Bridget Smith: Temporal Flux
Bolaji Bankole
In just about all media, there are “classics” that
are heralded to be the best, most amazing specimens of literary, artistic, or
storytelling competency, and they share the trait of generally being pretty old.
So, obviously, this trend extends into the world of science fiction and fantasy
where one can see the beginnings of certain ideas and tropes that persist to
the current day. Being able to see how certain SFF elements have been exhibited
in the past in reference to how they are more commonly presented in more modern
works is, in my opinion, the most interesting part of reading older SFF works,
though their age and ideological distancing can also create some other, less
desirable effects.
One of the most universal ideas in
science fiction is that of the robot. The first real depiction of robots in an
SFF story was in Karel Capek’s R.U.R.,
where they were essentially humans, just with a bit of something missing. While
most modern ideas of robots have them as cold, mechanical beings, the robots in
R.U.R. are made out of organic matter
that has been “woven” together into a human form. Another classic work that
took a similar spin on the idea of robots is Alfred Bester’s Fondly Fahrenheit, which has androids
which can be more easily distinguished from humans, but still keep many human
characteristics. This work could be seen as a kind of sign of the depictions of
robots changing to become more like what we see today. While reading these two
stories, I couldn’t help but think about Commander Data from Star Trek: The Next Generation. This
series of Star Trek was written well after those two stories, and realizing the
influences that they may have had on the way that Data and his character
interactions are portrayed in the show made the experience all the more
enjoyable. The eventual insubordination of robots as they decide to follow
their own wills, intentionally or not, is a trope which has its beginnings
evinced in both R.U.R. and Fondly Fahrenheit, and it is a staple of
almost every robot oriented science fiction story since them. It can be seen in
works ranging from 2001: A Space Odyssey,
to the aforementioned Star Trek, and
even to the relatively new movie, Avengers:
Age of Ultron.
Being able to see the origins of such a
pervasive idea in SF and how it has evolved over time is definitely a benefit
of reading classic works in SF, however that same development of ideas can also
be something that pulls me out of a story a bit. For instance, while it is not
a core mechanic to the story, the relegation of all computing to the mothership
in Tom Godwin’s The Cold Equations
was something that irked me a bit. It may be because I tend to think about
things in a more technical way, but the lack of some ideas that we have come
accustomed to in the modern day can make a few older stories less enjoyable.
The way that you interpret stories is heavily influenced by preconceived
notions that you have gained from your environment, and over time,
environmental factors can change drastically. Some SF stories can rely on dated
ideas, have old and irrelevant morals, or make now nonsensical cultural
references that can greatly diminish the enjoyment of a modern reader.
While ability to see how ideas in
stories change over time and influence each other is something that can make
some classics grab your attention, this same effect can also detract from your
enjoyment of said stories. There are many elements that have to come together
for a story to convey its entire meaning, and while some can stand the test of
time, others suffer. However, being able to analyze the ways that SF tropes
morph and develop from their inception to their modern implementations is what
makes me interested in classic SF.
Bolaji,
ReplyDeleteFocusing on how classic and more "modern" sf deal with a common textual feature (in this case, the artificially constructed humanoid) is a perfect way to explore how reading from the classics to the present can give one a sense of evolving style in a genre. It's fascinating that the earliest conceptions of robots were, in many ways, much more organically and morphically complex than later iterations, which seem so pedestrian and simple in the use of wires and servos to show what's "real" and what isn't. It's ALSO true that sf doesn't always age technically as well as we could imagine. Vacuum tube computing in space? No one would buy it except as retro-futurism, these days, let alone anyone who's grown up in the 21st century.
Best,
TT