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
1

Thistendencytoemphasizelandscapehelpstoexplainthefacilitywithwhichsciencefictionstorieshavebeen
adaptedtofilm,avisualmediumthatbyitsverynaturealsoemphasizessetting.TheappealofStanleyKubrickand
ArthurClarkes2001:ASpaceOdyssey,forinstance,isobviouslyoneoflandscape,ofsuchvisualsequencesasthat
ofthespaceshuttleslowlyaligningitselfwiththerotatingspacestationwhilethesoundtrack,playingtheBlue
Danube,providesuswithanaestheticattitudetowardaworldofdancing,halflivingmachines.

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:

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).

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.

[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.

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.
Thereforeeverymanandwomanshouldlivelifeaccordingly,
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.
Afterasuccessfulcampaignthesoldierswereputintowinter
quarters,wheretheybecameimpatientanddemandedtobe
senthome.HanSingrealizedtheurgentnecessityofcalming
themifhewastofinishhisoperationsinthefollowingyear;
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

whichwouldserveasanamusementintimesofleisureand,
being founded on the principles of war, would excite their
military ardor. The stratagem fulfilled his expectations; the
soldiersweredelightedandintheirdailycontestsforgotthe
inconveniences of their position. In the spring the general
tookthefieldagainandinafewmonthsaddedtherichShen
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

Quotedin:R.N.Coles,TheChessPlayersWeekendBook(London,1950),p.54.
JohanHuizinga,HomoLudens(Boston,1964),p.10.
3
Thereferencehereis,ofcourse,tothevonKempelenrobotof1770.
2


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

DiePolitischeInset(Berlin,1936).
H.W.Fowler,Subjunctives,ADictionaryofModemEnglishUsage(Oxford,1965).
3
Itshouldnotbenecessarytopointoutthattheclocksusedtotimematchgamesderivefromtheexigenciesof
thisparticularkindofcompetitionandnotfromsomethinginherentinthegameofchessitself.
2

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

H.J.R.Murray,AHistoryofChess(Oxford,1913),p.529
DonaldM.Liddell,etal,Chessman(NewYork,1937),p.19.
3
Seep.23ofLiddellsbook.
4
Illustratedonp.82inLiddell.
2

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

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

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.
2

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
1

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.
2

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>>


****