Anderson's Thermonuclear Warfare (Derby, Connecticut, 1963) argues that such an outcome is impossible:
"Some romancers have suggested that increased irradiation of man will simply increase the rate of evolution and so create a race of supermen. But this, again, is nonsense...
"Mutation, a strictly random process, nearly always does the wrong thing. A few babies born with superior intelligence, eyesight, or whatever [as in Twilight World] would be of no use to a human race most of whose children were being born defective. And even these few accidental superiorities would often be nullified by deleterious genes in the same individual.
"For practical purposes, then, we can say that all mutations are bad..." (p. 39)
I began reading Thermonuclear Warfare in the hope that it would not only inform us the readers about its subject (which it does) but also provide background information for his Psychotechnic History. Instead, it refutes his Twilight World future history! But this is what happens in speculative fiction. Some speculations pan out; others don't.
5 comments:
Hi, Paul!
Yes, that makes sense, what Anderson said about how for all practical purposes, mutations caused by massive irradiation will be always harmful, not beneficial. My thought was that by the time he wrote THERMONUCLEAR WARFARE, Anderson had learned more about the effects of radiation on the human body/genes. After all, except for the last part, TWILIGHT WORLD was written when researchers were still learning about the bad effects of that radiation.
I'm a bit surprised, tho, that you thought a non fiction work of Anderson would mention his fiction!
Sean
Not that the nonfiction would mention the fiction. Just that it would throw light on some of it. As it does, indirectly.
Hi, Paul!
Yes, I agree that THERMONUCLEAR WARFARE can indirectly throw light on works like TWILIGHT WORLD.
Poul Anderson was no pacifist. He did not believe that it would always be wrong or immoral to use nuclear weapons. He believed they should be used only as a last resort and as minimally as possible. And only against military targets. Which reminded me of of the space battle we see in ENSIGN FLANDY or how the Imperials felt free to use low yield nukes on hostile forces once they had been driven out of territory occupied by civilians in "Outpost of Emire."
Sean
Re: mutations after nuclear war
https://www.rerf.or.jp/en/programs/roadmap_e/health_effects-en/geneefx-en/birthdef/
"No statistically significant increase in major birth defects or other untoward pregnancy outcomes was seen among children of survivors. Monitoring of nearly all pregnancies in Hiroshima and Nagasaki began in 1948 and continued for six years."
This fact is seldom mentioned, perhaps because people don't want to seem to favor nuclear war. The impression that radiation is super bad is also used to smear nuclear power.
It also lead to abortions of wanted pregnancies in the aftermath of the Chernobyl accident, also possibly after Fukushima.
IIRC there were birth defects among children who got exposed to major radiation doses from the bombs *while in the womb*.
Kaor, Jim!
If you mean the possibly deleterious effects of radiation on future generations may have been exaggerated, I agree that might happen. But if nukes has to be used, I would far prefer they were used the ways Anderson preferred, as minimally as possible and only on legitimate military targets.
That thug, Vladimir Putin, does not seem likely to be so Andersonian in his possible use of nukes!
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment