Science Fiction Seminar

Preamble to the Liberation

The literary genre encompassing science fiction is generally known as science fiction and fantasy. It can sometimes be difficult to determine where the science ends and the fantasy begins. Jules Verne's 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA could have been regarded as fantasy at the time it was written but today's nuclear submarines would indicate that it was a prophecy of science. The movie FORBIDDEN PLANET from the 50's is an excellent demonstration of how pessimistic the futurists can be however. The movie opens with a future history stating that the first moon landing occured in the last decade of the 21st century, but of course we know it actually occured in the last year of the very next decade. AN ERROR OF ONLY 120 YEARS. The movie then shows us a man made flying saucer capable of FTL, Faster Than Light travel. Our current understanding of physics would indicate that FTL travel is impossible, so any story using it might be classified as fantasy. With so many possible plots available with aliens and interstellar empires I think sci-fi writers can be forgiven for using a little scientific liscense to sneak in FTL.

There has long been a split between hard and soft science fiction. The purist hard science fiction crowd even rejects Faster Than Light travel despite the imaginative advantages. Since I want to exploit science fiction for educational purposes I will lean somewhat in the hard sci-fi direction but I will try not to be obsessive about it. In describing the types of sci-fi I will split the field into scientific science fiction and liberal arts science fiction. As examples I will use movies instead of books since more people should be familiar with famous films. The films STAR WARS and 2001: A SPACE ODDESSY are perfect examples of opposite extremes. Both movies have spaceships and intelligent robotics but the science in STAR WARS is highly questionable. There is an acoustic roar when a ship passes in front of a camera in STAR WARS but this is impossible in the vacuum of space. In 2001 there is usually total silence which is realistic or the Blue Danube for awe inspiring impact. 2001 shows a rotating space station to produce an artificial gravity and pens floating in zero G. No explanation is given for the gravity on the space ships of STAR WARS, advanced technological magic must be assumed.

The leading robots in STAR WARS are humanoid and a garbage can with wheeled arms. A quick and versatile humanoid robot would be quite difficult to design and probably expensive. Giving it a snobish personality could only be amusing for a short time. Trying to communicate with a robot that could only whistle would be worse than the snob. HAL in 2001 didn't need its own body, it could use remote and radio control to activate specialized machines to do its bidding, even murder. The Millineum Falcon didn't seem to have an onboard intelligent computer which should have been possible if C3PO could walk and talk and annoy everyone.

So 2001 embodies accurate ideas about physical reality and technological design whereas STAR WARS does not. Science is the study of reality and knowing more about reality increases peoples ability to predict and manipulate it.

This is not to say that all liberal arts science fiction is worthless. The flick I mentioned earlier, FORBIDDEN PLANET, also belongs in the liberal arts category. There is a scene where Robby the robot is carrying some lead shielding. Even if we can accept that the robot could lift a mass of more than a ton, the way the robot holds the weight it would have to tip over. FORBIDDEN PLANET is not a simple minded good vs evil plot where the idiot good guys inevitably defeat the forces of evil. YAWN! FORBIDDEN PLANET explores the darker subconscious side of intelligent beings and questions the implementation of technological advances. I have heard it is derived from the play, THE TEMPEST by Shakespeare, and have found similarities in a short synopsis. So we have shallow liberal arts sci-fi which can be an entertaining waste of time and deep liberal arts sci-fi which can have psychological depth and be quite thought provoking. I read the book STAR WARS before the movie came out and decided not to see it. After hearing so many people say it was great I had to go. It was an interesting study of Marshal McLuhan's idea of 'the medium is the message.' The only message in the movie is 'dumb good guys always win' but the movie delivers the message in a much more visceral manner than a book is capable of, and for its time the special effects were impressive.

To use science fiction for educational purposes I will be limiting my selections to mostly scientific science fiction with some deep liberal arts science fiction. Although a shallow liberal arts story can be an enjoyable read why not spend the time on a deep scientific story instead. Have fun and expand one's mind simultaneously. The problem is finding the books. I will explain my selection process with another example. Whenever I encountered an unknown word or phrase in a book as a child I would research it in a dictionary or encyclopedia. Sometimes I would take out library books if the subject was sufficiently interesting. Consequently I was reading about astronomy in 5th grade when the nuns weren't saying a word about it. If you read the book COLD AS ICE by Charles Sheffield you will find he refers to robots as VON NEUMANNs. If you research Von Neumann you will find this refers to John von Neumann, one of the greatest mathematicians of the 20th century. He was involved in the Manhattan Project which produced the atomic bomb, and ENIAC, the first general purpose electronic computer in the world. He submitted a paper suggesting a way to overcome a major flaw in the ENIAC design, which made it too time consuming to reprogram. It is from this paper that the term 'Von Neumann Machine' originates. Almost all computers today are 'Von Neumann Machines' yet it is difficult to find the term in computer books. You almost have to know it, to look for it, to find it. Very Strange! Like the computer experts are making important information difficult to find. Another example is from the book THE MOON IS A HARSH MISTRESS by Robert Heinlein. You will find the phrase 'game theory' in the story. If you research 'game theory' this will lead you back to John Von Neumann. He was applying game theory to economics in the mid 1940's, the same time he was working on ENIAC. The terms 'game theory' and 'Von Neumann machine' are rarely heard though John von Neumann should be more famous than Bill Gates.

The cover of COLD AS ICE has a marketing blurb from Analog magazine. It says, "Fits comfortably on the shelf with Clarke and Asimov and Heinlein. He writes classic stuff." Arthur C. Clarke wrote 2001 and was the first person to suggest geosynchronous communications satellites which are common today. Isaac Asimov created the three laws of robotics which we have yet to, and may never, develop robots sophisticated enough to handle. Robert Heinlein wrote PUPPET MASTERS and STARSHIP TROOPERS from which movies were made. So these four gentleman will be the core of my suggested educational science fiction reading list because they contain information and ideas worth researching and thinking about which, unfortunately, many teachers do not provide. Charles Sheffield is a physicist, Asimov got a PhD in chemistry, Clarke and Heinlein engineers. They should have no trouble expanding the minds of grammar school kids. I think exposure in grammar school is a good idea because children's brains are still growing. Expand those synapses.

I can't create a large title list now. Some books by THE BIG THREE, Asimov, Clarke and Heinlein, I no longer have and haven't read since high school. I will have to walk down memory lane. A couple of words of warning about more recent science fiction. The genre began to change in the 70's becoming darker, more negative and cynical. There is also much more sex than could be found in the 50's and 60's material. Some judgement will have to be applied in giving recent stuff to kids. Considering what's on cable I don't know what anyone's judgement will be. I'll try to keep any titles I suggest relatively sanitary.

By the way, who was the father of science fiction? We are constantly hearing, the father of this, the father of that, but science fiction had a mother. Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley wrote FRANKENSTEIN in 1818. It is the first story of a scientist working in a laboratory, though possibly a mad one. Schelly played Pandora for the fictional side of science but real Frankensteins stalk among us today. Maybe Schelly's imitators can give us clues for coping with today's technological monsters.

I have noticed that many people do not take science fiction very seriously. I suspect when they hear the phrase "science fiction" their minds focus on the fiction not the "science." Therefore I will refer to it as "fictionalized science" to sneak passed this mental block.

<<- - - - - - - Click on Pics - - - - - - ->>

Home