The Caste of Our Insecurities

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

Hard truths are best absorbed in small packets, at least when possible. Depending on the immediacy of their message, that luxury may be unwise or impossible. But confronting such truths and the facts supporting them may be the primary duty decency demands. Hence, the purpose of books like Isabel Wilkerson’s Caste: the Origins of Our Discontents. 

The thesis of the book is simply stated, that we here in America, the United States, whether we wish to see it or not, live in a caste structure that allocates hierarchies and exiles certain groups of people to inferior status for no reason other than the preservation of those hierarchies. She makes comparisons with India’s much older and in some ways more entrenched caste structure, and examines the history and modes of its instantiation here. She gives examples, some horrific in their violence, many baffling in their intractability. 

She makes the case.

And then she examines how it functions as a stealth program, unconsciously for most people, expressed by body language, word choice, social assumptions, and a kind of cognitive aphasia in which people simply do not see what they’re doing or who they’re doing it to. Difficult to get the why if the what can be so smoothly unrecognized.

It’s hard reading, and yet fills in blanks that other attempts at addressing racism and class bigotry fall short. For instance, we tend to default to the occurrence of racism based on appearance, and to a great degree that is a major aspect. But any look at the history of it in this country reveals certain baffling inconsistencies, as when Irish immigrants were seen as nonwhites in the mid-19th Century, and how Jews have long suffered a conditional status. Italians, East Europeans, and so forth, all passed through periods of being regarded as, functionally,  not White.

At times, the idea that class is at work more than race, but that will not answer the fact that “success” is no guarantee against automatic relegation to inferior status. Over the last century and a half that African Americans have been removed from enslavement, wealth has proved to be insufficient to overcome systemic biases, even as wealth makes certain interactions easier. 

In the afterwash of the Civil Rights era, many white people would like to believe that the issue has been settled, but we are constantly reminded that it is not. Partly, this has been a consequence of not identifying the problem correctly. The frustration of seeing our best intentions regularly thwarted by behaviors which seem to have no manageable foundation dogs us through history. The key factor in this persistent misidentification is the fact that all our public declarations, beginning in 1776, overwhelming stress our commitment to equality. This pledge masks intentions that run directly counter to the stated goals. It is more than special pleading, it is a refusal to adhere to principles that require us to stop being White.

By White I do not mean the surface markers of what we semi-scientifically term Caucasian. Because, as noted, many groups that have met those qualifications in the past were, at one time or another, regarded as Not White. White is a social and political designation. The term did not exist as a group marker until the 18th Century and was intended as a hierarchical label. It quickly established a kind of “natural” pecking order upon which the future designations of racial groups could be slotted into categories. This quickly became both political and economic fuel for purposes of group identity and justification for exploitation. In America it was used to legitimate not only slavery but miscegenation laws and later eugenics programs. But more consistently, it evolved a rigid caste system with which we live today, albeit diluted sufficiently most of do not recognize it.

Not recognizing, it becomes difficult if not impossible to deal with.

Wilkerson’s book is, as I say, hard reading. The savagery with which we have treated African Americans, even after the 13th and 14th Amendments ending slavery and establishing the principle of participatory equality, is made all the more terrible because of the ideas on which our country has been founded. To be sure, caste may not be the key to undoing the systemic disregard experienced by millions of people, but upon reading this book I have found some purchase on the problem that, while not rendering it sensible, at least suggests the degree to which the problem is rooted. 

It has also given some slightly more discernible explanation for what just happened in our recent election. And if true, it is a sad and pathetic reality. 

The apparent need sewn into the fabric of our being to somehow be Better Than is a double-edged blade. One can use that need for self-improvement without it becoming a toxic excuse to constantly keep someone else down, to perfect one’s gifts, to aspire to personal achievement. Or it becomes a need to just exercise a false sense of self-entitled privilege over others by virtue of the arbitrariness of birth or group affiliation. This can justify anything from cheating on exams to murder, depending on the pathology of the obsession to simply Be Better as opposed to Doing Better. And of course, if the latter is the path chosen, the goal is already lost. All that remains then is to do all one can to hide one’s inabilities, infelicities, and lack of empathy. 

Expunging this apparently integral notion of caste may be the only way to become the better angels of our stated aspirations. But how does one do something without first recognizing it?

Klara and the Sun

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

Klara and the Sun is a simple story built upon a deep substrate of subtlety. It realizes its best effects by the very plainness of its presentation. But given a moment’s reflection it becomes clear how profoundly well-imagined is the world he has constructed.

Klara, the viewpoint character throughout, is an AF—and Artificial Friend. A robot built to act as a personal companion for a child or young adult. It’s a very old idea, almost Victorian, from a time when the wealthy, the aristocrat, would pay someone to be companion to a son or daughter. A constant presence that could be relied on to always be supportive and, more or less, guide the subject on a solid path to adulthood. As the novel opens, Klara is resident in the store where AFs are sold, with a view of the busy urban street beyond.

We learn in short order that AFs are solar powered, that they are intent upon finding a place with a customer, that there are different models with different capabilities (Klara is a B2), and that to a significant extent they are emotionally aware. This last detail has always given me pause because emotion is intrinsically hormonal. Living creatures experience emotions because our bodies give us chemicals in response to event, so we know fear and happiness, embarrassment and depression. Without these systems, machines by definition cannot have emotions. (This is a trope in SF that has always troubled me, but it seems wired into things now.) Ishiguro gets us by this small problem by inference that the emotions are programs that seem incapable of serious modification. Even at the end of the novel, in less than ideal circumstances, Klara’s emotional engagement remains consistent. So we can see this as a matter of program response that is self-referential and operates within a relatively broad but constrained range. (There is within this a nod to Turing.)

Details matter, especially in the construction of plausible science fiction narratives, so I point the above out to suggest that Ishiguro has done his homework and built his world well.

Klara is purchased finally by the mother of Josie, who is around 12 or 13, and is not well. She suffers bouts of debilitation. Eventually we learn that this is a consequence of her having been Lifted, a kind of genetic modification intended to enhance a child’s potential, both physically and intellectually. It does not always work out, though. The Mother, Chrissie, has already lost a daughter to this process and now it seems another may die. So the choice of an AF for Josie is shot through with multiple motivations as well a guilt and hope. Klara determines that she is there to see Josie through this.

The setting is the near future. Things are different yet much the same. The social dynamics have found new bases on which to operate, but the results are much as they have always been. Lifting has become the new standard of acceptance and obviously there is a class component. Josie’s best friend, Rick, has not ben Lifted, and so is sort of a misfit in the social groups Josie’s mother wishes her to join. The tension around the process feels very familiar and yet is a disturbingly dissonant option—for some, not all. What emerges regarding Josie’s difficulties, the dynamics between her and her mother and the estranged father, with Klara in the middle for purposes she is not altogether aware of form the ecology of the novel. Klara’s own apprehension of the problem seems at times both naïve and simply off the rails, with her conviction that the Sun is the solution to all these problems. Because Klara is solar powered, it seems logical that she has what amounts to a belief system centered on the Sun as a sort of deity. 

All these components merge into a disturbing yet disturbingly familiar expression of hope and need for purpose that, even as the answers and solutions sought by Klara are often beside the point, speaks to dedication, loyalty, and conviction. Klara succeeds, even thought what she actually does appears to have almost nothing to do with the actual mechanisms with which she wrestles, and experiences…well, perhaps not “life” as we might accept it, but fulfillment of intent that resonates.

Ishiguro has demonstrated a unique method of writing science fiction that “passes” as not. He has been working toward this for decades now, not quite succeeding in the attempt, until now. Just as he managed to recast the Arthurian legends as an unexpectedly trenchant work of mimetic historical fiction that was more concerned with the underpinnings of legend than with the legend itself, here he has given us a thoroughly-conceived work of SF that works as “literary” in the ways our culture accepts the idea. Certainly one can read this is as allegory, Klara herself as a metaphor, and, if one chooses, ignore the dislocations of the world itself. One can pretend this is a kind of riff on The Prince and the Pauper, a page lifted from Pollyana, a gloss on any number of sickly-child stories, even a study of the emotional fallout of adoption and divorce and loss. I suppose it might even work satisfactorily that way.

But it works best when the underlying conceits, which are wholly SFnal, are accepted and engaged. This is a disturbing world, a decade or two removed from ours, strewn with questions about the ethics of genetic engineering, AI, emotional substitution, and the economics of transformative technologies. One could go back through and pick a dropped line and unpack the meanings and marvel as the implications. 

It has long been pondered what it would look like if one day science fiction became simply another mode of literature. I think this may be one of the best examples.

Year in review

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

I read 94 books in 2024. 

Not what I was shooting for, but not by any means unsatisfying. Upon retirement, I imagined myself spending at least two or three hours a day poring over all the books and devouring the things I’ve always intended to.

Well. That didn’t happen.

But as things get more settled, I might exceed my goal of 100 a year. (The highest number I ever reached was my senior year of high school. I had taken a speed reading course the year before, I was cruising through texts at an average of 2000 words a minute, and I cut class most of my senior year. I spent most of those days at the local library—seriously—and got to where I was doing a book a day. I plowed through many of the so-called classics that way and I might have read 300 books that year. Now, I can’t read that fast anymore and I’m much happier for it, because what I read at the more modest pace of maybe 150 to 200 words a minute means more, has more impact, and stays in my memory. Lately I’ve been revisiting some of those classics I read back then and it’s like reading them for the first time. I remember I read them, but not much else, with a few exceptions.) That would be a respectable number, I think. 

I did a lot of filling in this past year. Books I’ve owned for decades and never got around to, some works of SF that are important if not seminal works that I simply passed up. To that end, I read several of the original Ace Specials, edited in the late 60s-early 70s by Terry Carr. While a couple of them did not quite pass the test of time, I was pleasantly surprised by the D.G.Compton’s—Chronocules, Steel Crocodile, The Silent Multitude, and Synthajoy. I found them very mature works, dealing with human interaction in ways much more sophisticated than a lot of popular SF at the time, with premises that, while certainly science fictional, did not dazzle with hi-tech glitz, but supplied a satisfying substrate for the real action, which is how we treat each other. Compton, I believe, holds the record for the most titles published in the Ace Special line. As well, I read a couple of Bob Shaw’s, a writer who has unfortunately been largely forgotten today. The Two-Timers and The Palace of Eternity are sophisticated stories of seemingly minor shifts in the given tapestry of our lives with outsized effects. 

I also filled a couple of Michael Moorcock gaps with The Ice Schooner, The Black Corridor, The Distant Stars, and The Warlord of the Air. Moorcock can be uneven, but he possesses a singular approach to science fiction that, when effective, elevates his work to a remarkable degree. 

I also tackled a lot of Robert Silverberg. There is a lot of Silverberg. He is one of the most prolific writers, in any genre, and he crossed genres significantly. In his early career, he wrote a great deal of popular SF, potboilers really, and some of it has not aged well. When Silverberg is firing on all cylinders, he can be brilliant. But the volume of work…well, not all of it rose to such vaunted heights, and we shouldn’t expect it to. But in some ways, work which was once seen as cutting-edge and groundbreaking, especially socially, has worn poorly. But among those I read this year that I think remain remarkable I would put Downward To The Earth. It’s a riff on Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. Silverberg has claimed Conrad as one of his favorites, so it’s not surprising that he would take a page from him from time to time, and this one is rather well done. Another worthy tale is Sailing To Byzantium. It’s elegant and picturesque and in the end poignant. 

There are novels one should read at the right age or, really, when they first appear if possible. I read several older works that, for a variety of reasons, simply have not held up well, despite clever ideas. Sad, really, because I can see in many cases where I would—at age 15 or 16 or 26—have been utterly enthralled by them. Some of this has to do with the natural changes of style that come with the passing of time. We’ve learned how to write this stuff better. Some of it has to do with the priority given to aspects of certain stories we know were they done today would be differently deployed. Times have changed, tastes have evolved, and for better or worse I am someone who has a difficult time Going Back. I can’t read a lot of older work that I know I loved when I first encountered it, because, well, it doesn’t flow anymore. Expectations have mutated, grown, what have you. (I have this problem with period novels. I know people who can happily get lost in the works of Trollope or Galsworthy, but I trip over the prose and stumble. Oh, there are writers from those periods I can read, there are exceptions, but a great deal of popular work from previous eras just doesn’t work for me and it’s not the fault of the work itself.) I will confess here that there is one type of novel I simply grind to a halt with and that is the broad satire. I attempted to read John Sladek’s Mechasm (another of the original Ace Specials) and it’s Vonnegut-esque, which would be a recommendation for many people. But it’s…well, smart-alecky. Tongues visibly in cheeks, caricatures, and just…clever ideas packaged as a series of absurdities. I’m willing to cop to tone-deafness on my part, but too often I’ve been in the middle of work like this before realizing I’m trying to read smart-ass prose as if they were deadly serious. I’m working on that.

Then there are writers whose approach to subject—their strategies, if you will—fails to engage. I have blindspots about this. I read things others tell me are just marvelous and I find them clunky and all but inaccessible. But so many people extoll the virtues of these writers so much that I suspect many of us who are simply not impressed say nothing for fear of spoiling the party. 

One classic, so called, that was surprising in many ways? I finally read The Man In The Gray Flannel Suit. Sloan Wilson’s first novel and  cultural touchstone of sorts. My review is here, so I won’t go into it. I read a few books that in their day were heralded as important. Martin Amis’s Time’s Arrow, which I found clever if not altogether revelatory. And then there was The Futurological Congress by Stanislaw Lem. I understood something about Lem after this one that I hadn’t quite realized before. Lem did not like mot science fiction, especially American SF, and this novel offered a clue as to why that may have been. Lem, I believe, didn’t think humans were…improvable. That we might develop amazing technologies, even make major breakthroughs in science, but we ourselves? Hopeless. I think he may have reacted negatively to the kind of Higher Frontier cheerleading a lot of SF indulges. 

I continue to be impressed with the tor.com series. I’ve read a number of great books from them and not yet encountered a bad one. This year continues with the latest entry in the Murderbot seriea, System Collapse. A Season of Monstrous Conceptions by Lina Rather pushed the boundaries of Steampunk in interesting directions, although I’m beginning to feel that category ought to be retired, at least in many instances. Just because a story is set in a more or less Victorian milieu it should not automatically be regarded as steampunk. Sometimes it’s just alternate history. More often, it seems, it’s an example of horror. Be that as it may, another fine work from tor.com is Aliette de Bodard’s Navigational Entanglements, a very satisfying kind of space opera. Top of the list from that publisher, though, is Ray Nayler’s The Tusks of Extinction, a sobering contemplation on the economics and sociometrics of poaching and the costs of solutions.

Continuing my desultory attempt to catch up on what may have been my Golden Age, I read a couple more Clifford Simak novels—Cemetery World, in particular—and James Blish novels. Blish is another mixed bag. Some of his books have aged poorly, while some are surprisingly still very good. Titan’s Daughter is a mixed bag novel reminiscent of Wells’ Food of the Gods. A thriller of sorts. And Mission To The Heart Stars would seem to be a response to Heinlein’s Have Space Suit, Will Travel, both dealing in different ways with the idea of humanity having to pass muster before a galactic civilization that holds our fate in its grasp. 

Two of the most surprisingly pleasurable reads (for completely different reasons) this year were C.S.E. Cooney’s World Fantasy Award winner  Saint Death’s Daughter and the Booker Prize winner Orbital by Samantha Harvey. The first because normally I would never have picked it up, but it’s a title in my book group’s roster (this month actually), the second because…well, an SF novel written by literary writer that, being SF, won one of the most prestigious literary awards on the planet.

Saint Death’s Daughter is a sprawling bit of world-building that, despite its excellent background construction and detail, is very focused on its characters, who are wide-ranging and unique. Despite some touchpoints that suggest this world is some past (or future) iteration of our own, it quickly becomes irrelevant to the plot, which is twisty and engaging and in certain ways compellingly perverse. It deals with necromancy, includes ghosts, resurrection, and an original take on magic which, by the end of the novel, left me wondering if this were fantasy at all. The world is not Earth, not in any traceable way, and I began to see the traces of a nanotech explanation for much of the so-called magic. But it is written in the manner of a fantasy. It appears to be a fantasy and, as such, is not something I would normally pick up. But it more than paid off the investment in a 640 page novel. 

Orbital on the other hand is exactly the sort of thing I would pick up, as much out of a desire to see how well it was done as for its content. I should be used to finding well-done SF written by otherwise non-SF writers by now. These are artists who have come of age steeped in the brew of science fiction that has soaked contemporary culture. It’s not like the “slumming” that one used to find from mainstream authors who attempted the form that they might otherwise have felt a subspecies of Good Writing. It has become much more acceptable for someone like Kazuo Ishiguro or Emily St. John Mandel or Mat Johnson to produce a work of unapologetic science fiction (even though some publicists still balk at embracing it), but I’m still cautious and surprised when one is done well. In fact, very well. To be sure, Orbital is easily read as mainstream literary, the SFnal elements smoothly entwined with all the rest to make it feel contemporary. But if one of the chief values of science fiction is how is elucidates the human changes wrought by science and technology which are themselves game-changers—paradigm-shifters, if you will—in anticipatory modes, then Orbital qualifies, and it is the respectful flower of internalizing SF as a valid literary form with significant implications.

This past year I’ve read more SF than the last several. Largely, this was a consequence of having to devote myself to more research, but also because my nonfiction-for-pleasure has increased, and in that regard some of the highlights of 2024 have been: 

Christendom by Peter Heather; Democracy Awakening by Heather Cox Richardson; The Existentialist Cafe by Sarah Bakewell; The Second Sex by Simone de Bouvoir; White Holes by Carlo Rovelli; Plato At The Googleplex by Rebecca Goldberger Goldstein; Orientalism by Edward Said; The Witches by Stacy Schaff. Again, some catching up going on there, books I should have read but never got to.

So, 94 books. I may tally fewer this coming year as I have several on my pile of epic proportions. That and I don’t know yet how my next couple of projects will distort my strategies. But all in all, I’m pleased with this last one. I have not mentioned several others, many of which were quite good but other than noting that I read them would add little to this summary. One of these years I may start linking to a spreadsheet so everyone can keep track.

I’ll end by pointing out that the last few years have seen declines in reading rates across several demographics. This saddens me. I know the pressures of daily life can make reading seem like a luxury—or a chore—that one cannot afford, but given the state of, well, everything these last several years, I think it is a necessary survival habit. The level of ignorance—specifically, the degree to which people simply do not know things—demonstrated quite publicly by too many people is having a corrosive effect on life itself. Regardless how bad one’s school experience my have been, reading is one of the most civilizing skills available to us. Not just the casual cruising of an internet feed but the kind of reading that stretches the imagination. Take a book, turn off the feeds, sit down, and dig in reading. It seems more and more that we’re going to let the world burn because we just don’t know any better.

Have a better 2025.

One Size Fits Who

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

We all have a list of books we feel we should read, should have read long ago, and somehow passed by. My own includes such classics as Catcher In The Rye, A Canticle For Liebowitz, A Separate Peace…and until recently, The Man In The Gray Flannel Suit.

The title alone suggests and entire era, a movement, a period in history to be both remembered and forgotten. A cultural cul-d-sac that an entire generation rebelled against. Even in my own experience, it suggested a lifestyle of formal acquiescence to a stifling conformity that set an example to be either embraced or scorned.

And yet, I wonder how many of us knew nothing about the story.

So this year I did due diligence and read it. It was not what I expected. 

Published in 1955, it’s the story of a war veteran trying to make a life in the exuberant possibilities of post-war America. He works for a foundation, his work is appreciated, but the fact is he simply doesn’t make enough money to meet the expectations of wife, three kids, and his own notion of success. Upon advice from an acquaintance he applies for a job at the United Broadcast Company. 

Now, he comes from money, but his grandmother has pretty much squandered it all. She still occupies a sprawling house that sits on a lot of untouched acreage, but as to cash reserves, not much. 

Our Hero gets the job, but not the one he expected. Instead he will be working directly with the president of the company on a special project. When he reports to work, he discovers an elevator operator he knew in the army, someone who knows a secret about him he worries might become a source of blackmail. During the war, in Italy, he had a lover, a young woman trying to get by. She has a child by him. The war ends, he goes home to his American wife, and enters the struggle.

Everything turns on these points. Will he succeed at his new job? Will his indiscretion be revealed? Will his grandmother leave him the estate? 

The novel made a huge impression when it was published. Bestseller and then, almost immediately, a major motion picture starring Gregory Peck. And this was Sloan Wilson’s first novel.

Reading it today…

It’s a fairy tale. It’s a wishfulfilment, semi-cautionary yarn about honesty and backbone and what can only be described as the entrenched innocence of that decade of American history. Everything comes out fine. Or if not exactly fine, no one ends up impoverished, imperiled, or negatively impacted in any way they can’t handle. Our Hero walks a thick tightrope between integrity and conformity that pays off. Granted, a few things are left unresolved, but we know it will all be fine. Everything will be fine. He even tells his wife about the Italian lover and the child and after a day or two of near-panic, she adjusts and say it will be fine and they should send money.

All in all, it is a dissection of the components of 1950s corporate aspirations. There is a former servant who tries to pull a scam about the grandmother’s estate—he fails. It’s possible that the immediate superiors of Our Hero will engineer his ignominious ouster from what looks to be a privileged, plum job—they don’t. The community where he lives might not agree to a new school, which would torpedo his nascent plans for a housing development on the land he inherits—the school passes.

Nothing really bad happens to Our Hero. He doesn’t even seem to be suffering much from his war experience, which in some ways reads like the core of another novel which might be much better, particularly as he inadvertently kills his best friend. By his own admission he killed 17 men during the war. No PTSD. Well, one wouldn’t expect that from a 1955 novel, not the way we understand it today, but psychological damage was not unknown, even if it did get little public attention. Still, Our Hero is remarkably well-adjusted.

The Man In The Gray Flannel Suit is a guidebook as much as anything else, but as I say, it is an American post-war fairytale. Warnings about dangerous corners, potholes, alleyways, but all the warnings lead to nothing much, and at the end we know he’s going to achieve everything he wants to.

One can see the rejection coming not a decade later. The lessons, such as they are, suggest the old “work hard and keep your nose clean and you’ll be a success” chestnut, and they must have rung a false note even then. But not a decade after WWII, it must have been a welcome balm to an uncertain public. People would have cheered for this guy. (Compare this to James Jones’ Some Came Running, 1957, which deals with many of the same themes, but much more plausibly, which was also a bestseller and quickly made into a movie.) The Man In The Gray Flannel Suit is a kind of prayer that everyone should have a life worth having with the minimum of resistance, since, one assumes from the war sections, penance has already been paid.

It’s not even that the characters are falsely drawn. The psychology is consistent and believable (mostly) and carries us through the various scenarios without challenging us with implausibility—not even shallowness, really. But then, fairytales must be psychologically true to have any utility. Its tactic, though—and tactic is, I believe, the correct word—is to take us up to the edge of genuine pathos, let us peek over the rim, and promise the harsh catharsis of reality…and then veer off and let things come out the way we might prefer. It teases, all through.

Some books are best read in their day or at certain times in one’s life. I’m not sure what I would have made of this had I read it at, say, 16. In terms of content, it has a certain historical interest (the prices discussed would rattle anyone’s suspension of disbelief today) but would pass today as YA but for the ages of the protagonists. It is rather well-written. 

Anyway, this one I chose to check off my list. Some of the others…who knows?

So Together, So Alone: Souls In Orbit

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

As William Gibson once suggested, the future is here, it’s just unequally distributed. We live in the dreams of past wishful thinkers, what with all the technological marvels surrounding us and permeating our daily lives. We’ve become blasé about much of it. Many of us walk around with the equivalent of a tricorder in our pocket and I heard an interview the other about an eight-year-old in Gaza hunkering down in the midst of chaos with her laptop and cellphone. We walk the hallways of tomorrow and often fail to appreciate the wonder of it all.

But the oldest of media can bring it home how wide our world has become and leave us with an ancient estrangement about ourselves and our place in the now. Words on paper. Stories. People coping with the strange and trying to make it “normal” even as they acknowledge how utterly amazing it all is.

Samantha Harvey’s Orbital is about a group of astronauts during their tour on the international space station. A mixed group, Russians, an Italian, American, Irish, Japanese…an international bunch with experiments to run and tests to conduct and marvels to experience, within a microgravity environment their bodies tell them is not as it should be. And below on Earth a massive typhoon forming in the Pacific which they can do nothing but watch grow and move toward land.

What are their thoughts? Their reactions? What do they tell themselves about all this humanly anomalous circumstance? 

The time is not very far in the future. We know this because a mission is on its way to the moon. Such a mission is scheduled but not for a while yet. The next phase in the human expansion into space.

But mostly an expansion is the conscious space of accommodating this future and its implications. Each of these people have private reactions, philosophical methods for dealing with who they are and where. Orbital is an elegant examination of becoming. It is a literary novel about something once upon a time you would only find between the covers of science fiction novels. 

Orbital has also won the Booker Prize.

For some, this is in itself is a moment of dissonance. A space story has just won one of the most prestigious literary awards on the planet. 

Well, of course. We’ve been moving toward that for decades. And reading Orbital produces no surprises on that score. It is a beautiful novel and does something for the 21st Century both necessary and unexpected. It establishes a bridge between dream and reality, between what once could not have been and what seems inevitable. But it does so with the full recognition that we carry all that we are into tomorrow, wherever we are or wherever we go. It is a literary work for the science fiction age, which is a period more and more people are actively embracing and living in.

The question then is: is Orbital science fiction? We’ve gotten into the habit of using that label for work that features new technology and some sort of life-and-death adventure, possibly aliens, certainly the Unknown. As far as it goes, one could argue all of that is at hand (except perhaps the aliens—but on a certain level, aren’t we all aliens to each other?) but folded within a rich fabric of simple human coping. “We’re going to be living here,” it says, “at least some of us, and some us will visit, but even if we don’t, this is now part of the space we inhabit as members of the human race…so what will it be like to be ourselves in that extended world?”

On another level, Harvey has captured the awe we will be challenged to manage when we come face-to-face with the new territory. Mitigated of course by the price and consequence of going there. These people in this fragile container, cycling through sunrises that test their internal circadian, and watching the world of their birth from a vantage that allows a perspective most of us must actively work to achieve and which they can find by simply looking out a window, must learn to accommodate their attachments to Earth with the limits of a new physical proximity and the trade-offs to come.

The details are well realized, the science if solid, and so it had to be for the emotional impact to unfold with the truth of recognition. Here we are. There we will be. The universe is ancient and new. What now will we do? 

And we glimpse that while the questions and answers emerge with a timeless familiarity, they are not after all quite the same. 

Ad Stellas Per Musica

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

Jason Heller’s Strange Stars is an overview of music of the 1970s that referenced, overlapped, or otherwise advanced science fiction. As such, it gives us a unique musical history that sidesteps much of what dominated the Seventies, but which was central to what made that decade unique in contemporary, pop, youth, and/or rock music, however one registers the soundscape of the period.

His take-off point is Davie Bowie’s appearance as a kind of avatar of unapologetic science fiction concepts through music, especially his Ziggy Stardust persona. Given the chronology, I can’t argue with that, even though at the time I was only marginally aware of Bowie, and when I did notice him I was not especially impressed. But Heller touches on many of the bands and performers who did exemplify that strain of music for me.

Reading Strange Stars, I’m reminded of how much it is possible to miss, even while—or perhaps because of—living through it all. For instance, George Clinton and the whole Funk movement passed me right by. I was aware of its importance only in retrospect. Likewise with a great deal of Glam. It seemed to me at the time to miss the point, but I can’t say why exactly since I paid it little attention, intentionally or otherwise.

But Heller is right that the Seventies encapsulated the emergence of science fiction in popular culture in ways it never had before, and in popular music it came to the fore in unique and unexpected forms. There were precursors, of course—the instrumental bands like the Ventures and the Tornados, the novelty acts, and then the whole psychedelic movement that gave us bands like Pink Floyd, which, despite Heller’s dismissal of them in later albums due to a lack of overtly SFnal lyrics, remained aesthetically connected to SF compositionally—that led to a flowering and full embrace by 1969-70.

Heller searches for and finds ample connection to science fiction through lyric content, Easter eggs and unapologetic references to classic SF and thematic explorations, and certainly all that was present, especially in a lot of Bowie from that early period of his career. But for me, it was the composition and performance itself, regardless of lyric content, that spoke to my geeky SF fan backbrain. All those novelty songs from the Sixties, which Heller catalogues, never said “science fiction” to me because musically they were still products of 1950s rock’n’roll and rather cheesy and absurd, albeit amusing and catchy.

He catches this when he tags Bowie and, especially, King Crimson as the first full on manifestations of a SFnal aesthetic. What I recall listening for was, in a way, a departure point, perhaps a gateway into a future like those I found in novels by Heinlein or Clarke or Norton or Asimov. As the decade continued, I felt that many of these bands were acting as guardians at the gate of a tomorrow we might actually live in. If we were mindful. If we were careful.

So for me, it was Yes that signaled the future. Yes and Genesis (up to A Lamb Lies Down On Broadway) and Emerson Lake & Palmer. Especially ELP with Emerson’s embrace of synthesizers and compositional experiments like nothing else in Rock till then. I heard this music in the same way I read science fiction, as manifestations of different worlds.

Emotionally, I imagine that the first time I heard Tarkus I felt—reacted—the same way audiences back in 1913 heard The Rites of Spring. Something so unexpected, so divergent, so….tomorrow….that it was like a wrench.

For whatever reason, Bowie didn’t do that for me, for all that I liked Space Oddity. But Heller’s thesis is valid just the same. After Star Trek it became a popular aesthetic movement that more and more took on the surface, at least, of science fiction. The music perhaps has been an underappreciated aspect of that. I remember as an earnest adolescent searching for the next bit of music that fed that need for the next phase of civilization. (I found a great deal of it in what later became known as Electronica, especially with Tangerine Dream, whose albums were all racked in Rock along with James Taylor, Chicago, The Doors, and Joni Mitchell.) When I settled down to listen to an album or go to a concert, I was looking to be transported. Often it was just rock and I loved all that offered, but there were those acts and albums that, for me, were gateways in the same way many of the books I read were.

I very much enjoyed Heller’s book. It took me back. I learned things I never knew (like that the backing band for an obscure album by Ramases, Space Hymns, which is a curiosity more for its cover art than for its music, later became 10cc), and so many creations I never knew about. One is limited by time and, often, money. I didn’t have the budget to acquire most of the albums I would have loved had I known about them. It was a rich period of musical ferment and worth a new look. You could do worse than use Heller’s book as a guide.

Latent Miller

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

There is an appeal to the idea of being somewhere at the beginning, of wishing to live at that time and be involved in those things. The start of movements, the first iteration of a new art form, the establishment of a new mode of expression. We look up to those pioneers and imagine what it must have been like, and, if we’re honest, sometimes envy them the advantages they enjoyed by being first.

An illusion, of course. There was always something before them and what they did, even if the world paid too little attention to make it special. Those giants we praise were simply at the right place at the right time, when recognition coalesced around a particular example of an art that finally came—somewhat—into its own.

Whitney Scharer’s novel, The Age Of Light, offers some of that nostalgia. Quite a lot of it, really, as she deftly puts us into the heads of the principle players of the Surrealist days in Paris and takes us through events that more or less happened (the details of the behind-closed-doors bits remain speculative) to two of the emergent giants of the era—Lee Miller and Man Ray.

Outside certain circles, both names faded into the vagueries of Lost Generation narratives. Probably a lot of people recognize Man Ray, fewer Lee Miller, but they were central to what became 20th Century Photography. 

Scharer’s novel follows Lee Miller on her journey from high profile model to a want-to-be photographer in Paris. She’s young, naïve, hungry—and on the outside of the circles she wants very much to be part of. A chance encounter introduces her to Man Ray, who was already established as a notable professional photographer (though he wanted to be a painter) and she inserts herself into his life in order to learn. Famously, they became lovers, and it was one of the many tempestuous relationships that went on to fuel stories about that period and those artists from then on.

Lee Miller became an excellent photographer. She was a consummate professional, who was adept at a wide range of work, including fashion, which may be an easy surmise given her connection to that world from the other side of the lens. But she was also a war photographer, traveling through Europe during World War II and doing vital, unflinching work that included the liberation of death camps. The trauma of that period haunted her the rest of her life, but the work she produced is amazing. The only reason she has not been more widely known is likely the reason too many women in the arts get overlooked. 

But her reputation is rising once more with the advent of a new film starring Kate Winslett.

The Age Of Light  treats those later years in short inserts. The main focus of the novel is Miller’s years with Man Ray. Scharer gives us a deft, nuanced portrait of a woman who does not quite know her way into her own heart, but has an idea what direction she wants to go. The give and take, the surrenders, the sublimation to others, especially men, is the thread woven through the narrative, bringing us finally to the point at which Miller understands who she wants to be and decides not to be used anymore. Her portrait of Man Ray as talented but clueless male (who falls very deeply in love with Miller) is sympathetic while being clear-eyed about his faults and limitations. 

No one in this novel is uncomplicated.

But I want to highlight Scharer’s evocation of the period and the profession. As a once-upon-a-time professional photographer, I appreciated the work she put in to getting things right. Yes, there are a couple of mistakes, enough to make me wince, but they are minor compared with what I regard a successful realization of the magic and wonder of photography at that time. This was an art form that had a very difficult road gaining legitimacy in the larger art world. (Even in my youth, starting out, there were people who should have known better who never regarded it as an art.) That it caught the imagination of the Surrealists and the Paris art set is not surprising, but it is noted throughout that art photography never paid the bills. Man Ray and later Lee Miller had to do commercial work in order to make a living.

This is not, however, a nostalgic novel. The “glamor” of the times is subsumed in the austerity of the reality Scharer presents. While it may have triggered some wistful feelings in me (and presumably other photographers, especially of the pre-digital generations) it never wallows in any lost times soft-focus romanticism.

All in all, it is an excellent portrait of its subject. Nicely done. Brava.

Formative Times and Moving Forward

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

It is true, the music that first inspired you tends to be the touchstone for the rest of your aesthetic life. Those songs encountered when the hormones begin their rampage through your limbic system and set all your neurons dancing form the core of what you seek and appreciate going forward. For perhaps five years, what you listen to will anchor you. Five years between, say, 13 and 18. Or 15 and 20? Give or take, that half a decade will be the source you return to till senescence sets in.

If one is very lucky, that music will be excellent. I suspect the difference between someone who keeps listening to those pieces over and over for the next 50 years and someone who goes on to find new music, expanding from that initial thrill, is entirely dependent on the quality of that initial exposure.

Yes, I’m going to indulge in a bit of snobbery now. Sorry. I believe there really is a difference between forms, performers, and examples. I’ve known people who, over the course of thirty or more years, always—ALWAYS—opt for that old Bob Seeger album over and above anything else and seem impervious to everything else. For them, the nostalgia—and the ritual—is everything.

Recently I filled my CD changer with a selection of older albums. Jefferson Airplane’s After Bathing At Baxter’s, the first Jefferson Starship album, Carlos Santana and John McLaughlin’s Love Devotion and Surrender, Emerson Lake & Palmer’s first album, and Live Cream Volume II. All these albums I first encountered during that particular phase when I was discovering MUSIC. 

With the exception of one track, nothing on any of them made the Top 40 of the day.

All of them are complex, unpredictable, indeed unusual by the popular standards of the day. The Santana-McLaughlin was one of those records I played over and over again. The intricacies of construction, the use of key changes and tempo modulations, the inherent expectation that the listener was going to do nothing else but listen…

This was the sort of music that set my taste for life. But it was still a starting point. From there I found my way in jazz, into classical, into electronic, into the variations of rock, into some forms that defy categorization. What seemed to me an obvious trajectory was to keep looking for newer works (meaning new to me) that teased those same responses to the tonal pageant on offer. 

Which of course initially meant following those musicians where they led, but along the way trying related artists, then stepping out of that stream altogether into new waters. Admittedly, without ELP and Yes I might not have discovered either Stravinsky or Sibelius. But once discovered, the library doors were opened, and the treasure of centuries lay before me.

But I confess, there is something about those works heard then that hold a deep fascination for me still. Those anchors still hold. It may be bias (and if it is, fine, I welcome it) but when I listen to those albums from back then, parts of my aesthetic are triggered in ways no other music manages. Even those works I no longer listen to very much if at all, when I hear them, a part of my spirit wakes up. I have no doubt this is as much a kind of imprinting as any other emotional attachment may claim. The question I have is, why do so many people remain locked in those periods, and others…don’t?

I suppose one could ask the same question of books and films. I suspect it has to do with the kinds of questions posed by those initial encounters. They leave one attuned to the next thing—or not.

As in other areas, I was always out of step with my peers. I tried to get enthused about the songs they seemed so turned on by, but for the most part the Top 40 model left me unsatisfied. On their part, they lacked the patience for what I preferred. And then there’s the whole cultural mode of music as background, as if its only function was as wallpaper, a room in which to carry on conversations or drink (or smoke), and for too many people the notion that one should shut up and listen was just odd. (You do that with classical stuff, don’t you? Yes, that’s why I don’t listen to it.)

We went to a club once because of the band playing that night, one of our favorites, and it was annoying that here were these superb musicians, doing amazing things, and yet the hubbub of ongoing chatter was constant and dismaying. They were missing something marvelous, and yet it seemed more important to talk about what-all even in the presence of brilliance.

I’ve always wanted to share my enthusiasms. It takes a while to sink in that in some instances, no one cares. Not that way, at least, and by pushing the issue you just seem weird.

But nostalgia, whatever it is, has its place. It is useful and pleasurable and I wanted to talk about it a bit. For me, it’s a special place, but was always just a starting point. All that I have heard since those first few years of being immersed in so much beauty has given me the standards…perhaps that’s too definite a word…the basis, then, to continue to find more beauty. 

Thank you for indulging me. 

Simulation and Literary

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

The question nags, even when it would seem settled (by some, at least): what qualifies a work as “literary”?

In a recent discussion about Justin Cronin’s The Ferryman, the question came up again. It seems to arise mainly in relation to genre fiction, which by those who traffic in such comparisons is decidedly not literary. At least until it is.

But what does that actually mean in terms of the book in your hands?

Always and ever, just as in the assessment of wine, if you’re enjoying it, it’s fine. It can be argued that the best gauge for whether something is “good” or “great” or “literary” is whether it can be read with pleasure multiple times. 

What about a given text would support that?

Let’s assume for the time being that there really is a definable difference between Literary fiction and Genre fiction. Fine. A good starting point to make that distinction would be to ask what the book is about. Following closely on that, what emphasis is placed on how the book addresses its subject.

Before we get too far into the academic, let’s make a distinction right now. In brief, what makes a work Literary rather than Genre? Well, a literary work is about its theme[s] while a genre work is about its tropes. A bit broad perhaps, but a fair starting point.

Which brings us to a primary example of blurred distinctions which both highlights them and dismisses them. Justin Cronin began as a literary writer, then moved into horror, and now science fiction. Of course, the only label one sees on the spines of his books is Fiction and he is marketed with all the presumption that he is a Literary Writer. And yet, Spaceships? Cryogenic suspension? Computer simulation?

The Ferryman is one with such works as Station Eleven, Oryx and Crake, Invisible Things. Novels that are on one level clearly science fiction and yet are received as…not.

The Ferryman is a magisterial novel about a ship on its way from a decimated Earth to a new planet in another solar system, bearing colonists who are asleep in suspension in order to make the century-long voyage. In order to manage the many problems with suspension, they are all tied in to a computer which runs a simulation in which they live otherwise ordinary lives. This is necessary to fend off cognitive decay due to a kind of dream exhaustion. Upon arrival, they will be revived to begin the work of establishing a new colony.

This is classic science fiction. The earliest story in modern SF to suggest the idea is Murrary Leinster’s 1935 Proxima Centauri. Robert A. Heinlein’s  Universe (1941) established the idea as a major theme in SF and many examples have proliferated for decades. A large vessel carrying thousands of people, sometimes with an ecosystem designed to sustain multiple generations, on a voyage of hundreds or thousands of years due to the limits on speed. Among the better examples are Gene Wolfe’s Book of the Long Sun and, more recently, Kim Stanley Robinson’s Aurora. 

What Cronin adds is the idea of the simulated existence, set in a “real” world, with the wrinkle of regeneration. People age to a point where they must leave their life to be reborn and come back as a new version of themselves sans memories. The ferryman of the title is one who escorts these people to the docks to get on the boat to take them to an island where the regeneration happens.

But not everyone. The support staff, so to speak, the workers who do all the labor, live on another island and do not receive rebirth. It is a class society, in many ways resonant of certain cities of recent memory. The elite run things, enjoy a rich aesthetic life…and rebirth. The workers…well, revolt is brewing. 

Through a good part of the novel all this feels as if it is only the near future and this is a closed community of he moneyed class, shut off from the rest of the world. We’re allowed to imagine all kinds of scenarios that have nothing to do with interstellar travel. This is on Earth. And the dramas of the principle characters are plausibly personal, with enough politics to hint at conspiracy. Cronin does a good job at misdirection here. We keep reading to find out what happened, how this hermetically-sealed society was established, what they’ll do when the peasants, so to speak, finally rise up to dethrone them. This is a tense socio-political situation and the title character, Proctor, a ferryman, is at the heart of it.

Proctor is having problems at home as well. His father has reached the end of this life and Proctor is the one to take him to the ferry, where an unanticipated series of events start an unraveling for Proctor that leads eventually to…

The actual situation, as it is revealed, is satisfyingly surreal and takes us right out of the mimesis of literary immersion and into the science fiction scenario that has been there, all but unnoticed, from the start. With minor quibbles, it is also good science fiction.

But in point of fact, it does not read like genre, not even at the end? Why?

One could say that the writing elevates it, which is a simplistic (and frankly insulting) explanation. The writing is good, but so is the writing by Gene Wolfe or Ursula Le Guin or Octavia Butler, yet they are all firmly defined as science fiction. 

Back to my premise: Literary is about its themes while Genre is about its tropes. While Cronin does a very good job describing his settings and, even at the end, explaining how things work, his focus is very much not on those things. His focus is on the internal workings of his characters. In the end, his characters determine the shape of the world, not the other way around. In the end, they are all solving personal problems, even the overall problem of surviving a dying Earth. In more or less typical SF, the world determines the shape of the character’s internal landscape. It is the human response to those dramatic differences that drives the SF narrative and is equal to or even above the interpersonal elements of the narrative. Cronin even remarks on the tenacity of human unwillingness to change in an exchange toward the end in which it is pointed out that the simulation design shows a sad adherence to a past that ought to be dead. With all the options at their disposal, the architects of the “world” choose to recapitulate a static scenario that should have been dismissed long before.

Moving past the binary here, it is of course too simplistic to categorically claim that Literary fiction is about its themes. There is a juggling act that goes on with any work of fiction that privileges one aspect over another, and depending on the emphasis placed on one or the other, such privilege can push it into a genre model wherein the tropes can emerge as character, the detective’s city as much a character in need of analysis as the detective himself, or, in the case of science fiction, the altered landscape that dictates new responses from the people inhabiting, and in fact, if done well, becoming a character itself. The borders are soft, permeable. A century ago, before marketing categories set much of this in concrete, the standard was how well truth was addressed, how deeply the reader could be immersed, how consistent and resonant were the characters. So it never occurred to publishers to create and follow a distinction that would have removed something life Brave New World from the literary mainstream just because it was set in a place, at a time, with customs alien to current embrace. 

I’m heartened that those who inhabit the old precincts of Literary are now stepping outside those walls and writing works that challenge our definitions. And of course that goes both ways. We may come to a point when those old borders have been beaten into oblivion by all the crossing back and forth.

The Trajectory of Faith and Historical Reality

/ Mark W. Tiedemann / Leave a comment

All histories are potentially divisive. Depending on how one approaches a period, supporters, detractors, identitarians, anyone with a self-appointed mission to either defend or attack certain sacrilized bovines may find agitation to the point of absurdity. The historian must be at least aware of all this before tackling her subject. Not with a view to self-censorship (although that may happen by default) but to know how much referencing and documentation may be required to overcome (somewhat) assaults based on issues having only tangential relation to the history being examined.

Which is one reason a book such as Peter Heather’s new Christendom: the Triumph of a Religion AD 300—1300 is both hefty and well-notated. He is not here interested much in the assertions of Christianity, only in the evolution of the religion over time as a social and political entity. The road from minor cult to the dominant aesthetic and political reality of Europe by the 14th Century is here examined as a system. How did it get to the point where we are still wrestling with questions of cultural legitimacy as they impinge upon the political realities of modern life?

Heather resents his credentials—agnostic, let’s say—as someone interested in what people did and how they did it. This is a history like any history of a country or a people. Dates matter. Major players matter. Shifting demographics matter. This is the story of bureaucracies and armies and successions and, above all, assertions of power. The Christianity that emerged over centuries after Emperor Constantine declared it the state religion of the Roman Empire is, regardless of how individual believers may feel, a political system. After Constantine is certainly became something other than what it started. The road it traveled is fascinating and maps closely to the more usual history with which we are familiar (if we are familiar with it).

This adds a layer as well to the questions of why Rome “fell” and how the Crusades began and failed and the way in which dynastic politics became inextricable from the dissemination of a faith that, in primary ways, was diametrically opposed to everything Europe became.

Two details make this a fascinating take on the topic. One, Heather goes into great detail over the matter of conversion. Of course, we know the famous ones—Augustine, Constantine, the less well-known Pegasios—and by these we understand it to be a dramatic, soul-wrenching experience. But when closely examined, it was never so simple, and for the vast majority of people at the time it was much more mundane. This month we’re worshiping Apollo, next month Sol Invictus, the month after that the Christian God. In order to comply with the law and obtain work, we must change our associations. Constantine’s mandate impacted the Empire through patronage. In order to obtain a position in the government, conversion was required. Heather makes clear with the case of Pegasios (bishop of Ilios, 350s A.D.) that it was a revolving door, as Pegasios had no trouble going back and forth between paganism and Christianity as circumstances dictated. This was not, for him (and presumably many others) a matter of salvation of the soul as it was a matter of livelihood and income.

Moving forward, it then appears obvious that the vast majority of conversions were pro forma. The king has decreed he and his subjects shall be Christians and so the people go to a different church.

This contradicts the idea of a major ideological revolution sweeping the continent. This was political.

Once understood, subsequent Church history makes more and more sense as history. Alliances, territory, prestige—all the values of a strong state—contributed to the eventual displacement of older religions as Christianity became the dominant ideology.

It is in the triumph of that ideology—or, rather, its symbols—that the success is traced. What people followed willingly (and, to our dismay, today) is a successful leader who could demonstrate a special bond to fate. The story of Constantine’s victory at Milvian Bridge is not a single unitarian narrative. There are four versions and it seems obvious in context that each served a public relations purpose. The Chi Rho triumphant, symbol of early Christianity, figures prominently in the story, but not in the same way in the various tellings.

Which is also where Christianity veered off its previous path of peace and harmony and, over time, became a militant religion. The leader who was victorious in battle and claimed aegis of the Christian god got to say which god would be worshiped. The contradiction emerged from the beginning. Peace and War joined in a paradoxical arrangement to underwrite the legitimacy of king or emperor.

The other thing Heather’s history dispels is the myth of the barbarian hordes. We tend to visualize them as rude brutes with no learning pouring brutishly into Roman precincts destroying a sophisticated civilization. In reality, these “barbarians” had learned from Rome and were in many way culturally on par with the empire they were displacing. And they brought with them their own variations of what they saw as True Christianity.

Which leads to another aspect that is oft misunderstood, which is the mythology of the Church Triumphant calling all the shots across Europe. That did happen, but it was a long process and fraught with setbacks and disputes. For much of the millennium being discussed, it was the kings who told the church what to do. Charlemagne’s crowning as the first Holy Roman Emperor was his idea, stage managed on his end, with the Pope going along with it lest there be consequences.

In short, this is an agnostic analysis of the growth of a bureaucratic, political system which follows the twisted paths of such things like any other. And by the time Rome became predominant once more, it was at the head of a religion that barely resembled the early pastoral communities from which it sprang. Each stage was a near-run thing and the unity of the Church was never what it appeared to be. 

Which is a curiously pertinent bit of history to become acquainted with now. Keeping the components separate and knowing how such things happen is a useful tonic in an age where the cries of faiths that claim unalloyed divine cause to overturn anything in their path.