Technology moves ahead in leaps and bounds. The article didn't mention the new state of matter that was discovered earlier this week—quantum spin liquid—that should lead to incredible improvements in data storage among other things. But to answer the question seriously, science fiction at its core isn’t really about technology. Science fiction is about what it means to be human. Technology is merely the means to test those boundaries, and the more technology advances, the more material sci-fi writers will have to play off of. Every doorway that is opened leads to a room filled with more doorways.
Technology moves ahead in leaps and bounds. The article didn't mention the new state of matter that was discovered earlier this week—quantum spin liquid—that should lead to incredible improvements in data storage among other things. But to answer the question seriously, science fiction at its core isn’t really about technology. Science fiction is about what it means to be human. Technology is merely the means to test those boundaries, and the more technology advances, the more material sci-fi writers will have to play off of. Every doorway that is opened leads to a room filled with more doorways.
ooo... oooo... not mind blown.... rather..... mind... expanded... *in Jeff Goldblum's voice..
There are only 37 plots and the Greeks used them all.
What can SF writers do? The same thing thy have always done: Show how we will react to these new things. Bring out ideas that would be too ham fisted to do in a modern society.
Naturally, I get that the science in Science Fiction is just a setting in which to tell stories about people. I was thinking in the context of Jules Verne and H.G. Well. The predictive elements of those "prophets of science fiction" (nod to John Suntres) are mind blowing. Technology is doubling itself so quickly that i myself often have a hard time wrapping my head around it.
The Prophets of Science Fiction series was a good little show, but some of their suppositions were a little... dubious. In the cases of Verne and Wells, they were just trying to tell exciting adventure stories, not make any predictions of where technology was heading. Most of the “science” in their stories had little basis in how things actually work. I think you could call Wells a SF writer—at least part-time—but I consider Verne to be a fantasy writer with science-fiction trappings, just like I consider Star Wars a fantasy film and not a sci-fi film. Either way, I would say neither of them were predictive in any way. That is to say, I don't think either of them based a single one of their novels on an idea they thought was likely to come true based on the scientific knowledge of their time. But if you throw enough ideas out there, and they remain in print long enough, some of them are bound to come to pass.
In more recent times, however, I think probably the majority of SF writers write in a predictive manner, where they actively try to imagine where science is headed next. A large number of science-fiction writers have a background in science. Neal Stephenson, for instance, majored in physics until he found he could get more time on the university computer server if he switched majors to geography—which he then did. J.G. Ballard studied medicine for a time, and later served as an assistant editor for Chemistry and Industry magazine. Asimov, of course, was a professor of biochemistry. Authors like this have a strong working knowledge of the world, and how scientists think, and what the likely routes are for scientific discovery. Add in some creative thinking and they have enough story ideas to last a lifetime.
The Prophets of Science Fiction series was a good little show, but some of their suppositions were a little... dubious. In the cases of Verne and Wells, they were just trying to tell exciting adventure stories, not make any predictions of where technology was heading. Most of the “science” in their stories had little basis in how things actually work. I think you could call Wells a SF writer—at least part-time—but I consider Verne to be a fantasy writer with science-fiction trappings, just like I consider Star Wars a fantasy film and not a sci-fi film. Either way, I would say neither of them were predictive in any way. That is to say, I don't think either of them based a single one of their novels on an idea they thought was likely to come true based on the scientific knowledge of their time. But if you throw enough ideas out there, and they remain in print long enough, some of them are bound to come to pass.
In more recent times, however, I think probably the majority of SF writers write in a predictive manner, where they actively try to imagine where science is headed next. A large number of science-fiction writers have a background in science. Neal Stephenson, for instance, majored in physics until he found he could get more time on the university computer server if he switched majors to geography—which he then did. J.G. Ballard studied medicine for a time, and later served as an assistant editor for Chemistry and Industry magazine. Asimov, of course, was a professor of biochemistry. Authors like this have a strong working knowledge of the world, and how scientists think, and what the likely routes are for scientific discovery. Add in some creative thinking and they have enough story ideas to last a lifetime.
Actually, having recently read Verne's most popular novels, I think it's more accurate to classify him as a travelogue author, as he was seldom interested in much of anything but the journey and what people saw along the way. He used SF trappings as an excuse and a method to get people to those fantastic sights, and cared little for exploring the characters that populated his tales. His stories were mainly about the travels and nothing more.
The Prophets of Science Fiction series was a good little show, but some of their suppositions were a little... dubious. In the cases of Verne and Wells, they were just trying to tell exciting adventure stories, not make any predictions of where technology was heading. Most of the “science” in their stories had little basis in how things actually work. I think you could call Wells a SF writer—at least part-time—but I consider Verne to be a fantasy writer with science-fiction trappings, just like I consider Star Wars a fantasy film and not a sci-fi film. Either way, I would say neither of them were predictive in any way. That is to say, I don't think either of them based a single one of their novels on an idea they thought was likely to come true based on the scientific knowledge of their time. But if you throw enough ideas out there, and they remain in print long enough, some of them are bound to come to pass.
In more recent times, however, I think probably the majority of SF writers write in a predictive manner, where they actively try to imagine where science is headed next. A large number of science-fiction writers have a background in science. Neal Stephenson, for instance, majored in physics until he found he could get more time on the university computer server if he switched majors to geography—which he then did. J.G. Ballard studied medicine for a time, and later served as an assistant editor for Chemistry and Industry magazine. Asimov, of course, was a professor of biochemistry. Authors like this have a strong working knowledge of the world, and how scientists think, and what the likely routes are for scientific discovery. Add in some creative thinking and they have enough story ideas to last a lifetime.
Actually, having recently read Verne's most popular novels, I think it's more accurate to classify him as a travelogue author, as he was seldom interested in much of anything but the journey and what people saw along the way. He used SF trappings as an excuse and a method to get people to those fantastic sights, and cared little for exploring the characters that populated his tales. His stories were mainly about the travels and nothing more.
You could certainly make a case for that based on his Voyages Extraordinaires novels, which make up most of his catalog, though I think Phileas Fogg and Nemo are characters all the more interesting for what is not said about them.
I will say that I have not read Paris in the Twentieth Century, which from what I have read about it, seems to be the most SF of all his books. And then, of course, there’s Robur the Conqueror and Master of the World, which come a bit closer to SF, though I still wouldn't call them the results of predictive writing.
This was one of the things that attracted me to Punk Rock Jesus. (Premise: DNA from Shroud of Turin cloned and then raised on a Turman show-esque reality show called J2) It occurs to me that it has been, what 15 years since dolly the sheep was cloned? I saw a TV show last year called, i kid you not, Clone My Dog. the premise was some hollywood plastic surgeon took a DNA sample of his dog after it was hit by a car and shipped it off to Korea (apparently the apex of this technology) and they shipped him back 3 identical dogs. if this technology has reached the Reality TV level then you KNOW there is some mad scientist out there cloning Kim Jong Il.
This was one of the things that attracted me to Punk Rock Jesus. (Premise: DNA from Shroud of Turin cloned and then raised on a Turman show-esque reality show called J2) It occurs to me that it has been, what 15 years since dolly the sheep was cloned? I saw a TV show last year called, i kid you not, Clone My Dog. the premise was some hollywood plastic surgeon took a DNA sample of his dog after it was hit by a car and shipped it off to Korea (apparently the apex of this technology) and they shipped him back 3 identical dogs. if this technology has reached the Reality TV level then you KNOW there is some mad scientist out there cloning Kim Jong Il.
WIth it being a Reality tv show who knows how real that show is.
This was one of the things that attracted me to Punk Rock Jesus. (Premise: DNA from Shroud of Turin cloned and then raised on a Turman show-esque reality show called J2) It occurs to me that it has been, what 15 years since dolly the sheep was cloned? I saw a TV show last year called, i kid you not, Clone My Dog. the premise was some hollywood plastic surgeon took a DNA sample of his dog after it was hit by a car and shipped it off to Korea (apparently the apex of this technology) and they shipped him back 3 identical dogs. if this technology has reached the Reality TV level then you KNOW there is some mad scientist out there cloning Kim Jong Il.
So would that make cloning the next stuffing and mounting? (I’m talking about taxidermy, people. Get your minds out of the gutter!) I guess technically those people who have had their pets stuffed and mounted could still send them to be cloned, assuming the DNA is still viable.
And I'll bet Disney is all over this. They’ve probably already shipped Walt’s frozen head to the lab.
Comments
:D
What can SF writers do? The same thing thy have always done: Show how we will react to these new things. Bring out ideas that would be too ham fisted to do in a modern society.
It's more than just the tricorders.
In more recent times, however, I think probably the majority of SF writers write in a predictive manner, where they actively try to imagine where science is headed next. A large number of science-fiction writers have a background in science. Neal Stephenson, for instance, majored in physics until he found he could get more time on the university computer server if he switched majors to geography—which he then did. J.G. Ballard studied medicine for a time, and later served as an assistant editor for Chemistry and Industry magazine. Asimov, of course, was a professor of biochemistry. Authors like this have a strong working knowledge of the world, and how scientists think, and what the likely routes are for scientific discovery. Add in some creative thinking and they have enough story ideas to last a lifetime.
I will say that I have not read Paris in the Twentieth Century, which from what I have read about it, seems to be the most SF of all his books. And then, of course, there’s Robur the Conqueror and Master of the World, which come a bit closer to SF, though I still wouldn't call them the results of predictive writing.
And I'll bet Disney is all over this. They’ve probably already shipped Walt’s frozen head to the lab.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,993568,00.html
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/glenn/technology/warp/warpstat.html
http://io9.com/warp-drive/
http://gizmodo.com/5942634/nasa-starts-development-of-real-life-star-trek-warp-drive
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2012/09/warp-drive-plausible/
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-scientists-begin-warp-drive-experiments-190400874.html