Twisting The Tale
01/10/2003 . Source: Geoff Willmetts 

Back in the year dot before noughts were invented, Science Fiction was less restricted than it appears now. This was simply because there was more speculation about the state of the universe than there is today.

Hello everyone

Back in the year dot before noughts were invented, Science Fiction was less restricted than it appears now. This was simply because there was more speculation about the state of the universe than there is today.

Hardly surprising as there was no space travel nor orbital telescopes surveying the cosmos. Expectation & speculation made anything reasonable seem possible. One didn't always have to worry about the fine details.

Space travel was seen as something akin to driving a car rather than the inherent problems we know that exist today. The main two being getting out of the atmosphere and the boredom of long flights. The days of building a spaceship in your back garden and fly off are long gone.

It's information like this that you have to either account for, explain or be consistent with what we know today. As to string theory and time travel, well that would just tie you in knots just thinking about that. Who wanted to know how you got there when it was being in the past that seemed the most important part of the story.

Mind you, that's understandable or all space fiction would be starship bound instead of getting to the important bit. It's extremely unwise to bluff in Science Fiction with any established knowledge because too many know the difference and any credibility will be torn to shreds if you don't do any basic research.

The more popular and respected SF authors of what is commonly called 'The Golden Age' didn't bluff either. As the late Isaac Asimov lamented in his 'Asimov's Mysteries' anthology, when he wrote the short story 'The Long Night', he would probably have plotted differently had he known that Mercury actually rotated. It was only the more recent, to him, discovery of Mercury rotating that invalidated his story.

If anything, we can all be victims of our knowledge, scientific and otherwise, but it is a standard requirement to be up-to-date with the world of today as your starting point. With Science Fiction, it is expected that you should know a little about the science you're playing with. The world and its knowledge is changing very quickly today but it has more to do with technology than basic science. If anything, much of our current knowledge of the universe isn't going to change that radically for the present.

The number of elements in the Periodic Table aren't going to suddenly change by the discovery of a new one. Any new elements are going to be artificial and most probably very unstable. Scientific laws, at least at our end of the cosmos scale, aren't likely to change drastically. In many respects the current knowledge of the universe shouldn't be regarded as a limitation but it does mean a lot more work is required to maintain the sense of wonder.

If anything, we're also becoming a lot more jaded about our reality let alone its limitations and expectations. No aliens living on planets nearby let alone invasions for our resources. Having to break through such a barrier only ups the stakes for the earnest writer to be aware of all the relevant information that is currently affecting the world we live in and the story he or she is trying to write.

Something that might be thought of as viable one day could be dismissed by the scientific community the next. If it has any bearing on your story, then it has to be adjusted before the draft lands on a publisher's slush pile or it faces instant rejection for not remaining up-to-date. Saying that, fortunately, most of the time it's the details that might change not the basic knowledge.

This is why your imagination has to be applied and speculate where certain pathways will develop with the knowledge to hand. It should open new twists that weren't available for the SF authors of the past rather than rehash old ideas in a hope for a sale from familiarity. With our world slowly evolving into a possible Science Fiction future, everything has to be seen as relevant.

You can't write a story about cloning without taking into account society disapproval or at least the reasons of some groups why it shouldn't take place or its pitfalls like having a shorter life. This has nothing to do with being politically correct but more to considering how such problems could be resolved or how they affect the issue of the story. It might only end up being secondary details to the main plot but acknowledging previous problems also tells the reader you have done your homework. In many respects, it's a similar problem to space travel.

You're not going to be able to get to another star system in your own life time unless you defy Einstein's space-time limitation and exceed the speed of light. It isn't helped very much that you'll have to use similar methods to other writers in doing such things. Not because you're copying just that there's very few ways of using faster-than-light or hyperspace travel, especially if you want your characters to arrive in their own life-times.

This also brings up a problem of how to stay ahead of our reality. Setting a story in the future doesn't mean you can't ignore the science of today. It has to be used as the building blocks for any reality. When Asimov went back to his 'Foundation' stories he had no choice but to shed the hyperspace jump tables and install computers or look really out of date. He was very fortunate that hyperspace travel was only a means to an ends in his original stories.

His real stories were at the destination not in getting there. It's also a demonstration of how far we've come in the past 60 years. Back then, it was either log tables or slide rules used to sort out complicated maths (if you're too young to know what these things are look them up) and the latter only died out in the early 1970s. The computer on board Apollo 11's lander was no more than a programmable calculator you can buy today.

Correct that: Today's programmable calculators are more advance than in 1969. These days, knowing how to use either logs or slide-rule isn't that necessary cos a calculator or computer can give the answer in a few seconds and with greater accuracy. If anything, it is the technology that is advancing and refining than anything which is basic science. Maths is still the manipulation of numbers.

All that's changed is the way we get the answers. Using the computer as an example here. I doubt if such a device at the size it currently is let alone the capacity they run at today was ever contemplated. IBM would have you believe that there would only be 3 computers needed in the world. It was any wonder that so many stories developed where the computer ruled the world?

'Course, as we're all computer users reading this, there's an awareness that a menacing AI is less troublesome than a computer virus. Mind you, a computer virus isn't likely to talk back to you and only as smart as the programmer and less likely to be the subject of a story. Well, maybe. Hands up all those who's picked up the odd computer virus lately.

Saying that, everything will be turned upside down again when nano-technology is seen to be effective. Mankind will get through the throes of Ludditism fears and general prejudice until common-sense and practical use makes us wonder what we ever did without it. The fear of the Frankenstein 'monster' seems to be the backbone of the human psyche.

We fear the unknown first before deciding that some things might actually be better for us. A fear of change is probably a healthy thing in some respects. It stops and makes us think before acting but to living in a world that will never change would make us no better than a tardy pupil at school. If the need for change didn't overwhelm us then we'd still be believing that the Earth is the centre of the universe and Galileo's efforts to prove otherwise futile in proving to us otherwise. Science Fiction is the genre of speculation and serious thought for those who want to contemplate its implications.

Oddly enough, it really does appear that its fiction is following the same route as films and TV in that it's depending more on adventure than using the format as it was intended. That is, taking a basic premise of change and see where it takes reality. Even with a limitation of 6 or 8 basic plots, there is still a wider selection of solutions or resolutions to how they work out.

To just peter out in a happy ever after ending questions the level of expectation and what we think we want out of a story. Science Fiction is suppose to be challenging our imagination so we come out thinking as much as having a feel good factor at the end. [Isn't that so PC?!! Why don't we just issue happy pills?!]

Stepping out of our reality into SF and then come back with a deeper awareness is something that I took for granted in my youth and I was reading adult not junior fiction. The definition of adult SF had a lot more to do with intelligent theme and speculation than sex and bad language defines it today. As a genre, we need more Science Fiction to speculate than to re-cycle if we need to remind those who don't read it that SF stands for imaginative speculative reading.

SF needs a reminder of its roots for providing radical view points. Not that we all agreed with them but it did give us pause for thought. I tended to remind myself of that whenever I read Heinlein as he took a particular viewpoint rather than him being left-wing. This was mainly cos Heinlein didn't use his view to sway your judgement but only to show the consequences of such thinking and let you make your own mind up. I can't see the people of the future being much different than they are today or even over the past century. We aren't all going to be able to agree on everything.

Some radical thinking is definitely going to be dangerous but I'd rather read the consequences in fiction first than have a graphic demonstration in our reality. In many ways, SF allows us to exercise our fears, our Frankenstein's monsters, before they are brought to fruition. It doesn't mean that there can't be any of the other SF that's around today but I do think this aspect is becoming sorely neglected in today's Science Fiction. Be happy. Be safe. Use your imagination as it was intended. Enjoy the rest of the website.

Thank you and good night

Geoff Willmetts
editor: SFCrowsnest.com

PS For those keeping up with my health. Anyone want a head cold? I've got several going spare together with an irritating cough and stuffy throat that gets me when I least expect it. (Less Serious)

Thought For The Month # 1: The new American TV series 'Tru Calling' was originally going to be called 'Heroine' until it was realised that phonetically it sounded like a Class 'A' drug and might not attract the right kind of viewer outside of dealers and druggies.

Why bring this up now? Well, it occurred to me that there would be other series names that would also bring up a similar demographic. I mean, 'Anal-Retentive' is hardly likely to do well on TV largely because it would only be of interest only to TV executives. (Less Serious)

Thought For The Month # 2: Saying that, this might have serious overtones. The recent destruction of the space probe Galileo in Jupiter's atmosphere rather than risk a collision with the moon Europa cos they believe there is life developing below the ice surface. Looks like another tick on Arthur C Clarke's scoresheet for those who remember '2010'.

Pity we aren't told that there's a Monolith watching over Europa though. I said this had a serious over-tone. It is possible for life to be under Europa's ice. A lot depends on the thickness of the ice. Jupiter no doubt gives off a percentage of radiation that is providing the necessary heat. It might not be able to penetrate the ice but would certainly keep things on the warm side and under the right conditions queue the Richard Strauss music. Pity that it'll have to stay under the ice and so might not develop beyond lichen or algae level but proves basic life can develop anywhere. We are not alone when it comes to weeding although we might treat the weeds with a bit more respect.

(Less Serious) Thought For The Month # 3:

My re-watching of 'Babylon 5' has reached into Season 2 and brought up an interesting quandary. In our reality, when the American President's away, the vice-president stays at home to run the shop. In the future of this Earth Alliance, why do both the Earth President and vice-president leave Earth together, let alone on the same starship? Who's running the planet while they're away? All right, it was needed to dramatic effect and as evidence that Vice-President Clark was avoiding the explosion but he needn't have done it and would have had a firm alibi. Joe Straczynski: over to you.

PS If you've survived this far in the editorial, let me reiterate something from the website newsletter. As you can see from the main page, we have one of the biggest SF/fantasy/horror monthly reviews columns on the Net.

Our success has increased the number of books that comes in and our policy is to read everything before giving a review. We roadtest books so you have some idea of what you're letting yourself in for when all you've got to go by is the cover and promotional blurb.

If you like reading books in the genre, think and can show you can write a decent review and, most importantly, live in the British Isles (sorry, expense, time and distance travelled prohibits elsewhere), contact me below for my 'Reviews Flyer' - put this in the subject ebox and we'll see if you've got what it takes.

We can't pay you but a review for the price of a book has to be a good incentive. We have one of the most popular SF review columns on the Net. Think you're up to writing a review??

PPS: For those keeping track, I'm still about 18 months (late September 2001 now if you're still thinking I'm just repeating the same message every month) behind with going through the ebook samples.

Thank you for your patience but let me know if you've sold elsewhere so I can reduce my pile or if you've changed address, especially e-mail address. I've looked through a few recently who've sold elsewhere so that made moving on 2 months easier.

This isn't much of a repeat, just to show you're not forgotten. Those sending in samples, be prepared for a long wait and read the Guidelines elsewhere on this website. They are there to help you do some of the right things and reduce the number of times I'm repeating myself over silly grammatical errors.

It makes editing a lot easier if any editor has less work correcting poor English which should have been sorted out in the first place. There's an old editorial adage, if you can't aim for perfection why should an editor nurse-maid you to that state?

If you're a writer, then you should understand the words and grammar of the job you're supposed to be writing or are you considering it as mundane and boring as any other job to get right?