In this past semester, my perspective on the genre of Science Fiction has changed dramatically. As someone who did not grow up watching popular science fiction movies like Star Wars or Star Trek, or even as someone who read any science fiction books in general, I did not have any knowledge of the genre coming into the course. I associated the genre with the typical stereotypes of aliens, space travel, and the future, which really narrowed my mind of what to expect from the readings in this course. I am glad to say now that my perspective on science fiction literature has changed dramatically since. Instead of associating the genre with the typical stereotypes I previously mentioned, I started to think of the genre as one that was not only an expanded universe of infinite possibilities but also one engrained by the historical ideology of the Cold War and defined by some surprisingly striking philosophical elements. As someone who does enjoy studying history and philosophy, I started to become enthralled by the genre.
In my mind, the Cold War represents an era of ideological struggle and a period of drastic political, societal, and economic changes that still have long-lasting effects on the modern-day. Never would I have imagined that science fiction was one of the literary works to emerge from a period of bipolar ideologies and try to answer the question that was on the minds of everyone during this time: what happens next? However, it is not possible for me to fully discuss the effect that the Cold War has had on science fiction before explaining the effect that the genre had on me during the semester, and how it opened my mind to the genre.
The first few weeks of the course worked to help us to define what the genre of science fiction even was. As someone who entered the course with no particular “view” or opinions on the genre, I found myself unable to fully grasp how to define the genre. Although there were some elements of science fiction among the criteria that we used to base our definition on, my narrow view of the genre was still plagued by typical stereotypes. Upon learning terms like “cognitive estrangement”, I have to admit that I was, at first, very confused by what this literary element was trying to convey. It was only until I had read Samuel Delany’s “About 5,750 Words” that I had begun being able to conceptualize the genre outside of the typical stereotypes. Delany presented a conception of science fiction that revolved around an endless universe of unimaginable possibilities. It was the author’s job to create and portray the world in an impactful way to the reader, but it was the reader’s job to conceptualize the author’s story into a continuous image. Even Delany’s level of subjunctivity helped me to distinguish between other literary genres like fantasy, which I am more accustomed to, and science fiction. My first thought, however, was: isn’t this how all fictional literature is meant to be portrayed? While I may have seen Delany’s definition of science fiction to be interesting yet not entirely convincing, I have since come to apply his thoughts whenever I read a science fiction novel. Making sure to closely read the text in a way to create my own perception of the author’s world and to make that impact my perspective on the genre. While this is something that I have also applied a lot while reading historical and philosophical texts, Delany’s definition of science fiction was still a significant factor in increasing my interest in the genre.
With my increasing interest in the genre and a very vague definition of what to expect from the readings in the course, I delved into each of the readings that the course had to offer and found within these novels a multitude of philosophical and historical elements. The relations to the Cold War and the concept of Soviet Realism were two elements that I would not have first expected to be a part of science fiction literature. Despite already having a solid foundation of knowledge pertaining to the Cold War, the concept of Soviet Realism really stood out to me. As I began reading through the novels, the parallels between the two time periods began to become more and more noticeable, and as a history buff, it really piqued my interest to understand more about the literary elements of the Cold War era. However, I ultimately knew from the title of the course that the Cold War was going to be involved in some way, shape, or form. That is when another element of these science fiction novels began to catch my eye: the philosophical talking points.
Since I only ever knew science fiction as a genre defined by space, aliens, and advanced technology, I never realized that while reading the books I would begin to question things about the world around me like in my philosophy classes. While some of the philosophical themes overlapped between the novels, the questions were posed through their own unique stories and stylistic elements. Every story involved some form of overlying philosophical concept as to why the events of the story occurred, or as to explain the different types of societies showcased within the novels. Ernest Junger’s Glass Bees involves the struggle of a protagonist who is becomes lost in a world that is becoming increasingly technologically advanced to the point that the difference between technology and nature is blurred. At that point, what kind of effect does rapid technologization have on people? What is “real” and what is “artificial”? If society becomes technologically perfect, then what happens to humans and the concept of human perception. This novel offers a very tense philosophical view of a world where technology struggles with humanity, but not for superiority, but for perfection and co-existence. Richard Dick’s Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is similar to Glass Bees in that it presents us with a world where androids live amongst humans in a very rigidly structured society, and the protagonist is tasked with killing androids blending in amongst the humans. The only way in the novel to determine a human from an android is through an “empathy test”, but it poses the question of what makes us human. Is it the will to live? Is it empathy? Can androids feel empathy? It really makes you ponder what truly makes up a human and the thought of the actual existence of androids. Lem’s Solaris also poses philosophical questions concerning aspects of humanity, but through the means of alien contact. The planet Solaris is presented as a living ocean that scientists are attempting to understand, but their comprehension of the planet is all but futile when the planet creates simulacra of other people from their lives that are not completely human. Here it is probably to once again pose the question: what makes a human? But Lew’s novel instead exposes the arrogance and scientific understanding of mankind by pitting the scientists against beings that are incomprehensible to them. From this, the question that is posed is what are the limits of human cognition? How do humans work to understand things and what happens when they are encountered with something truly foreign to their very existence? These novels pose common but intriguing philosophical questions that make us question the future of technology, our cognitive and emotional limits as humans, and our very humanity in a way that I never would have imagined.
Other novels, like Le Guin’s The Dispossessed: An Ambiguous Utopia, also work to implement elements of philosophical thought, but in ways that define other concepts in science fiction and not our own human understanding. The concepts of utopia and dystopia were two of the very few concepts of science fiction that I knew coming into the course. However, when asked to create a definition of a utopia, I felt that I could only think of a society where everyone is in equal standing with each other and no one person holds power over others. But when overcome with other responses to this question and the broad scope of the term, I felt that I could not truly create a functioning definition of utopia. This really made me ask myself: what actually is a utopia? Le Guin’s novel presents two planets with very Cold War-related attributes and completely different ideologies and one protagonist who puts it upon himself to bring the two planets together. Anarres is defined by collective action where no one owns anything, not even themselves. Urras is a planet that illustrates a paradise-like capitalist society where the few own everything, but the lower classes of society own nothing and want to rebel. These two planets are divided between physical and mental walls, where each planet believes its own society to possess a “correct” ideology and be a “utopia”. Is it really a utopia if everyone equally owns nothing, or if only some have everything? Is there a “correct” ideology in this situation? Is a utopia where everyone is equal even impossible? Le Guin’s novel not only implements Cold War ideology into its meaning, but it truly works to question the reader on if they would consider any society represented in the novel a “utopia”.
The six blog posts that I have chosen will work to illustrate my understanding and questioning of these philosophical and Cold War elements within the novels. The three curated guest posts that I have chosen will also work to present ideas and thoughts on Cold War and philosophical concepts within the novels, but in ways that I found were unique to my thoughts and to others in the course. These science fiction novels are not possible to fully comprehend unless you are able to question the concept and main ideas of the novel. The author’s world is not just an image that the reader is meant to create an image of, but it also exists for the reader to formulate his own opinions of the world and pose himself questions based on the world the author created. Through these readings, I also feel that I have gained a genuine interest in the genre of science fiction, and being able to apply aspects of philosophy and history that I love has made me enjoy it even more. I hope that you enjoy the new perspective that I have taken on the science fiction genre as you read through my portfolio, and I hope that you will give thought to these questions as well.