Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Michael White | November 9th 2009 02:16 PM | 9 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More Adaptive Complexity articles

All

About Michael White

Welcome to Adaptive Complexity, where I write about genomics, systems biology, evolution, and the connection between science and literature, government, and society.

I'm a biochemist


... Full Bio

I have to delay the Sunday Science Book Club and my discussion of Voyage of the Beagle until next week. In the mean time, I'm initiating the first Post-Apocalyptic Sci-Fi Corner. Over the next few months, I'll share my experiences as I work through my list of post-apocalyptic sci-fi, one of my favorite fiction genres.

Post-Apocalyptic Sci-Fi Corner
Far North, by Marcel Theroux
Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 2009


Makepeace, the narrator and protagonist of Far North, living in post-apocalyptic Siberia in a not-too-future world devastated by what seems to be war and chaos brought on by catastrophic climate change, sums up her attitude towards science by saying, regarding one particularly implausible scheme to engineer a strain of anthrax that only kills men (leaving women behind to breed children for the conquering army):

"It sounds unlikely, but not unlikelier than many other things I know to be true."

As the great sci-fi author Arthur C. Clarke said, advanced science can seem no different than magic, and this is clearly how Makepeace sees science. While this outlook is OK for the protagonist of the novel, it's clear in Far North that the author's outlook is the same.

And thus we get such nonsense as anthrax engineered to kill only men (because, according to the book, it was simply more "practical" to perform this feat of impossible biological engineering than to just create a generally lethal strain of anthrax), a scene where someone, knocked unconscious in a dark room, wakes up and still has to wait for his eyes to adjust to the darkness, a Arctic frontierswoman hero who is described casting bullets with great detail, in the middle of a place without any source of gunpowder, and most absurdly, a mysterious but non-magical flask of some blue light emitting substance that somehow heals wounds flawlessly within minutes, a process that would require rates of cell division that would make E. coli look downright sluggish.

Of course, regarding that last technological wonder, the books physician character 'has a theory' about how the flask works, but refuses to elaborate.

The issue here isn't scientific accuracy or plausibility; it's extremely lazy writing. No matter what crazy scientific advance an author cooks up, it has to be made to resemble science in some way - that is, however much like magic it may appear to the characters, from the author's perspective, there have to be constraints. Especially in a book that aims to reflect on our relationship to technology, our dependence on it, our longing for it, and our ability to destroy ourselves with it. Sci-fi authors, or, more typically, 'literary' authors crossing the genre boundary into sci-fi, would do well to heed Richard Feynman's description of scientific imagination: it's imagination in a straightjacket, imagination constrained by the requirement that it be consistent with all of the other known physical laws or biological principles. This is true even if, for the sake of the story, you choose a new set of physical laws to work from. Science, real or fictional, should always reflect that kind of constraint.

The core notion explored by Far North is this: "Everyone expectes to be at the end of something. What no one expects is to be at the end of everything." This is a rich idea, but it is underused in the book. In Makepeace's post-apocalyptic world, people do what they typically to in post-apocalyptic fiction - they turn to authoritarian religion, crime, enslavement, or isolated surivalism. The stoic, pragmatic Makepeace is a compelling narrator, and she certainly carries the book. However, her story did not add up to anything more than a fairly pedestrian exploration of what people do when the immediate necessities of survival trump all else. As an exploration of our relationship to nature and technology, the book fell short.

Read the feed:


Comments

Becky Jungbauer's picture
Science isn't magic? Crap...(averts eyes while attempting to hide astrology and creationist books behind back). Although in one instance, I beg to differ, and argue that science can involve magic. A friend and I were taking an exam in our advanced organic chemistry class, and she forgot the substrate for one particularly taxing multi-step reaction, even though she knew the final compound. Stumped, she finally wrote "magic!" over the arrow leading to the final compound and handed her test in. She was awarded the point simply for sheer creativity and chutzpah. Ergo, science can indeed involve magic.

adaptivecomplexity's picture
Long o-chem synthesis reactions are magic to me. I basically made things up on my o-chem test because at the time I never got the logic behind the reaction conditions.

Gerhard Adam's picture


adaptivecomplexity's picture
One of my favorite cartoons.

Becky Jungbauer's picture
Wow, very well played!!! Awesome. :)

Yago's picture
I suppose it depends on what we mean by "magic".    What do you mean by it, Mike?  I think I can sort of glean it from what you write, but I wonder if you can make it explicit?

*I forgot to suggest this and don't remember if it's on your list.

Richard Matheson, I am Legend.

adaptivecomplexity's picture
I wasn't too specific, so thanks for encouraging me to elaborate.

In this case, I mean this: this realist novel takes place in the not-too-distant future, and yet comes up with completely ridiculous, completely impossible scientific inventions. Not ones that are particularly crucial for the novel (like anthrax that kills only men), and not done as an ironic take on far-out science that would seem like magic. To me this book felt like an alternate history novel that casually gets historical facts wrong, but not deliberately, not to highlight the uncertainties of history or support some aspect of the alternative world, but just because the author was too lazy to do the research.


One of the key elements, I think, of good post-apocalyptic sci-fi, at least the kind that spends some time dwelling on technology, is the exploration of the consequences of our ability to only partially control nature. What we can do with science is always constrained by 1) our incomplete understanding of nature, and 2) very well-established science (like say, atoms and cells) that effectively rules out alternate possibilities that one might have imagined before science came and closed off that alternative. (Pynchon deals with this latter theme especially well.)

So in a book about society destroyed by nature spinning out of our control, it's more effective to portray science&technology the way it really is - constrained. We try to control nature, but science does not make us omniscient or omnipotent. I guess that's what I was calling magic - the ability to not be constrained by the most basic, well-established facts of nature. Those facts can be fictional facts of an alternate world, but they have to be there.

I think what you're forgetting here is that the writer of that novel clearly intended for the book to be a work of science fantasy, not hard science fiction. Star Wars is the best example of this, yet just about nobody criticizes it for lazy writing (how do lightsabers work? on what principles do antigravity function? so on, so forth) precisely because most recognize the fact that the seemingly ridiculous technologies are meant not to present a coherent picture of a predicted outcome of scientific advancement, but only to provide a platform from which the artist may exercise his or her creativity.

I don't think near-future settings should necessarily imply realistic technological developments either, given how works of fiction such as Twilight Harry Potter, and Underworld are all set in contemporary times. If fantasy novels are given so much creative freedom, why shouldn't the science fiction/fantasy authors be allowed just as much?

You're reading too deep into this, I think.

adaptivecomplexity's picture
the writer of that novel clearly intended for the book to be a work of science fantasy, not hard science fiction

That could be, but the first half of the novel sure reads like hard science fiction. Technology and our relationship to it, and what life is like when it's absent plays a big role in the book.

I don't think Twilight and Harry Potter are comparable - they're set in contemporary times, but they're about vampires and/or magic. Underworld I haven't read (it's high on my list though), but I didn't think Far North used fantasy as effectively (or as deliberately) as novels that fall into the category of magical realism.


This idea in Far North that Russian scientists engineered anthrax to kill only males (because accomplishing this impossible feat of biological engineering was "more practical") really didn't do much for the novel in terms of advancing the major themes or the plot. The same plot developments could have been achieved with a more plausible take on anthrax. The novel would have been more compelling had it worked within more realistic scientific constraints.

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.