did not yet know what that child would become;
thought that it was impossible to change the past;
believed that it would be wrong to try to change the past;
- but only because he did not want to kill a child. So why not prevent Davros' parents from meeting, instead? Exactly this question is asked of Hitler in Poul Anderson's Time Patrol series. It is good to see that popular sf addresses the big questions although it usually makes a mess of the paradoxes, as Doctor Who did when an earlier companion tried to prevent her father's death.
The blog moves in two directions. We can either find an endless wealth of details within a single text or connect that text to many others. The Time Patrol connects with Anderson's other time travel works and also with The Time Machine, Doctor Who etc. Speaking of sf villains, I expect to read more about SM Stirling's Draka shortly and, if anyone qualifies for the description "human Daleks," it is the Draka Security Directorate.
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
A good question! I too would be unwilling to kill FUTURE monsters like Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, etc., as children They were CHILDREN not yet guilty of the ocean of blood they were to shed. There is no justice in killing a child for crimes he has not yet committed.
I far prefer your suggestion: that the parents of Hitler, et al be prevented from ever meeting in ways which did them no harm.
And I'm looking forward to you reading Stirling's THE STONE DOGS and commenting on that book. The officers of the Draka Security Directorate are Daleks? I would also compare them to the minions of Sauron who staffed the "houses of lamentation" the Witch King threatened to send Eowyn to so she would be tormented.
Sean
Post a Comment