A Writer's Odyssey

Another comment on the Odfellow list on the topic of whether or not there is an anti-science trend in today's science fiction was that today’s sf writers are generally pro-science and don’t pan scientists.  The same poster made the point that Generation X and Y generally embrace rather than abhor technology. 

I responded to both comments:

I agree with your statements whole-heartedly, but you are talking about a very limited group--professional sf writers, writing for a sympathetic clientele, sf fans.  Many sf writers are themselves scientists--Greg Benford, Vernor Vinge, Joan Slonczewski, et al--and you will seldom read negative comments about science or scientific progress in a magazine like _Analog_, for example, that's dedicated to the idea of scientific progress.

My comments are focused on the scientist as a figure of popular culture, and there the outlook is not so rosy.  Going back to "Dr. Strangelove," there is a portrait of the Ignorant Scientist that seldom reflects the reality of science researchers.  This is especially true in popular techno-thrillers like _Coma_, _The Andromeda Strain_ and _Jurassic Park_, where writers like Robin Cook and Michael Crichton make a living portraying scientists in unflatteringly simple if not venal roles.  Check out Stephen King for many more examples (I say this knowing I'll draw fire from his admirers on the list; he's a fine writer but he does pick on scientists.)

Hollywood is particularly guilty of using the scientist as dupe or evil--from remakes of romantic classics like "The Island of Dr. Moreau," to modern New Wave-type sf movies like _Aliens_ series, where scientists are basically robots in the service of corporate and military interests.  The SciFi Channel is notorious for mass-producing these kinds ofmade-for-tv movies--check out "Sometimes They Come Back for More," and "Reign of the Gargoyles" (featuring creations of evil Nazi scientists, a favorite plot device of this network) I understand the latest buzz film, the Korean horror movie "The Host" features a creature created by a toxic substance thrown into a river by an American scientist.  These examples show that there's an audience that accepts this stereotype, whether they believe in it fervently or not.

Being a progress-loving technophile myself, I'm glad to hear that the generations coming up are pro-science and technology, even though I don't see the love of science and mathematics played out in my classroom very often by my students, who love their gadgets but aren't much interested in learning how to make them.  But I'm also cynical enough to believe that you, Abby, technophile that you are, live in a part of the country and work in a business surrounded by people who are like yourself, so perhaps you don't see the opposition to science and technology that exists elsewhere by people in your generation.

Pirsig uses the metaphor of the pendulum swing to describe the swing in popular support for the classic-romantic points of view. I believe that there are plenty of romantic, back-to-nature types just waiting to bash science and scientists.  We're just one technological disaster, terror attack, or war away from another pendulum swing, and the seeds for it are being sown in our popular culture by the depiction of scientists as dangerous people.  Sorry to sound so pessimistic, but there it is.

|  Add to del.icio.us |  digg this