Category: …and everything else

…some days, you just need to wake up for two hours, then decide to throw the towel in and go right back to sleep. I consider this a brief break from sleeping, to make it even sweeter when I do return to it, oh, now…

“Science Fiction as the Reflection of a Dystopic Present”

A common perception of science fiction is that it functions as a cautionary tale of dystopic futures. For instance, if we are too reliant on computers, they will take over and use us as batteries, or if we continue to tamper with biotechnology a plague will be released on the world. A closer look at major shifts in plots and themes, however, indicates something else: Science fiction dystopias are less reflective of the future and more relevant to current dangers. For example, when Philip K. Dick writes The Simulacra, he’s reflecting the current trend towards time-shared computing, the miniaturization of technology, and the apparently disembodied quality of communication over ARPAnet. In the 1980s, William Gibson writes Neuromancer at the same time Apple and Microsoft ship the Macintosh and Windows, and personal networking allows computers to go virtual. These authors aren’t portraying a dystopic, distant future, they’re writing about the present, presenting a dystopic mirror to the promise of new technology.

This paper will use the work of Niklas Luhmann, Maturana and Varela, Katherine Hayles and others to show how cultural resonance influences technological inventions at the same time it inspires science fiction authors. It is not coincidence that major and influential works of science fiction occur at the same time as these technological advances. Science fiction novels are a reflection of our fears, not of the dystopic future, but the dystopic present, technology, and how it impacts our humanity.

I sat down with Phillip this afternoon to go over my reality television paper. We got into a rather loud, 30 minute argument over the paper and the directions I took, with it culminating in my admitting that I ended with the conclusion I did because I’d run out of time and couldn’t think of anything else. Thankfully, the rather loud argument was fun, energetic, and full of compliments – just what I’ve envisioned a feedback session on a paper should be like. He also flattered me by saying he was giving me the treatment he would any graduate student, and that he truly loves my writing style.

I still really like the paper, and am happy and excited to take a crack at serious rewriting. I’ve never done that before, and this seems like a good opportunity. We also went over my other abstracts; much to my delight, I appear to have a knack for writing them, and he liked both very much. I’m waiting for the final approval of the second, and then I shall submit. I also found several other conferences I would be very interested in presenting at, including:

IMAGINING THE FUTURE: UTOPIA, DYSTOPIA AND SCIENCE FICTION
6-7 December 2005

Centre for Comparative Literature and Cultural Studies
Monash University, Clayton Campus
Melbourne, Australia

I’d love to go to Oz! …this life, academia, is definitely for me. Can you imagine me doing anything else? Me neither.

After throwing together a second proposal on the way out the door, I met with Phillip, and surprise, surprise, he liked this second one better. I’m seriously not surprised, for two reasons. One, I had more time to think, so although it didn’t take me long to write, I had a lot of thinking time. Two, I could tell what the flaw in the first proposal was the first time I read it, and this abstract fixes it, quite solidly.

“Science Fiction as the Reflection of a Dystopic Present”

A common perception of science fiction is that it functions as cautionary warning tale of potential dystopic futures. If we are too reliant on computers, they will take over and use us as batteries, if we continue to tamper with biotechnology, a new mutant race will develop, or a plague will be released on the world. A closer look at major shifts in plots and themes indicates something else: the stories are less reflective of the future and more relevant to current dangers. For example, when Philip K. Dick writes The Simulacra, he is reflecting the current trend towards time-shared computing, the miniaturization of technology, and the disembodied ARPAnet. In the 1980s, William Gibson writes Neuromancer at the same time Apple and Microsoft ship the Macintosh and Windows, and personal networking allows computers to go virtual. These authors are not portraying a dystopic, distant future, they’re writing about the present, presenting a dystopic mirror to the promise of new technology.

This paper will use the work of Niklas Luhmann, Maturana and Varela, Katherine Hayles and others to show how cultural resonance influences technological inventions at the same time it inspires science fiction authors. It is not coincidence that major and influential works of science fiction occur at the same time as these technological advances. Science fiction novels are a reflection of our fears, not of the dystopic future, but the dystopic present, technology, and how it impacts our humanity.

“Science Fiction as the Reflection of a Dystopic Present”

In the early 20th century, Henry Ford perfected the production industry by developing a highly specific and efficient assembly line; while many people loved the assembly line there was also concern about the replacibility of each person on that line. In the middle of the century, technology shrank mainframes and inspired the idea of time-sharing; this idea of distributed computing time, combined with a fear of nuclear war wiping out standard methods of communication brought us the Internet. At the end of the century, the power of networking allowed distributed systems, moving computers to the realm of the virtual.

In each of these eras we find that science fiction does not, as commonly believed, predict dystopic futures. It actually reflects and resonates fear of current technology and what it means to be human. The fear of being turned into a cog in the machine can be seen in Fritz Lang’s dystopian movie Metropolis, and continues to resonate in the works of numerous science fiction authors. With The Simulacra, Phillip K. Dick moves postmodern science fiction away from the idea of the automaton replacing humans and towards a disembodied computer that augments, and often begins to control, humans. William Gibson brings us Neuromancer, which re-embodies the virtual. Utilizing the work of Maturana and Varela, Niklas Luhmann, Katherine Hayles and others, this paper explores the idea that science fiction does not represent the potential for dystopic futures but instead reflects our fear current technology and how it impacts our humanity.