Wells: space travel; time travel; Martian invasion; future history.
Stapledon: all four in one volume, then a cosmic history!
Lewis: Christian replies on all four themes.
Heinlein: all four themes - alien, although not Martian, invasion; American future history series.
Blish: Wellsian-Stapledonian-Heinleinian, post-Lewisian sf.
Anderson: the same as Blish but a lot more.
That is a very brief summary. Lewis' interplanetary invasion is from, not of, Earth. His That Hideous Strength is not a future history but is about whether man can remake himself in the future.
In Surprised By Joy, Lewis writes that he:
"...took to...the 'scientifiction' of H. G. Wells."
-CS Lewis, Surprised By Joy (London, 1964), II., p. 34.
He found the idea of other planets, like the Moon and Mars, peculiarly attractive although it was also completely unlike any other literary interest. It was "...coarser and stronger..." (ibid.) than "Joy." Capitalized "Joy," a technical term invented by Lewis, refers to:
"...an unsatisfied desire which is itself more desirable than any other satisfaction." (I., p. 20)
I agree that this experience exists and is important but disagree with Lewis' deployment of it in a philosophical argument for theism. But the present question is whether we agree with Lewis about sf. His interest in it:
"...was ravenous, like a lust." (p. 34)
Those who like sf, he claims, like it ravenously whereas those who do not like it:
"...are often nauseated by it." (ibid.)
Therefore, he argues, "...a psychoanalytical explanation..." (ibid.) is appropriate. Is this a fair description of our interest in sf?
Lewis' own "planetary romances," as he calls them, were intended not to gratify but to exorcise this merely psychological and entirely unspiritual fascination by subjecting it to what he regarded as genuine imagination. Unfortunately, this exorcism took him out of the real Solar System into an imaginary one.
How did the transition to the literary ghetto of genre sf, which occurred in this period, affect the issue? When discussing all the issues that arise within Poul Anderson's works, I do not feel that I am gratifying a ravenous literary lust antithetical to spirituality.
4 comments:
Well, the 'literary' genre -- itself a product of this period -- tended to look down on all other genres, as if it itself wasn't one among many, but actual "fiction" from which those following different conventions deviated.
Kaor, Paul!
One of CS Lewis' most interesting essays was "Religion and Rocketry," containing many of his reflections on the theological issues that might arise from mankind making contact with non-human races. I even quoted some bits from it in my article "God and Alien in Anderson's Technic Civilization." I was esp. interested by his speculations on what might happen from Fallen humans meeting un-Fallen aliens.
You are more familiar with Lewis' writings than I am, has he ever mentioned any of Anderson's stories?
JRR Tolkien also liked SF, tho not perhaps as much as Lewis did. He liked some of Asimov's stories and critiqued one of Anderson's stories. Tolkien also corresponded with Forrest Ackerman, Gene Wolfe, and Sterling Lanier.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Lewis never mentioned Anderson or any other sf writer to my knowledge. Which Anderson story did Tolkien critique?
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Dang, then Lewis may have mostly focused only on Wells and Stapledon.
Tolkien read and critiqued at least Anderson's "The Valor of Cappen Varra." IIRC, as a philologist Tolkien wasn't satisfied with many of the names Anderson invented for the Cappen Varra stories. This came from me reading handwritten notes by Tolkien online.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment