoprophesy,extrapolationisinherentlyaconservative imaginativeact.Ifweinthepresentaregoingtothinkaboutthefutureinany scientificway,wehavetoreasonfromtheexperienceofthepast.Forthefuture tobeknowabletheremustbesomepatternofcontinuity,someuniversal process,whetherofchangeorofstagnation,whichwehavealreadyperceived andwhichallowsustoextrapolatetowhatwillbe.Thisprocessoflookingahead, asthewritersthemselvesinsist,isnotvisionary;itsscientificbasis,however, doomsittobeconservative,forinonewayoranotheritmustenforcesome patternfromthepastonthefuture. Nomatterhowscientifictheirbasis,allvisionsofthefuturethatforesee futurediscoveriesarefictions.2Thus,again,inSFsclaimtotreatthefuture scientificallywemeettheparadoxicalconjunctionofscienceandfiction,of determinismandfreedom,whichisanimportantsourceofpleasureandinterest fortheSFaddict.Theparadoxattheheartofextrapolationisevidentina statementofIsaacAsimovsdefendingtheprocess:itislegitimatetoextrapolate fromthepastbecausesometimessuchextrapolationsarefairlyclosetowhat happens. 3Ontheonehand,inclaimingthatextrapolationislegitimate, Asimovimpliesarigorousandknowablerelationbetweenpastandfuture,while
1 2

ScienceFictionHawksandDoves:WhoseFutureWillYouBuy?Ramparts,(February1972),p.27. SeeKarlR.Popper,ThePovertyofHistoricism,3rded.(1961:rpt.NewYork:HarperTorchbook,1964),p.viict passim. 3 SocialScienceFiction,inModemScienceFiction,ed.ReginaldBretnor(NewYork:CowardMcCann,1953),p. 183.

ontheotherhand,inthequalificationssometimesandfairlyclose,hebetraysthe actualflimsinessofthelogicalnecessitylinkingthem.Thoughhisstatementreally allowsforanykindoffantasy,itinvokestheconservativemethodofreasoning fromthepasttosanctiontheimaginativeact. Onemayreasonablyaskwhetheritispossibletoimagineordescribeany futurethatisnotinsomewaybasedonthepast;thewildestfantasy,afterall,ifit istobecomprehensible,mustatsomepointanchoritselfintheknown.But popularSF,ratherthanpushingtowardstheboundsofthetrulyunexplored, tendstobemoreimaginativelyconservativethanevenitsscientificmethod requires.InthisrespectwritersaspoliticallydifferentasRayBradburyandRobert Heinleinshareasimilarconservatisminthattheybothlooktothefamiliarpast fortheirexoticfutures.InTheMartianChroniclesBradburyfrequentlydescribes thefutureonMarsintermsofthemidwestinthe1920s.InTheRoadsMust RollHeinleinmodelshistransportworkersontheU.S.Marines.Andjustas institutionsandimagesfromtheactualpastshapetheSFwritersvisionsofthe future,theoverwhelmingconventionalityofthisformofliteraturemakesit almostinevitablethatstyles,images,andfiguresfrompastliteraturewillalso dominatethefuturesdescribed.Thus,thepresenceofkingsanddukesinSF novelsislessasignofafeudalpoliticalinclinationinherentintheengineering mentalitythananinstanceoftheinevitablepersistenceoftraditionalliterary formsandfiguresinSF.Thisconservativeprospect,inwhichthefutureisa superficialtransformationofafamiliarpastanddescribedinfamiliarterms, characterizesalmostallpopularSF.IfSFgivestheimpressionoffacingthe unknownfuturewithdaringandforesight,itisseldombecauseitreallyimagines anewfutureinanyradicalway,orbecauseitforecastschangewithanycertainty orprecision,butbecause,byrelyingontraditionalliteraryconventionsandforms, andbyrepeatinghistoricalandpsychologicalpatternsfromthepast,itmanages todomesticatethefuture,torenderithabitableand,inspiteofasomewhat strangesurface,basicallyfamiliar. Thatitdoesnothelpusunderstandandcopewiththefutureinthewaysits apologistsclaimdoesnotmeanthatthegenrefails,however.Likeotherformsof literature,SFtreatsthepresent,notthefuture.Itdiffersfromotherformsinthat itengagesscience,notasatangentialaspectofhumanaffairs,butasacentral phenomenon,andasagenreitestablishesacontextwithinwhichtheaddictcan experiencetheliberatingparadoxoffreedomandnecessitythatsciencepresents.

Atthedeepestlevel,therefore,theaddictdrawshisimportantsatisfactionfrom hisknowledgeofthegenreitself;hetrustsit,andheappreciatesindividualworks, notsomuchfortheiringenuity,originality,orforesight,butforthewaythey recognizablyreinforcehissenseofthegenre.Forthispleasurehecanoverlook manyliteraryfaults.ThatiswhySFcanbeverypopularandimportantandyet havefew,ifany,worksthatareacknowledgedasclassicsbyanyoneoutsideof thecircleofaddictsitself. <<Contents>> ****

NotesontheEditorandContributors
MarkRose,theeditorofthisvolume,isProfessorofEnglishattheUniversityof Illinois,UrbanaChampaign.Heistheauthorofanovel,GoldingsTale,aswellas scholarlystudiesofRenaissanceliterature:HeroicLove,ShakespeareanDesign, andSpensersArt.HeisalsoeditorofTwentiethCenturyInterpretationsofAntony andCleopatra. KingsleyAmis,theEnglishnovelist,istheauthoroiLuckyJim,TakeaGirlLikeYou, OneFatEnglishman,TheGreenMan,andmanyotherbooks.Togetherwith RobertConquestheeditsanannualanthologyofsciencefiction. RobertConquest,whospentmanyyearsintheBritishForeignService,writes principallyoncontemporaryRussianhistoryandpolitics.Healsopublishespoetry, fiction,andliterarycriticism. MichaelHolquisthaspublishedessaysonLewisCarrollsnonsenseandthe metaphysicaldetectivestoryaswellasontopicsinRussianliterature.Currently writingabookonDostoevski,heischairmanoftheSlavicLiteratureDepartment, UniversityofTexas,Austin. JohnHuntingtonhastaughtcoursesinsciencefictionatRutgersUniversityand theUniversityofRhodeIslandandhaspublishedessaysonsciencefictionandon Renaissancepoetry.HeispresentlyworkingonastudyofH.G.Wells. DavidKettererisAssociateProfessorofEnglish,ConcordiaUniversity,Montreal. HewritesonAmericanliteratureandonsciencefiction. StanislawLem,aPolishwriterwhowasoriginallytrainedinmedicine,has publishedbooksonthehistoryandphilosophyofscienceaswellasliterary criticismandsuchsciencefictionasSolaris,TheInvincible,andTheCyberiad.Most ofhisworkhasnotyetbeentranslatedintoEnglish. C.S.Lewis,whodiedin1963,wasProfessorofMedievalandRenaissanceEnglish atCambridgeUniversity.HisscholarlyworksincludeTheAllegoryofLoveandthe

volumeonnondramaticliteratureofthesixteenthcenturyintheOxfordHistory ofEnglishLiterature.Healsowrotechildrensbooks,religioustreatises,andthree sciencefictionnovels:OutoftheSilentPlanet,Perelandra,andThatHideous Strength. EricRabkinisAssociateProfessorofEnglishattheUniversityofMichigan,where heteachescoursesonfantasyandonsciencefiction.HeistheauthorofNarrative Suspenseandiscurrentlywritingabookonsciencefictionincollaborationwith RobertScholes. RobertScholes,ProfessorofEnglishandComparativeLiterature,Brown University,iswidelyknownforsuchbooksasTheNatureofNarrative(written togetherwithRobertKellogg),TheTabulators,andStructuralisminLiterature. SusanSontagisbestknownasacriticforAgainstInterpretation,butsheisalsoa novelist,afilmmaker,andacontributortosuchperiodicalsasPartisanReview andCommentary. DarkoSuvin,AssociateProfessorofEnglish,McGillUniversity,wasbornand educatedatZagreb,Yugoslavia.Hehaslecturedandpublishedwidelyondrama aswellasonsciencefictionandiscoeditorofScienceFictionStudies. <<Contents>> ****

SelectedBibliography
BrianW.Aldiss.BillionYearSpree:TheTrueHistoryofScienceFiction.GardenCity, N.Y.:Doubleday,1973.Thebesthistoryofthegenretodate. KingsleyAmis.NewMapsofHell:ASurveyofScienceFiction.NewYork:Harcourt, Brace,andWorld,1960.Classicintroductorydiscussion. WilliamAtheling,Jr.(JamesBlish).TheIssueatHand.Chicago:Advent,1964. Essaysbyoneofthebestsciencefictionwritercritics. .MoreIssuesatHand.Chicago:Advent,1972. J.O.Bailey.PilgrimsThroughSpaceandTime:TrendsandPatternsinScientific andUtopianFiction.NewYork:ArgusBooks,1947.Pioneeringsurveyof earlysciencefiction. BernardBergonzi.TheEarlyH.G.Wells:AStudyoftheScientificRomances. Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress,1961.ClassicstudyofWellss sciencefiction. ReginaldBretnor,ed.ModernScienceFiction:ItsMeaningandItsFuture.New York:CowardMcCann,1953.Essaysbysciencefictionwritersandeditors. .ScienceFiction,TodayandTomorrow.NewYork:HarperandRow,1974. Essaysbysciencefictionwritersandeditors. ThomasD.Clareson,ed.SF:TheOtherSideofRealism.BowlingGreen,Ohio: BowlingGreenUniversityPopularPress,1971.Goodcollectionofcritical essays. .ScienceFictionCriticism:AnAnnotatedChecklist.Kent,Ohio:KentState UniversityPress,1972.Invaluable. I.F.Clarke.VoicesProphesyingWar,17631984.NewYork:OxfordUniversity Press,1966.Thefuturewartheme. RobertC.Elliott.TheShapeofUtopia:StudiesinaLiteraryGenre.Chicago: UniversityofChicagoPress,1970. H.BruceFranklin.FuturePerfect:AmericanScienceFictionoftheNineteenth Century.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1966.Anthologyoffictionwith importantintroductorymaterial. JamesGunn.AlternateWorlds:TheIllustratedHistoryofScienceFiction. EnglewoodCliffs,N.J.:PrenticeHall,Inc.,1975.ComplementsAldisss history. MarkR.Hillegas.TheFutureasNightmare:H.G.WellsandtheAntiUtopians.

NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,1967.Thedystopiantradition. DavidKetterer.NewWorldsforOld:TheApocalypticImagination,ScienceFiction, andAmericanLiterature.Bloomington:IndianaUniversityPress,1974. Importantstudy. DamonKnight.InSearchofWonder.Chicago:Advent,1967.Essaysbyoneofthe bestsciencerfictionwritercritics. StanislawLem.Fantastykaifuturologia.Cracow,Poland:Wydawnictwo Literackie,1970.Sciencefictionandfuturology. SamMoskowitz.ExplorersoftheInfinite:ShapersofScienceFiction.Cleveland: World,1963.Biographicalstudies. .SeekersofTomorrow:MastersofModernScienceFiction.Cleveland,1966. Biographicalstudies. MarjorieHopeNicolson.VoyagestotheMoon.NewYork:Macmillan,1948.The earlymoonvoyagestories. RobertM.Philmus.IntotheUnknown:TheEvolutionofScienceFictionfrom FrancisGodwintoH.G.Wells.Berkeley:UniversityofCaliforniaPress,1970. RobertScholes.StructuralFabulation:AnEssayonFictionoftheFuture.Notre Dame:UniversityofNotreDamePress,1975.Provocativeintroductory discussions. Therearetwooutstandingjournalsdevotedtocriticaldiscussionofscience fiction:Extrapolation,thejournaloftheModernLanguageAssociationSeminaron ScienceFiction,editedbyThomasD.Clareson,andScienceFictionStudies,edited byR.D.MullenandDarkoSuvin. <<Contents>>