Date:  Thu May 30 2002 11:55 pm

Author:  Bill

Subject:  Re: Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

Thank you for your kind words, Svetlana.

You are correct; you did not say that fiction was useless! I did, however, get the impression that you had little use for science fiction. You are also correct that there are not any science fiction writers with the stature of Shakespeare. I will agree that there is a lot of pap out there. However, even as relatively young as the science fiction genre is, some “classics” are beginning to emerge. If you have not come across them, let me point you in their direction. The original “Foundation Trilogy” by Isaac Asimov is considered a classic, and was written in the 60’s and early 70’s I believe, and so does contain some dated outlooks. For instance, computers are not very prevalent in the trilogy, as Asimov had no way of knowing how pervasively computers would invade our lives.

I respect your decision that science fiction is not for you. Many works of science fiction are not for me, either. I pick and choose which ones I read, and I enjoy the selections I do make.

I, too, enjoyed Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. It was immensely funny, and I was disappointed that the library did not have the video version of it in stock, or that would have been my selection for the presentation.

If I may ask, from which book did you get your quote? It doesn’t sound like something I’m familiar with.

I agree as well with your last statement. I do not like gloom and doom, either. It is a chore for me to read books like that, because I do not enjoy them. It is one of the reasons I do not like Kurt Vonnegut’s style of writing.

Thank you for making me think, Svetlana.

Cheers!

Bill

——————————————————————————–

Current Forum:  Bonus Assignment Forum

Date:  Fri May 31 2002 9:35 am

Author: MIKE

Subject:  Re: Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

I would just like to interject that the best science fiction starts out as quality fiction. It is the story that matters, and what makes great science fiction great is that the story could be moved to Victorian times and still be a great story. Science fiction serves simply as a backdrop to a good story. Poor science fiction is akin to movies that are big on special effects for the sake of the special effects. Good science fiction is like a film where the special effects are simply the icing on the cake.

Mike

——————————————————————————–

Current Forum:  Bonus Assignment Forum

Date:  Fri May 31 2002 9:58 am

Author: SVETLANA

Subject: Re: Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

The book I quoted from is “Moscow 2042″. If you go to www.amazon.com it will let you even read about 12 pages of it. I think you would enjoy it even without knowing many of the references as I do simply because I know what exactly Voinovich makes fun of. It is about a possible scenario for the Soviet Union. Ironically, there would be a sort of Kutz at the end, but the immense sense humour of Voinovich makes it a great and pleasurable experience. You do not have to force yourself to finish the book, as I did with “Heart of Darkness”. And Voinovich never fails to make the point.

——————————————————————————–

Current Forum:  Bonus Assignment Forum

Date:  Sat Jun 8 2002 5:59 pm

Author: Vernon

Subject:  Re: Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

Not to jump on the bandwagon, but I have to disagree with Svetlana on the merits of Science Fiction. Like BIll said, there are many books that are considered classics like Asimov’s Foundation and I, Robot series. They have stimulated the minds of thousands of children who went on to become some of the best scientific minds for that very reason. Science Fiction is also the first glimpse we get on what political and social issues may arise with the advent of new technologies and helps many people see the issues before they even become a problem in society.

Well-written science fiction is as stimulating and sometimes even more stimulating than many of the good fiction books out there. It allows us to not only visualise what we know today, but also perceive of a place that doesn’t exist. A place that could possibly become reality one day, for better or worse.

Like other fiction, there are a lot of works out there that are not worth reading. However there are as many titles in science fiction that have merit as there are in other fictional categories. You should give them a try.

——————————————————————————–

Current Forum:  Bonus Assignment Forum

Date:  Tue Jun 11 2002 10:07 pm

Author: SVETLANA

Subject:  Re: Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

I agree with you and Bill and Mike. Mike probably put it the best that science fiction is only a backdrop for a good story like decorations for a stage play. And it is not the genre itself that makes it good or bad, but the talent of the author. Maybe, science fiction is a more difficult genre to succeed in because a writer needs a fertile imagination to make it interesting and substantial and not stupid and outdated in a few years after publication. Somehow, Philip K. Dick did not make it for me. Although I must admit that he hit on many good ideas worth of exploring. Too bad, he did not give himself enough time to develop those ideas more thoroughly.

But you know in light of our discussion of science fiction and literature in general, I came across the very interesting statistics. A couple of weeks ago, BBC (?) published the data that 40% of the population of Britain does not read books at all. And some 20% have not read a whole book (even once) in their whole life. I am quite positive that the same could be said about North America. So, soon the debate about literature in the “beer garden”, which I quoted, could be changed to saying that not only realism but also the whole literature is the thing of the past. It would not matter then, which genre is the best and what books are worth reading if they are not read at all.

Current Forum:  Bonus Assignment Forum

Date:  Thu May 30 2002 11:33 am

Author:  Bill

Subject:  Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

P.K. Dick wrote this thing back in 1968. The world was a different place back then, with a different political and social climate. The cold war was at its height. The genre of science fiction was still trying to find its way. Many of today’s sci-fi fantasy authors write merely to entertain and for escapism, but back in the ’60’s, many Sci-Fi authors felt they had to convey some sort of social message in their works. The times, they were a changing, and all that.

By now, we’re pretty well familiar with some of the major issues that Dick was portraying in his novel. He wrote of the subjugation of an entire race of people. It was taken for granted back in Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness that the Europeans were just inherently superior to the natives of Africa. That did not need to be explained. Likewise, in Dick’s novel, it is assumed that of course androids aren’t real people. But he still toyed with the idea that ok, they aren’t people like us, but they still go through the motions. I’m not sure that the message that Dick was trying to convey was that the androids were equal to humans, but more as a metaphor of attitudes that people have regarding their own humanity.

Today, people are more willing to see and accept a fuzzy area between intelligence in any form. We are having theoretic discussions about artificial intelligence, and if that constitutes a valid life form once it evolves to the point of self-awareness. The human race’s consciousness as a whole has progressed beyond what it was back in 1968, and is more able to accept certain ideas and concepts.

The evolution of ideas is what will define us as humans in the future, more so than the evolution of biology.

I leave you with perhaps the most memorable quote from the movie Blade Runner: “more than anything, shows that androids have Soul”.

I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.

-Roy Baty

——————————————————————————–

Current Forum: Bonus Assignment Forum

Date:  Thu May 30 2002 6:48 pm

Author:  SVETLANA

Subject: Re: Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

As for the equality between androids and humans, I thought they might be unequal in life, but they are certainly equal in death. Fear of death is their strongest emotion.

About science fiction (I am pretty positive that everyone will disagree), but I happen to like and agree with this excerpt:

“Rudi is so fascinated by all this technology that I don’t think he reads anything but technical journals and science fiction. He hasn’t even read my books, although he does display them prominently and always brags to his horse-world friends about having an unusual friend, a Russian writer.

He tells me (even without having read me) that I write too realistically, realism being the thing of the past. To be honest, such ridiculous opinions infuriate me, and I am always telling Rudi that his horses are also a thing of the past. But if some people still have need of horses, there still must be some use for a literature that depicts life as people really live it. People are much more interested in reading about themselves than about robots and Martians.

I had just said this to him in the beer garden where we were sitting. With a condescending grin, Rudi replied that we should compare the sales of my books with that of the average science-fiction writer. “Science fiction,” he said self-confidently, “is the literature of the future”.

That statement exasperated me. I ordered another mass and said that science fiction, like detective stories, is not literature but tomfoolery like the electronic games that induce mass idiocy.” (Voinovich, “Moscow 2042″)

——————————————————————————–

Current Forum: Bonus Assignment Forum

Date:  Thu May 30 2002 10:49 pm

Author:  Bill

Subject Re: Counting Electric Sheep

——————————————————————————–

Thanks for your response, Svetlana.

Now… Where to begin… First, I agree with your first statement about humans and androids being equal in death. And they do have a strong survival instinct. I’d say you’re right on the mark, there.

Regarding your next statement and quote concerning the uselessness of science fiction, I would have to strongly and completely disagree with that viewpoint. And no, it’s not just a knee-jerk response. I happen to believe that if you thought about it the right way, you too would come to see the value that fiction has in our society.

First, the person whom you are quoting… I don’t get the impression that he has read much of the science fiction that he chooses to so readily relegate to the Trash Heap of Useless Things.

Let me say a few things about fiction. Not just science fiction, but all fiction. Virtually all the great works of history and society are… you guessed it… fiction. If fiction was so useless, why has only it endured through the centuries when more “useful” things have not? Perhaps, then, it might not be that useless? Rarely can we have a conversation without some reference to literature of some sort. The English language is rife with phrases lifted directly from Shakespeare that even today are still in common use. Phrases like “something is rotten in the state of Denmark”, “pure as the driven snow”, “at one fell swoop”, “in the twinkling of an eye”, and the list goes on and on. How plain and poor would our language be today without the contributions of people like William Shakespeare?

Fiction has enabled our culture and many other cultures to attain a depth and richness that often is the only thing from that time period which endures. In ancient Greece, the Parthenon and other structures are in ruin. Yet, the ancient Greek tragedies are still performed for audiences all over the world. Homer’s The Odyssey and the Iliad are a part of every well-rounded library. In pre-Roman England, very little is known about the people that lived there or their culture. Yet from that time period, the epic ballad of Beowulf has endured.

Edgar Rice Burroughs, creator of such works as Tarzan and John Carter of Mars, has this to say about fiction, “highly imaginative fiction, such as I write, demands the retention of a youthful and elastic mind, to achieve which one of my principal aims in life is to keep my body physically fit and my mind responsive to a diversity of simple stimuli.”

Or, to quote someone a little more modern, according to renowned physicist Stephen Hawking, “science fiction is useful both for stimulating the imagination and for diffusing fear of the future.” Interest in science fiction may affect the way people think about or relate to science.

Fiction, and by extension science fiction, is not useless. There is value to be had. I enjoy the journey my mind takes to far off worlds and universes that I could not have begun to imagine on my own… To feel my mind stretching as it wrapped itself around a concept that had never before occurred to me. As existing social issues were displayed to me in a new light, and my understanding of them deepened as a result. As I became less aloof from the humanity about me and came to understand and even love the diversity the people I interact with each day.

I would never say that “mere fiction” is useless. It has real value, and ultimately, as history has proven time and time again… Perhaps the only enduring value.

You can’t discover new oceans until you are willing to lose sight of the shore…

All the best!

Bill