A History of the Future Prophets of

Progress from H G Wells to Isaac

Asimov Peter J. Bowler
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/a-history-of-the-future-prophets-of-progress-from-h-g-
wells-to-isaac-asimov-peter-j-bowler/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

A History Of The Future Prophets Of Progress From H G

Wells To Isaac Asimov Peter J. Bowler

https://textbookfull.com/product/a-history-of-the-future-
prophets-of-progress-from-h-g-wells-to-isaac-asimov-peter-j-
bowler-2/

H G Wells: A Literary Life Adam Roberts

https://textbookfull.com/product/h-g-wells-a-literary-life-adam-
roberts/

Foundation and Earth 19th Edition Asimov Isaac

https://textbookfull.com/product/foundation-and-earth-19th-
edition-asimov-isaac/

Educational Measurement From Foundations to Future 1st

Edition Craig S. Wells Phd

https://textbookfull.com/product/educational-measurement-from-
foundations-to-future-1st-edition-craig-s-wells-phd/
The Age of Wind Energy Progress and Future Directions
from a Global Perspective Ali Sayigh

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-age-of-wind-energy-progress-
and-future-directions-from-a-global-perspective-ali-sayigh/

Sons of Cain A History of Serial Killers from the Stone

Age to the Present 1st Edition Peter Vronsky

https://textbookfull.com/product/sons-of-cain-a-history-of-
serial-killers-from-the-stone-age-to-the-present-1st-edition-
peter-vronsky/

Automation and Collaborative Robotics: A Guide to the

Future of Work Peter Matthews

https://textbookfull.com/product/automation-and-collaborative-
robotics-a-guide-to-the-future-of-work-peter-matthews/

Utopias and Dystopias in the Fiction of H. G. Wells and

William Morris: Landscape and Space 1st Edition Emelyne
Godfrey (Eds.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/utopias-and-dystopias-in-the-
fiction-of-h-g-wells-and-william-morris-landscape-and-space-1st-
edition-emelyne-godfrey-eds/

The History of Economic Thought A Reader Second Edition

Steven G Medema Warren J Samuels

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-history-of-economic-thought-
a-reader-second-edition-steven-g-medema-warren-j-samuels/
A HISTORY OF THE FUTURE

Prophets of Progress from H. G. Wells to Isaac Asimov

In this wide-ranging survey, Peter J. Bowler explores the phenomenon of
futurology: predictions about the future development and impact of science and
technology on society and culture in the twentieth century. Utilizing science
fiction, popular science literature and the novels of the literary elite, Bowler
highlights contested responses to the potential for revolutionary social change
brought about by real and imagined scientific innovations. Charting the effect of
social and military developments on attitudes toward innovation in Europe and
America, Bowler shows how conflict between the enthusiasm of technocrats and
the pessimism of their critics was presented to the public in books, magazines
and exhibitions, and on the radio and television. A series of case studies reveals
the impact of technologies such as radio, aviation, space exploration and
genetics, exploring rivalries between innovators and the often unexpected
outcome of their efforts to produce mechanisms and machines that could change
the world.

PETER J. BOWLER is Emeritus Professor of the History of Science at

Queen’s University Belfast. He is a Fellow of the British Academy, a Member of
the Royal Irish Academy, and a Fellow of the American Association for the
Advancement of Science. He has published a number of books on the history of
biology and several general surveys.
A HISTORY OF THE FUTURE
Prophets of Progress from H. G. Wells
to Isaac Asimov
Peter J. Bowler
Queen’s University Belfast
 University Printing House, Cambridge CB2 8BS, United Kingdom

One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10006, USA

477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia

4843/24, 2nd Floor, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, Delhi – 110002, India

79 Anson Road, #06–04/06, Singapore 079906

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education,

learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

www.cambridge.org

Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107148734

DOI: 10.1017/9781316563045

© Peter J. Bowler 2017

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant
collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written
permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 2017

Printed in the United Kingdom by TJ International Ltd. Padstow Cornwall

A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Bowler, Peter J., author.

Title: A history of the future : prophets of progress from H.G. Wells to Isaac Asimov / Peter J.
Bowler, Queen’s University Belfast.
 Description: Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2017.

Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2017024135| ISBN 9781107148734 | ISBN 9781316602621 (pbk)

Subjects: LCSH: Forecasting. | Science fiction – History and criticism.

Classification: LCC CB158 .B69 2017 | DDC 303.49–dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017024135

ISBN 978-1-107-14873-4 Hardback

ISBN 978-1-316-60262-1 Paperback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external
or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content
on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
 Contents
List of Plates
List of Figures
Preface

1. Introduction: Progress or Threat?

2. The Prophets: Their Backgrounds and Ambitions

3. How We’ll Live

4. Where We’ll Live

5. Communicating and Computing

6. Getting Around

7. Taking to the Air

8. Journey into Space

9. War

10. Energy and Environment

11. Human Nature

12. Epilogue: Plus ça change?

Notes
Bibliography
Index
 Plates

1. Poster advertising Alexander Korda’s 1936 film of H. G. Wells’s Things to

Come. Alamy images.

2. Poster advertising the New York World’s Fair of 1939. Alamy images.

3. Futuristic commuter train imagined in an advertisement for the Bohn

Aluminum and Brass Corporation in the 1930s. From D. A. Hanks, American
Streamlined Design (2005), p. 227. Reproduced by kind permission of the
Syndics of Cambridge University Library (S950.a.200.1646).

4. Projected unmanned Mars probe. Frontispiece to Arthur C. Clarke’s The

Exploration of Space (1951). Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of
Cambridge University Library (424.c.95.54).

5. Imaginary transatlantic rocket, from the front cover of Hugo Gernsback’s

magazine Science and Mechanics, November 1931. Getty Images. Note the
similarity to the science-fiction rocket images of the period.

6. Imaginary airport on the roof of a skyscraper, from the front cover of

Meccano Magazine, May 1932. Author’s collection.

7. 1930s poster advertising the airline KLM. Alamy images. The Flying
Dutchman of legend becomes a reality thanks to the progress of technology.

8. Poster advertising transatlantic flights by the airship Hindenburg, 1936.

Alamy images.

9. Image representing Sir Ronald Ross (discoverer of the malaria parasite)

inviting Europeans to colonize the tropics. From Arthur Mee, ed., Harmsworth
Popular Science (1911), vol. 1, facing p. 233. Author’s collection.
 Figures

1.1 The Futurama exhibition at the 1939 New York World’s Fair. Spectators
view a futuristic cityscape from moving chairs. From Wohl, Spectacle of Flight
(25), p. 297. Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge
University Library (S95.b.2.303)

2.1 H. G. Wells, his son G. P. Wells and Julian Huxley discuss the production of
their popular work The Science of Life (1929). From Julian Huxley, Memories
(1970), pp. 126–7. Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge
University Library (382:2.c.95.22)

3.1 Cartoons showing the pros and cons of the all-electric household. The
convenience of the breakfast table is offset by the alarm clock that strips the
bedclothes off if you don’t get up. From A. M. Low, ‘Women must Invent’,
Armchair Science, March 1932, pp. 674–6. Reproduced by kind permission of
the Syndics of Cambridge University Library (L340:1.b.1)

4.1 Buckminster Fuller’s Dymaxion house, 1933. Getty Images

4.2 London as it might appear in A.D. 2536. Frontispiece to J. P. Lockhart-

Mummery, After Us (1936). Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of
Cambridge University Library (200.c.93.79)

5.1 Artist’s depiction of Nikola Tesla’s radio tower at Wardenclyffe, NY, from
which messages and power would be broadcast. Alamy images

5.2 Arthur C. Clarke’s proposal for communication satellites in geosynchronous

orbits. Rear endpapers of Arthur C. Clarke’s The Exploration of Space (1951).
Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library
(424.c.95.54)

6.1 Buckminster Fuller’s Dymaxion car, 1933. From D. Bush, The Streamlined
Decade (1970), p. 106. Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of
Cambridge University Library (407:8.b.95.6)

6.2 The Brennan gyroscopic monorail crossing the English Channel. Note also
the airships. From H. G. Wells’s The War in the Air (1908), facing p. 14.
Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library
(Keynes.X.3.16)

7.1 Proposed system of searchlight beacons to allow night flying between Paris
and London, from A. Christofleau, Les dernières nouveautés de la science et de
l’industrie (1925) p. 5. Author’s collection.

7.2 Norman Bel Geddes’s design for a giant flying boat. From D. Bush, The
Streamlined Decade (1970), p. 27. Reproduced by kind permission of the
Syndics of Cambridge University Library (407:8.b.95.6)

8.1 Anticipation of what an airport would look like in 1985, as depicted at a

symposium organized by Trans-World Airlines in 1955. Getty images. The
‘aircraft’ are clearly rockets similar to those envisioned in science fiction.

8.2 Space adventure in a 1920’s boys’ comic. Front page of Boys’ Magazine, 24
July 1926. Author’s collection.

8.3 Spaceships refuelling at a space station. From Arthur C. Clarke, The

Exploration of Space (1951), facing p. 5. Reproduced by kind permission of the
Syndics of Cambridge University Library (424.c.95.54)

9.1 Airships attacking battleships in the Atlantic. Frontispiece to H. G. Wells,

The War in the Air (1908). Reproduced by kind permission of the Syndics of
Cambridge University Library (Keynes.X.3.16)

10.1 Experimental solar power plant constructed in Egypt in 1913. From Harry
Golding, ed., The Wonder Book of Engineering Wonders (no date, c. 1920), p.
230. Author’s collection.

11.1 Graph showing declining death rates in infants, from Edward Alsworth
Ross, Standing Room Only (1927), p. 90. Author’s collection. The downward
trend is clearly indicated (despite the spike caused by the influenza pandemic of
1918), but Ross worried about the population problem that would result if the
same medical benefits were extended to the developing world.

11.2 Poster advertising Serge Voronoff’s book on rejuvenation. Chicago Tribune

archives.
 Preface
I have occasionally been asked why – having built my career researching the
history of Darwinism – I have ended up writing a book about futurology. There
are several mutually compatible explanations for the transition. One is that
anyone interested in the origins of evolutionism knows that the theory was at
first strongly linked to the idea of progress, and predicting the future progress of
science is an obvious extension of that link. Another explanation emerges from
the fact that I have steadily moved away from Darwinism by a series of steps,
each of which seemed to make sense at the time. Studying the early evolution
debates involved me with the whole question of science and religion, and I
became increasingly frustrated by the fact that – for Britain at least – historians
seemed to lose interest in that relationship at the point when the Victorian era
came to an end. A study of the relationship between science and religion in early
twentieth-century Britain led toward another area, that of popular science
writing, again sadly neglected after the Victorian period. (I should add that
neither of these lacunae are present for the situation in the United States.) This
book emerges in part from my work on the British popular science literature of
the early twentieth century, where I began to notice that predicting future
developments seemed to become increasingly prevalent. Having always had an
amateur interest in science fiction, it seemed natural for me to link the two areas
of prediction and look for generalizations. The fact that both Wells and Asimov
wrote popular science as well as science fiction illustrates the kind of synergy
that interests me.
 I have confined myself to the first two-thirds of the twentieth century partly
because that seems to represent a reasonably coherent period for this topic (and
also because I feel uncomfortable treating events I can remember as past
history). As far as I know, there is no other book that seeks to survey predictions
of the future on as broad a scale as that attempted here. We have many studies of
science fiction and of the predictive novels written by literary figures such as
Aldous Huxley. There are also many surveys of futurological speculation about
particular areas of technical development and their implications. The use of such
studies to throw light on cultural history is especially strong for America and a
few other areas such as the Soviet Union. These studies make extensive use of
popular science literature as well as science fiction and I have mined them
shamelessly for information in what follows. One country for which the popular
science literature does not seem to have been exploited is Britain, and here I
have made use of my own detailed research. Since I read French, I have also
made brief forays into the popular science literature in that language. I am
acutely aware that even so, this is very much a survey based on the English-
language literature, both primary and secondary. My only excuse is that at the
age of 72 I don’t feel up to trying to extend myself further.
I hope that this book will be of interest to a wide range of readers and I
have been given to understand that it might prove useful as a text for a number
of university-level courses. This has created something of a problem when it
comes to providing documentation for the information and assertions contained
in the text. Academic readers and students need references to the material from
which evidence is derived, but ordinary readers may be put off by too obvious a
display of erudition. The situation is compounded by the fact that in some areas I
can appeal to reliable secondary sources to back up what I say, whereas for the
British and French literature I need to provide detailed references to books,
magazines and newspapers which have remained little researched up until now.
Many of my references thus consist of an uncomfortable mix of secondary and
primary sources, and of both academic and popular literature. To avoid littering
the text with superscripts, I have in general provided all the documentation for
each paragraph in a single note, and I apologize if these are sometimes rather
complex. The bibliography is huge, reflecting both the breadth of the primary
sources that bear on this topic and the richness of the secondary literature
available in some areas. To keep the bibliography from getting really out of
hand, references to newspaper and popular magazine articles are given only in
the notes.
I’d like to end by recording the encouragement of several colleagues,
including Amanda Rees, James Secord, Simon Schaffer and Charlotte Sleigh and
the help of the editors at Cambridge University Press, Lucy Rhymer and Melissa
Shivers.
 1
Introduction
◈

Progress or Threat?
After visiting the New York World’s Fair in 1964, Isaac Asimov – already a
well-known science fiction author – wrote a prediction for the New York Times
of what he thought would be displayed at a similar exposition in fifty years’
time.1 When the new year of 2014 was ushered in, there was a flurry of media
attention focused on the accuracy (or otherwise) of Asimov’s vision. We seem to
be fascinated by predictions of the future and also by a retrospective evaluation
of earlier generations’ efforts. It’s almost as though we relish a demonstration of
just how wrong earlier thinkers were about what we ourselves are actually
experiencing. A popular book published in 2012 collected a host of articles and
images from early volumes of Popular Mechanics under the title The Wonderful
Future that Never Was.2 Asimov actually did pretty well, although like many at
the time he predicted a rosy future for nuclear power. More seriously, he
combined optimistic forecasts about the future development of technology with a
more sober assessment of what life might be like in an overcrowded and
increasingly resource-starved world. Others at the time worried over the
destruction of civilization or even of humanity itself by a nuclear holocaust. A
companion volume to the Popular Mechanics survey highlighted predictions
about new weapons that might be developed, showing that the optimistic and
pessimistic visions of a technologically-rich future have always run side by
side.3
Asimov was not just a famous writer of science fiction; he was also a
prolific contributor to the genre of popular science writing. In this dual role, he
paralleled the efforts of an even earlier pioneer, H. G. Wells, who predicted the
future in novels such as The War in the Air and The Shape of Things to Come,
but also made serious efforts to alert the public to the latest scientific
developments (see colour plate 1). Wells and Asimov were both fascinated by
science and technology, and were convinced that together these enterprises had
the potential to change the world for the better. But they were also concerned
that human nature and the dysfunctional state of modern society might lead to a
disastrous misuse of technology. As science fiction writers, they imagined future
worlds in order to tell stories about how human beings might cope with the
challenges thrown up by new machines. And as popular science writers, they
were happy to engage in an imaginative form of an enterprise which would later
be called futurology.
 Plate 1. Poster advertising Alexander Korda’s 1936 film of H. G. Wells’s
Things to Come.
Alamy images.

The term ‘futurology’ came into use in the 1950s to denote efforts to predict
the future by extrapolating social and economic trends, increasingly via the use
of computers to crunch the figures. The previous generation did the same thing
on an individual basis. Writers like Asimov were trying to predict how society
might evolve, but they were more interested in how social trends might be
created or deflected by new technologies that they saw as plausible given the
state of scientific knowledge at the time. This was a ‘what if?’ approach
necessitated by the fact that one could only guess which of the potentially viable
inventions would actually become successful. I am going to borrow the term
‘futurology’ to describe this project even though it is much more open-ended
than the number-crunching of the global organizations that now worry about
what might happen to us. Like science fiction, this kind of futurology makes an
imaginative leap to pick out which possibilities will be explored, but doesn’t set
a human-interest story in the projected future. I want to argue that there is a close
link between the two projects. The Shape of Things to Come was really this kind
of futurology thinly disguised as fiction (although the subsequent movie version
has a bit more action in it).
Popular interest in these predictions derives from our fascination with their
accuracy or lack of it. We still worry that Aldous Huxley may have all too
perceptively anticipated current trends in the application of biological
technology in his Brave New World. The new technological gadgets foretold by
Asimov and the Popular Science writers arouse admiration or contempt
depending on whether or not we really are using them today. But for the
historian of science or of popular culture, these anticipations of the future are a
valuable resource for understanding the attitudes, beliefs and expectations of a
generation that was getting used to the idea that the future would not merely
repeat the past because science and technology were having irreversible effects
on how we live. At the most basic level, they tell of the hopes for progress and
the fears that it all might go horribly wrong. At a more detailed level, they tell us
just what the technically savvy writers of the time thought might be the most
fruitful lines of development and what they thought the effects would be for the
ordinary person. Any effort to understand the interaction of science and
technology with the emergence of modern social and cultural values must take
these earlier prognostications into account.
Academic interpretations of early twentieth-century attitudes to science
tend to focus on the pessimists. The Shape of Things to Come predicted a war
that would almost destroy civilization, although at this point Wells still thought
that a rationally planned state would emerge when the few remaining scientists
took over and began to rebuild. The later 1930s saw a plethora of novels
anticipating mass destruction through bombing, poison gas and even germ
warfare. Brave New World suggested that if the world ever did become governed
by technicians, it would become a nightmare as they moulded humanity into a
herd of passive consumers. C. S. Lewis also turned to a cross between science
fiction and fantasy in his trilogy parodying Wells’s vision of a scientifically
planned world. Many recent surveys of the period’s efforts to foretell the future
concentrate almost exclusively on the literary intellectuals’ and novelists’ efforts
to convince their readers that technology would destroy them one way or
another. The chapters on the early twentieth century in I. F. Clarke’s Pattern of
Expectation paint a picture of unrelieved gloom derived almost exclusively from
the fiction of the time.4 More recently, Richard Overy’s Morbid Age trawls
though the writings of intellectuals and political thinkers to paint a similar
picture of a period when almost everyone thought that a catastrophe was
imminent.5
In 1940, George Orwell commented on the pessimistic attitude of literary
intellectuals such as Huxley, noting: ‘All of them are temperamentally hostile to
the notion of “progress”; it is felt that progress not only doesn’t happen, but
ought not to happen.’6 Orwell soon became more pessimistic, but at this point he
thought the literary figures of the interwar years were out of touch with what was
really going on. He knew that the scientists, technical experts and designers of
the period were predicting the next steps forward in a much more positive light.
Huxley parodied not only Wells’s plan for a technocratic world state, but also the
predictions of eminent scientists such as J. B. S. Haldane, whose Daedalus of
1924 had offered an even more ambitious vision of how science would transform
human life. When we take into account the numerous magazines such as
Popular Mechanics promoting the technical developments that would make life
easier, we come to appreciate how a focus on the work of literary figures can
bias our view of how ordinary people at the time thought about the future.
Popular science writers often looked to the future with optimism, and for many
readers they were the most trusted guides.
So, was the early twentieth century a morbid age terrified of future wars or
a streamlined era fascinated with speed and convenience? In fact, it was a
complex mixture of both attitudes. In his study of the years preceding the Great
War, Philip Blom notes that many of the cultural, scientific and technical
innovations that galvanized society had their origins then. The title of his book,
The Vertigo Years, encapsulates a growing sense that the world was moving into
an age of rapid and unpredictable change which some found frightening, but
many experienced with exhilaration. Exploring the hopes and fears generated in
France, Roxanne Panchasi writes of a ‘culture of anticipation’.7
It all depends on where you focus your attention. The situation changed
decade by decade, and different social groups experienced the changes in
different ways. National experiences differed too. The post-war experiences of
the European nations were hugely influenced by ideologies, both of the right and
the left, which were enthusiastic for change. Conservative social and political
forces viewed the new developments with suspicion. Nor did the divisions abate
with time. By the late 1930s, Europe was lurching toward war, while
‘streamlined’ America was recovering its confidence after the Great
Depression.8 New tensions subsequently emerged in the era of the Cold War.
 The image historians create depends on the material they study, and
unfortunately most academics specialize in a particular period, nation, class or
literary genre and present an image of the past that generalizes from their chosen
area. We have thus accumulated a mass of secondary literature that presents a
host of conflicting interpretations of early twentieth-century culture. It’s a bit
like the story of the blind men studying an elephant – each feels a different part
of the animal and thinks that his impressions tell him what the whole beast must
be like. We need to recognize that there wasn’t a single coherent Western culture
that responded uniformly to the prospect of scientific and technical progress. The
time is ripe for a more comprehensive overview that will balance the pessimistic
with the optimistic, the technophobe with the technophile, the warmonger with
the industrial designer, the literary intellectual with the inventor. And the first
step must be to gain a better view of just who was involved with predicting and
shaping the future – and who was trying to sell the rival visions to the public.
 Science Fact and Science Fiction
The evidence a historian uses may open a restricted window on what is actually
a very complex situation. Literary scholars will tend to focus on novels and are
most likely to prefer the highbrow literature produced by intellectuals. Students
of popular culture might look to the more everyday novels – a very different
genre, but one still produced mostly by authors with little experience of science
and technical innovation. But if they turn to books and magazines dealing with
popular science, they encounter material written by authors with real experience
of science and engineering. These authors would tend to support the
development of science and technology and would look forward to the next
stages in the progress. Occasionally, a high-profile scientist such as Haldane
would contribute to this literature, attracting newspaper headlines and arousing
the fears of highbrow novelists and intellectuals.
The relationship between popular writing about science and science fiction
can be quite complex and, in some cases, there is little clear distinction between
the two areas. ‘Science fiction’ may be taken to include everything from the pulp
magazines to the occasional ventures of literary intellectuals into the field of
future dystopia. Our concern here is, of course, with efforts to imagine a future
world – stories about invading aliens or colliding comets are not relevant unless
new technologies are predicted to deal with them. But the aims of those who set
stories in imagined future worlds can be quite different. Literary figures and
moralists usually agonized over the potential threats to traditional values, while
pulp science fiction authors worked hand in glove with the enthusiasts who
promoted the latest developments.
 Even those readers who do not enjoy the genre as a whole will be familiar
with the future worlds created by authors such as Aldous Huxley and George
Orwell. They are the subjects of biographies and literary analyses, and their
works are routinely reprinted with scholarly introductions.9 Their visions are
almost all dystopias – nightmare stories set in a dehumanized world, with
technological developments being depicted as the tools of regimes that control
every aspect of life. Fritz Lang’s influential 1926 movie Metropolis depicted the
workers enslaved in the bowels of a futuristic megalopolis. French intellectuals
were also suspicious of the drive toward a mechanized world and frequently
identified America as the source of the trend. Georges Duhamel’s Scènes de la
vie futur of 1931 was translated as America the Menace. A variant on this theme
is E. M. Forster’s story ‘The Machine Stops’ of 1909, in which people have
willingly adopted a life of ease in mechanized cocoons.
The extent of science’s involvement in these stories varies, however. In the
case of Huxley’s Brave New World, it is considerable, but it has been argued that
Orwell’s 1984 is not a dystopia in the same vein because new technology plays
only a limited role in how the state’s control is exercised.10 Orwell’s target was
not the threat of new technology, but the possible emergence of totalitarian
regimes that would misuse whatever was available. It is fair to say that the same
concern was paramount in virtually every dystopia from Owen Gregory’s
Meccania of 1918 through to Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We of 1924 to David Karp’s
One of 1953. But for most of these authors, the power given to the state by new
technology plays a greater role than it does in 1984 and they are thus of direct
relevance when it comes to assessing visions of future developments.
Mainstream contributors to science fiction such as H. G. Wells, Isaac
Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke and Robert Heinlein now attract a good deal of
scholarly attention, although they seldom figure in the realm of literary criticism.
Scholars are recognizing that as a window on popular culture, this literature is a
much better guide than the highbrow novels that achieve iconic status only after
they have been incorporated into the literary canon.11 We also have studies on
the spread of science fiction into the realm of cinema, and a study by
Christopher Frayling notes how the technology imagined in the movies can
actually inspire the scientist and engineers to create it.12 There is also a mass of
information and comment generated by fans, much now available via the
internet.
These authors wrote ‘hard’ science fiction in which the effort to predict
future technologies and their implications was a major inspiration. Their
protagonists may engage in struggles against oppressive states (as in Wells’s
Sleeper Awakes), but they operate in a world which is very much shaped by new
technologies. Asimov defined what he called ‘real science fiction’ as ‘those
stories that deal with scientific ideas and their impact in the future as written by
someone knowledgeable in science’.13 He points to Heinlein’s early stories such
as ‘Solution Unsatisfactory’ of 1941 which imagine worlds transformed by new
technologies (in this case nuclear weapons) and place their heroes in situations
defined by the problems created by the technologies. Heinlein himself preferred
the term ‘speculative fiction’ and later writers such as Brian Aldiss have
protested against the focus on the impact of science and technology. But it is
precisely the kind of story identified by Asimov that resonates with the more
sober futurology that he (and many others) also engaged in.
Along the same lines, Arthur C. Clarke argued that ‘only readers or writers
of science fiction are really competent to discuss the possibilities of the future’.14
What he meant was not that only science fiction can predict effectively, but that
meaningful futurology has to involve an element of imagination. It cannot be
mere extrapolation from existing trends – it has to involve choosing a
conceivable technology and predicting what might happen if and when it is
developed and applied. So even an account of a future world that does not
include a human-interest narrative involves thinking about possibilities, but not
certainties. The authors may get the details wrong when viewed in hindsight, but
they tell us much about what educated people thought was at least plausible at
the time. These stories are anything but utopias, but they recognize that scientific
progress will continue and seek to grapple with the consequences. A partially
dystopian scenario is, in any case, far more useful as a literary device than the
perfect society envisaged by the real technophiles. It would be hard to set an
exciting story in a utopia where everyone was genuinely happy and fulfilled all
of the time.
There is also, of course, the ‘pulp’ science fiction of the popular magazines
that began to appear from the 1920s onwards. These are usually dismissed as
being of poor literary quality, and at the lowest level these stories offer only an
impoverished vision of the future, even when major new technologies are
imagined. Ray guns and spaceships replace six-shooters and stagecoaches, aliens
replace Indians, but the stories often merely rehash the themes that would be
familiar to any reader of popular westerns. There is little effort to develop a
complex human story, but also little effort to think seriously about the effects
that the new technical developments might have on society. Even so, the pulp
fiction helps us to understand what some ordinary readers were prepared to
accept as plausible visions of a future world. Just to imagine the possibility of
space travel was a major imaginative leap until rockets transformed the situation
in World War II. Before that, most would scoff at the prospect, but a sub-culture
was building up which was more aware of the possibilities. By the time authors
such as Asimov and Heinlein entered the field around 1940, the magazines had
matured into a major source of inspiration for a generation of enthusiasts.15
The emergence of popular science fiction magazines reminds us that we
need to take account of ordinary readers’ interests as well as those of the literary
intellectuals. Students of popular culture are well aware that popular science
writing flourished in the Victorian era, but are taking note of important
transformations in the early twentieth century. Books and magazines were
increasingly well illustrated and there was considerable interest among some
sections of the public in well-presented information about the latest
developments. Newspapers, too, trumpeted the achievements of aviation
pioneers and inventors of all sorts. Eventually new media such as film, radio and
later television became active, opening up new avenues for those involved with
science to educate the public and seek to influence its attitudes.16
Magazines such as Popular Mechanics in America and Armchair Science in
Britain were dedicated to the promotion of technical innovations, and by their
very nature stories on such themes invited speculation about future applications
and their impact. The magazines also included occasional ventures into more far-
reaching futurology, the predictions sometimes featuring in their cover
illustrations (see colour plate 5). There was also a constant flow of books
predicting the future of science and technology. Some were written by major
figures in science, such as Haldane’s Daedalus and J. D. Bernal’s The World, the
Flesh and the Devil. There were many similar works by lesser-known figures,
most of whom had at least some technical education or experience. Historians of
science now take popular science seriously as a means of accessing the public’s
attitude toward science, and if the relevant books and magazines were routinely
speculating about the future, they must have played a role in shaping attitudes
along with the fictional accounts.
It would thus be a mistake to draw too sharp a line between science fiction
and the kind of futurology based on extrapolating from the current state of
science. The ‘harder’ kind of science fiction often places its protagonists in a
future world whose technological hardware has been conceived using the same
predictive insights as those used by futurologists. A few novels are almost
hybrids between the two genres, the human-interest narrative playing a very
minor role against the background in which the author tries to imagine a future
society. Wells’s The Shape of Things to Come would certainly fit into this
category, and the narrative element in Olaf Stapledon’s Last and First Men is so
thin that it scarcely classifies as a novel. Some authors wrote in both categories,
including Wells himself, and later figures such as Isaac Asimov and Arthur C.
Clarke.17 ‘Professor’ A. M. Low, science consultant and later editor of Armchair
Science, wrote futurological articles in the magazine, two books on the theme
and also science fiction novels. Futurological texts were occasionally presented
in the form of a fictional account of life in the predicted future.18 The rhetoric of
much futurological literature shows a remarkable similarity to that of science
fiction, suggesting that the general public would regard them as parallel routes to
the imagined future. Even the illustrations – including the magazine covers –
look the same.
 Two Cultures?
There was thus a complex of differing attitudes toward science and technology
among those who sought to influence public opinion through the mass media.
Writers of hard science fiction worked hand-in-hand with popular science writers
to promote the hope of technical progress and explore its social implications.
Literary figures were less interested in the technicalities and more fearful of the
consequences. Wells pointed to the difference between the two outlooks in his
‘Discovery of the Future’ lecture of 1902, contrasting what he called the
legalistic or past-regarding mentality of the majority with the creative or future-
regarding approach of those who looked toward and welcomed the introduction
of new technologies and new social arrangements.19
The polarization Wells was trying to identify looks remarkably like an
anticipation of the ‘two cultures’ model popularized by C. P. Snow in 1959,20 in
which society is divided between the humanities and the sciences. The
humanities have a stranglehold on government which blocks technical research
and development. Snow is now a much-maligned figure, his novels dismissed as
second-rate and his views on the cultural divide criticized as over-simplified and
self-serving. But I have a soft spot for him, not least because he was an old boy
of my own school (alongside my future father-in-law). Historians have shown
that his view of the humanities’ influence was grossly exaggerated – the British
Government had been investing heavily in scientific research for decades in the
hope of creating high-tech weapons systems. But Snow was reflecting a view
already developed by Wells, suggesting that there really was a sense among the
technophiles that they were struggling against an entrenched attitude suspicious
of their aspirations.21
 Snow himself admitted that he simplified his images of the two cultures to
make his point, and that his vision was more appropriate to Britain than to many
other national contexts. But if we generalize the image that Wells and Snow
projected, we get a useful handle on the different perspectives from which
people viewed the prospect of scientific and technical progress. On the one side,
we have those directly involved with scientific and technical work, and on the
other, those who reflect and comment on the human situation and social issues.
This division obviously misses out a huge swathe of the population whose only
concern is making a living or a profit within the existing system – they are the
ones whose opinions might be influenced by writing about science or
technology, either factual or fictional. There are also people active in areas such
as economics and politics who hope to influence things by proposals that may
not involve technical or industrial research.
The literary figures and highbrow intellectuals represented the humanities
side of Snow’s divide and the legalistic side of Wells’s. Their views would be
shared by a wider swathe of popular novelists and often by the journalists who
reported and commented on social and political news. The key point is that these
would be people with little or no education in the sciences and few contacts with
anyone involved with scientific, technical or industrial work. For this reason, the
authors of hard science fiction would have to be excluded from the group. Snow
dismissed the literary intellectuals as natural Luddites who instinctively feared
that the new gadgets produced by technical research would be misused either by
the military or by political demagogues. The negative viewpoint of major literary
works such as Brave New World suggests that there may be something in this
characterization. But so does a whole genre of more popular stories in which
scientists are depicted as lone madmen and future wars rendered horrific by new
weapons.22 Journalists might be equally biased – there were few dedicated
science correspondents until the middle decades of the century and the ordinary
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
gentleman whose estate may be pretty well covered with timber,
already, or long since, arrived at maturity, to make as near an
estimate as he can of its present value, or procure it to be made; and
having calculated the amount which would be exhibited of the gross
sum at compound interest, for any given term of years, then let him
“try back,” and endeavour to ascertain what, according to this mode
of calculation, may have been his individual loss. But when a
gentleman coolly makes up his mind to allow his Timber Trees to go
to decay without ever intending, or wishing, to make any thing of
them, why then, in that case, nothing can be advanced, but to
suggest the means of protracting their existence to the longest
possible period.
It is impossible not to do homage to the feeling which prompts a
gentleman to make so large a sacrifice to taste, as to suffer the
greater part of his Hedge-row and detached Timber to perish by slow
decay; but if it can be proved that he acts upon mistaken views, and
that, by a better system of management, his object might be gained
without the very serious pecuniary loss which, on the other plan, he
must necessarily suffer, it cannot be doubted that such a suggestion
ought to command his instant attention. It will hardly be denied, I
think, by any one who fully understands the subject, that such a
regular succession of Timber Trees in the Fields and Hedge-rows
might be secured by a proper system of management, as would
sustain and perpetuate the beauties of the landscape, while, at the
same time, nearly every tree should be taken in its turn as it arrived
at maturity. It would, of course, require an entire change of system,
or rather of practice, and the change would necessarily involve a
considerable outlay, inasmuch as a constant supervision would be
required from the time of planting, but whatever might be the
expense, it would be amply returned; and whatever might be the
apparent difficulty, it would not be such but that skill and
perseverance would be sure to surmount it.
If then the objection which would be made by the man of taste, to
the felling of Hedge-row and detached Timber, could be effectually
obviated, by providing a regular succession to take the place of such
as might be cut down—for the difference of a few yards in the site
need hardly be taken into the account—one great difficulty, at least,
would be overcome; and instead of wasting, as is done under the
present practice, a quantity of Timber, the aggregate value of which
makes it an object of national importance, the growers might take
down their trees when they arrived at maturity, and thus produce a
constant supply of the best sort for home consumption: and it will not
surely be argued by the most determined advocate for free trade,
that it would be for the interest of the English Gentleman to give a
higher price for Foreign Pine than he would be able to make of
home-grown Oak! No! emphatically No!! When the navy requires it,
by all means let it be so appropriated, and if the demand be sufficient
from that quarter, the relative price will be kept up, but let not English
heart of Oak be reduced in our home market below the value of an
inferior article, with all the costs of transit added to the original price.
This were indeed to show a most extravagant and unaccountable
preference of a crotchet over the obvious dictates of reason, and the
suggestions of prudence. It would indeed be to drop the substance,
and grasp at the shadow.
I trust I may now conclude that I have satisfactorily proved, not
only that the “magnitude of the sacrifice which the present practice
involves is disproportionate to the good resulting,” but that “the
embellishment of a landscape does not necessarily include the
perpetuity of any one race of Trees.” In handling the remaining
proposition, and in endeavouring to prove that the present treatment
of Hedge-row Timber is “a perpetual offence against good taste,” I
shall at the same time, be accumulating evidence in support of the
other two.
It is proper to remark before I proceed any further, that when I
speak of Timber being allowed to stand too long, and of the
consequent heavy loss upon it to the proprietors, I refer to such as
belongs to the Nobility and Gentry, for, although their example has in
this, as well as in every thing else, some effect upon those below
them, it does happen that, in this respect at least, the middle classes
are wiser in their day and generation than their superiors, the Timber
upon small estates being generally taken down at an earlier period
than on large ones. There is indeed among the higher orders—of
course with a few exceptions—a prejudice against felling Timber,
older than the oldest Timber Tree in existence; and as strong as the
most enthusiastic admirer of the beauties of landscape scenery can
desire it to be: and so far is this feeling carried, that, by many, Timber
of the most unsightly character, and in situations where it can be
associated with no idea connected with the scenery, is religiously
spared, and spared long after it has ceased to be either useful or
ornamental where it stands.
Having ventured thus strongly to point out the loss to proprietors, I
will now show, by an example, how the community is affected by the
disinclination to fell one particular kind of timber; viz., the Ash. This
tree is hardly ever cut down before it becomes exceedingly tender;
and as almost every agricultural implement is either wholly, or partly
composed of it, the consumers—those who wear out the wagons
and carts, the ploughs and harrows—are proportionate sufferers; for
it cannot for a moment be supposed, that timber which is in the last
stage of decay, or indeed, approaching to that stage, will wear half
so long as that which is cut down as soon as it has arrived at full
maturity. The period when it has done so, will be indicated to a
practiced eye, at a single glance, even with that class of trees which
has had fair play; or in other words, where premature decay has not
been brought on by mal-treatment. But the latter class is by far the
most numerous, and it requires very little either of science, or of
knowledge of a practical kind, to teach a man how to deal with them.
It is of no use to let them stand. If they are not wanted for ornament,
the sooner they are felled the better, for the process of decay is very
rapid in this particular tree. Their early removal is further necessary,
because they injuriously affect the Farmer in another way, as I will
show.
The roots, &c. of one single Ash Tree are said to amount to a
million in number, and to extend themselves as far all round the bole
as the branches. I do not profess to be able to form a very decided
opinion as to the number of the roots, rootlets, fibres, &c., but I have
seen quite enough of the habits of the tree to convince me, that the
roots extend themselves much farther than is here supposed; and it
is well known to all farmers, that to a distance far beyond this,
vegetation is almost totally destroyed; and that, near a Hedge-row
(dividing two arable fields) which is filled with filthy, scabbed, stunted
Ash Trees, which, from “mismanagement,” have been brought into
such a condition as positively to be making no progress at all, sow
what he may, the farmer can never reap any thing: and yet these
unsightly things, which are the latest of all other of our common
deciduous trees, in getting their foliage, and almost the earliest out
again, are suffered to linger out their feeble, but blighting existence,
until by slow decay they become so unsound, that the wind blows
them down, and they are fit for nothing but the fire! or, if they do not
actually reach this stage, they are only cut down because the owner
has the fear of such a result before his eyes! A volume might be
written with reference to this particular tree, were it necessary to take
up every one of the points which present themselves, as
condemning the present practice in its management, but that is not
needed, for the Ash Tree is so generally met with in a diseased
state, that it may be considered as the subject of grosser “mis-
management” than any other of our domestic trees. If any one still
deny this, let him look round him and say, why Hedge-rows so
abound every where, in puny, sickly, Ash Timber, which cannot
possibly attain to a useful size: and when he has confessed the fact,
that they really do exist in that state, I will reiterate the assertion, that
the cause is bad management! If the present condition of Hedge-row
Ash, generally, does not prove “mis-management,” I am at a loss to
know what does, for when the different kinds are planted upon a
congenial soil, if they be properly treated, they will continue to grow,
more or less rapidly, according to circumstances, and for a longer or
shorter period, as the natural term of their existence may rule: but as
they are now treated, they are never healthy, for the principle of
decay is introduced at a very early stage of their existence, and in
consequence, premature old age is brought on. To the absence of
early training, may be attributed much of what is seen to be wrong in
the present condition and quality of Hedge-row Timber, but much
more to the vile practice of mutilating the trees, which almost every
where obtains. There is, indeed, in some quarters, such perfect
indifference manifested about the well-being of the trees, that free
licence is allowed to the tenants of the land to do as they will with
them: and free use they make of it, as may well be supposed, and as
is abundantly evident in all such places. And why should it be
otherwise? It has so long been the practice, and it is so far out of
their way to really understand the matter, that farmers may well be
excused. They cut off the roots, and reduce the extent of the
branches, of their enemy, in self defence; and without having the
remotest idea that they are doing so serious an injury to the property
of their landlords. This is fully proved by the fact, that they treat their
own trees in precisely the same way. It is, then, to the indifference
that has hitherto been manifested by the proprietors of Hedge-row
Timber, and the consequent prevalence of mistaken views on the
subject, that the present state of things is to be attributed. Some
gentlemen do indeed introduce into their Agreements, clauses
affecting to provide against the mischievous pruning which is here
condemned, but, except in the neighbourhood of a mansion, where a
strict look out is generally kept, they are quite inoperative—they are
a dead letter, for not only does the pruning go on, but, as I have just
hinted, the trees are often attacked below too, and deprived of their
roots, as well as their branches, thus cutting off their supply of
nutriment from the atmosphere above, and from their legitimate
sources of supply from the soil. Both these practices ought to be
most strictly interdicted.
My indignation and regret have a thousand times been excited, on
seeing the noblest of all our Hedge-row Trees, the Oak, clipped of its
beautiful proportions, and reduced by repeated snaring, as it is most
aptly called, to the capacity and shape of a huge besom! and by this
truly infamous treatment, deprived not only of all its scenic beauty,
but actually of its specific character! and, if not altogether stopped in
its growth, rendered utterly worthless for application to the chief end
and purpose for which it is adapted and intended. I need not say,
that I mean—the building of ships.
Upon this subject there ought not to be two opinions: neither will
there, among those who really understand it; but it is much to be
lamented, that a very large portion of the Hedge-row Timber of this
country is in the hands of persons who either do not understand the
management of it, or who are indifferent about it. It very frequently
happens, that there is no person but the Land Steward, who can
make any pretensions to a correct judgment in the matter, and he
has often quite enough to attend to, without so responsible a duty as
this is—being added to his department. He therefore, very naturally,
attends to those duties which are indispensable; and as for the
Timber, &c. &c. he only thinks about it seriously, when he wishes to
ascertain how much of it he can turn to profit.
Every considerable estate ought to have a person upon it, whose
attention shall exclusively be devoted to the supervision of the
Woods, Plantations and Hedge Rows, &c. He should be a well-
educated and an intelligent man; and should be so well-paid for his
services, as to feel that his employer has a moral claim upon him, for
the entire devotion of his mind, as well as his physical powers, to the
efficient discharge of his duties.
An inquiry into the natural history of Hedge-row Timber, if I may so
speak of it, would furnish a field for highly interesting remark, and it
would assuredly remove any doubts that might remain in the minds
of those who have gone no farther than to suspect that the
management of it has been bad. When it is considered that the
Timber of our Hedges is the product of chance, or even worse than
that, that it has grown to what it is, notwithstanding that it has been
subjected to the most barbarous treatment; it is impossible not to
perceive, that if it had been watched and tended as it ought to have
been, it would have equalled any thing that could have been
conceived of it.
The classes of trees which may be met with in our Hedge-rows are
various, and are so situated in many places, as to really give rise to
the idea just now referred to—that they are found there, more as a
matter of chance, than of design: and this may be assigned, partly at
least, as the reason why they have been so neglected, or so
shamefully used. If they had been planted, and if any calculation at
all were made before planting, it might be imagined that a gentleman
would wish to ascertain what would be the surest mode of raising a
class of fine unblemished trees, whether they were Oaks, or Elms, or
Ash, or any other kind; and having carefully, and at some expense,
introduced them into his hedges, it is difficult to suppose, that he
would either leave them to shift for themselves, or to the tender
mercies of their natural enemies, the occupiers of the land on which
they might be growing: it is therefore more than probable, that a
considerable proportion of them are in the hedges more by accident
than any thing else. But however that may be, the fact remains the
same: they are, very generally, standing memorials of the ignorance
of the men in whose care they have been placed, and a triumphant
vindication of the propriety of my title.
If Hedge-row Trees have length of bole, they have it—not because
they were properly trained and assisted when they were young, and
therefore needed it, but—in consequence, most likely, of
indiscriminate lopping and pruning at some former period of their
growth, the fruits of which, although now invisible to the unpracticed
eye, will appear hereafter, to the dismay, and serious loss, of the
person who may have to saw them up.
I have elsewhere given my opinion very freely on the subject of
pruning, but as it will be necessary just to glance at it, in connection
with Hedge-row Timber, I will again take the Oak, which is almost the
only tree that I would recommend for hedges. As this noble tree will
naturally grow of a bush-like shape, when standing alone, it is
absolutely necessary that it be pruned, or it will not acquire sufficient
length of stem. I am not, therefore, the wholesale condemner of
pruning, even of Hedge-row Trees, but I would have no pruning done
after they had arrived at a certain age—say, twenty years: all work of
this kind should be done during the infancy of the tree, or not at all. I
would much sooner cut down a tree, if it had not sufficient length of
bole, and trust to the chance of raising a better from its stool, than
take off large branches, particularly if it was not over thirty years of
age. Indeed the former method of repairing the mischief of long
neglect, appears to me as one peculiarly adapted to the
circumstances in which some estates are placed, as to the timber;
and I should not hesitate to adopt it upon an extensive scale. I have,
in fact, seen many estates where I should cut down Oaks very freely,
which have not length of bole, or which, from some cause or other,
are not healthy; even though they might not produce timber enough
to pay for the cost of cutting. There are estates within less than two
hours ride of my residence, which are apparently well stocked with
timber, but it is of such quality that, were it under my own
management, I should instantly cut it down; and from a large
proportion of the stools I should train up a new race of trees. These
would, if well attended to, grow into a class and quality of timber,
very little, if at all, inferior to maiden trees; while, on the other hand,
from those which are standing, whatever length of time they may
remain, nothing can be expected, but a small quantity of timber, and
that of middling quality. But to return to pruning. In a Wood, or a
Plantation, trees will draw up each other to a certain length, and
many of the lateral branches, from the exclusion of light and air, will
die, and some of them will fall off; this is, of course, natural pruning:
but in a Hedge-row, they have no such help, they will, therefore,
require artificial pruning; which should commence at the time of
planting, and continue until it can be seen that they will assuredly
acquire ample length of bole. The kind of pruning which is here
advocated cannot possibly do any harm, if it be well done, and done
at a proper season. The soundness of an Oak will in no degree be
impaired by it; and consequently, it will be, on all accounts, more
serviceable for naval purposes, than if it were not pruned; for it will
not surely be contended, that clearness of grain, and length of stem,
are not likely to recommend it to the ship-builder. So far from having
a doubt upon this point, I am of opinion that timber thus carefully
trained, will be, on every account, incomparably superior to that
which is at present obtained from our Hedge-rows;—it will exhibit a
healthy developement, from the pith to the alburnum; so that
wherever there is a bend, a crook, or a knee, in it, the purchaser will
be sure that it is sound—whereas the very opposite is the case with
by far the greater part of that which now comes into the market. The
reckless extent to which the abominable practice of pruning, lopping,
or snaring—whichever it may be called—is carried, renders the
conversion of timber a very hazardous speculation, and should long
since have taught the growers of it, to avoid the commission of such
an error themselves, and to impose a heavy penalty on all those
belonging to them, who should be found guilty of it.
To illustrate a little further the statement here made, and the
opinion here given, it may be remarked, that the effect of such a vile
mutilation of Hedge-row Timber as is, in almost every quarter,
permitted, is seen and felt most in those very parts where strength is
most wanted, and which, if sound, would render the timber so much
the more valuable. It is on the outsides of bends or knees, that
blemishes are so frequently found, and which are often so
considerable, as to reduce the value of a valuable crook to almost
nothing.
These defects in timber are sometimes so far within the body of
the tree, as to elude the scrutiny of the keenest eye, proving, in
some very old trees, that pruning is not an evil of modern date. In a
still greater proportion, as to the whole quantity, however, the eye of
Ship-builders, or Timber Merchants—all of whom have frequently
been bitten—will detect, from external appearances, the snag-
pruning, covered over both with wood and bark; and consequently,
they protect themselves as well as they can in their purchases,
against the contingency of unsound timber, by shaping their offers
accordingly. This, of course, affects the seller in no inconsiderable
degree, and is one other reason why he should put a stop to the
practice of pruning altogether, except when it could be done under
the eye of his own Wood Manager.
The last point connected with Hedge-row Trees which I shall
mention, is the planting of them; but upon this part of the subject, I
shall not say much. I might, indeed, have passed it over in silence,
and still have fulfilled the requirements of my Title-page; but
inasmuch as the planting of Hedge-row Timber, must form a part of
an improved system of management, however it may be left out of
the present practice, it does not seem quite right to overlook it
altogether.
If Hedge-row Trees are to succeed at all, they must have a good
start; and if they are to have a good start, there must, of necessity,
be some trouble bestowed in the preparation of the site on which
they are to be planted. In the fences of new inclosures there will be
no difficulty at all. If the border, as it is often called, be well prepared
for the quick, it will be in a right state for an Oak Tree; and it would
really appear to be a piece of unaccountable neglect—an
inexplainable circumstance, as the act of a man of business—if a
tract of land were to be enclosed, and new fences put down, without
the opportunity being seized to plant a suitable number of Oak
Trees. I say, of Oak Trees, because I am persuaded that it would be
very difficult indeed to find a locality where any other kind of timber,
other circumstances being equal, would be likely to pay so well. In
the line of every Quick fence, then, I should certainly recommend
that healthy Oak Plants, of four years old, which have been at least
twice transplanted in the nursery, should be inserted, at a distance
from each other—say, of twenty yards—and if they are properly
guarded and nursed, nothing is more certain, than that they will
become a fine race of trees. But planting young Oaks, or young trees
of any kind, in an old Hedge-row, is quite a different affair. It is
indeed an undertaking involving real difficulty, and requiring a very
considerable degree of skill on the part of the workman, and of
firmness and determination on the part of his employer.
It would be found all but impossible to rear a young Oak in the
exact line of an old and vigorous thorn hedge; but there are many
situations which present much less difficulty. For example: In the
year when a hedge is plashed or laid, where there is a moderate
space on the bank which has been raised when the quick was first
planted—say, of a foot or more—there will be room for a tree; and in
all cases, where the bank has not been pared down, there will be
more room than is here supposed. Many other places, such as the
sides of the banks of large ditches, the gaps of hedges, &c. &c. may
be met with, on almost every estate, which ought to be filled with
Oaks, after the ground has been prepared in a suitable manner.
But, a previous preparation of the plant is necessary. Planting in
Hedge-rows, where planting has been done at all, has been
performed in the same ill-adapted way as every thing else relating to
timber. The plants have been taken out of the nursery,
indiscriminately with others, which have been intended for close
planting; instead of having such, and such only, as have been twice
or thrice shifted, and each time into a more exposed situation, and
wider apart, in order that they might acquire more fibrous roots, and
induration of bark, and thus be enabled to cope with, and surmount,
the disadvantages of their new position. Another point, which has
previously been hinted at, is the guarding of the trees. No matter
what the expense may be, if a gentleman determines to have
Hedge-row Timber, he must guard it well. It stands more in need of
the watchful eye of the Wood Manager than almost any thing else: in
fact, it is of little or no use planting at all, if a good and sufficient
guard fence be not immediately put down: but, having put in good
plants, and effectually protected them, I say again, I know of no
reason why Hedge-row Timber should not thrive and prosper, and,
ultimately, turn out as sound, as any other. That it is not so with the
race of Timber Trees now growing, except to a very limited extent, I
assert without fear of contradiction; and, with the same confidence, I
plead this fact as my justification, when I re-assert, that their
treatment, from first to last, is neither more nor less, than a course of
gross “mismanagement.”

THE END.

Printed by J. Perfect, Cartergate, Newark.

 Transcriber’s Notes

pg 47 Changed: in the agregate, a comparatively valueless property

to: in the aggregate, a comparatively valueless property
pg 119 Changed: having carefully, and at some expence
to: having carefully, and at some expense
pg 122 Changed: are not likely to recommed it
to: are not likely to recommend it
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK REMARKS ON
THE MANAGEMENT, OR RATHER, THE MIS-MANAGEMENT OF
WOODS, PLANTATIONS, AND HEDGE-ROW TIMBER ***

Updated editions will replace the previous one—the old editions will
be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S.

copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in
these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it
in the United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of
this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™ concept
and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and
may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following the
terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use of
the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as
creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research.
Project Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given
away—you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with
eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject
to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
 PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free

distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or
any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and

Redistributing Project Gutenberg™
electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree
to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be
bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from
the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in
paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be

used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people
who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a
few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic
works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.
See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with
Project Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the
collection of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the
individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the
United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in
the United States and you are located in the United States, we do
not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing,
performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the
work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of
course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg™
mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely
sharing Project Gutenberg™ works in compliance with the terms of
this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg™ name
associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of
this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its
attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when you share it without
charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also
govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most
countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the
United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms
of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying,
performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this
work or any other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes
no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in
any country other than the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other

immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must
appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™
work (any work on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or
with which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is
accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
 This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United
States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away
or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License
included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you
are not located in the United States, you will have to check the
laws of the country where you are located before using this
eBook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is derived

from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a
notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright
holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the
United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must
comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through
1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted

with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works posted
with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of
this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project

Gutenberg™ License terms from this work, or any files containing a
part of this work or any other work associated with Project
Gutenberg™.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this

electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form,
including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you
provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work
in a format other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in
the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,

performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing

access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:

• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the
method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The
fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark,
but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty
payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on
which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your
periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked
as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, “Information
about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation.”

• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who

notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that
s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
 copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and
discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project
Gutenberg™ works.

• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of

any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in
the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90
days of receipt of the work.

• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg™

electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend

considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe
and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating
the Project Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works, and the medium on which they may
be stored, may contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to,
incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a
copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or
damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer
codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except

for the “Right of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph
1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner
of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party
distributing a Project Gutenberg™ electronic work under this
agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and
expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO
REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF
WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE
FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY
DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE
TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL,
PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE
NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you

discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it,
you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by
sending a written explanation to the person you received the work
from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must
return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity
that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a
replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work
electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to
give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in
lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may
demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the
problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in
paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you ‘AS-IS’, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted
by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any
provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.