-Poul Anderson, "Un-Man" IN Anderson, The Psychotechnic League (New York, 1981), pp. 31-129 AT p. 117.
This is a Wellsian phrase. See Remember Wells. And for all earlier blog references to HG Wells, see here.
This blog appreciates Wells as a major founder of science fiction and Poul Anderson's works as a major culmination of Wellsian sf. CS Lewis is anti-Wellsian. Anderson addresses Lewisian concerns but from a Wellsian perspective. Anderson is skeptical of Wellsian utopias without, like Lewis, seeing them as literally diabolical.
16 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I'm a bit surprised, now that I've thought of it, why Lewis should have felt so STRONGLY about Wells SF. The latter was apparently an atheist, but he could not have been the only atheist SF writer read by Lewis. So why the anti-Wellsian intensity found in Lewis' Space Trilogy, esp. THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH?
Sean
Sean,
Wells believed in and advocated human improvability. Lewis felt obliged to insist on the need for divine salvation.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Of course I agree with Lewis to that extent, on the need for divine salvation. I would have argued with Wells that I see no reason to expect a species as imperfect as ours to ever be PERFECT.
C.S. Lewis was an enthusiastic reader of SF and wrote about it in both book reviews (I think) and essays like "Religion And Rocketry."
We know JRR Tolkien liked to read science fiction, and even read and commented on one of Anderson's Cappen Varra stories. I would like to know what JRRT thought of others of PA's works.
Sean
Wells was a classic example of an early 20th-century tendency to grotesque overconfidence in our ability to understand and consciously plan human minds and human societies.
Christian conservatives like Lewis (or Chesterton before him) were among those who saw this as yet another case of hubris. They were among the few who saw the early 20th-century fascination with eugenics as deeply pregnant with evil, for example.
For example, in his "Anticipations" Wells has a truly chilling passage about eliminating whole ethnic groups and classes, and in the 1930's he called for "liberal Fascisti".
I've always agreed with Chesterton that all religious dogmas have to be taken on faith -- except for Original Sin, for which there is abundant empirical evidence.
"From the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing can be made".
Hence caution and a disinclination to try and "fix" things that are working, however imperfectly.
Mr Stirling,
One problem is that the global system currently works VERY imperfectly for many people. Another problem is that we continue to disagree and fight about what the solution is.
Paul.
Dear Mr. Stirling and Paul,
Mr. Stiring, again, I absolutely agree with you! And one result of the mania for eugenics was the "legalization" or increased "legalization" of the monstrosity of abortion.
And I recalled what Wells said about "liberal fascisti" from Jonah Goldberg's grimly fascinating book LIBERAL FASCISM (with the title taken from Wells).
I agree, caution and a prudent disinclination to "fix" things that are working, however imperfectly, is the way to go.
Paul, but what do you even MEAN by "the current global" system? WHAT system? It's my observation that that the most successful nation, whatever form of gov't they have, are those who come closest to true free enterprise economics and the rule of law exemplified in the LIMITED state.
Sean
Sean,
The whole Earth is surely an increasingly integrated global economy with enormous conflicts over sources of energy?
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And many conflicts arise BECAUSE of some nations pursuing foolish and oounter productive policies. Such as what we are now seeing in Venezuela. And there are conflicts over IDEOLOGY as well, such as the revolt of Islam against Western influence. So, it's more than mere disputes about "resources."
Sean
Sean,
But I still think that the world economy is integrated, also that ideological differences often reflect differences of economic interests.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
And I still think the world economy is only imperfectly integrated. And that ideological, religious, and philosophical quarrels are more deeply based than merely differences of economic interests.
Sean
Sean,
Imperfectly integrated, ok. Ideological differences can have a life of their own independent of economic conflicts, ok. But we still have one planet with power politics and conflicts that have very bad consequences for a lot of people.
Paul.
Kaor, Sean et al!
It's been years since I last read OUT OF THE SILENT PLANET, but .I seem to recall an introduction in which Lewis wrote that his disagreements did not mean that he failed to appreciate scientifiction by Wells and others. That may not be precisely what he wrote.
Best Regards,
Nicholas D. Rosen
Kaor, Paul!
THAT I can agree with. And I don't see any foreseeable end to this time of Chaos we are struggling thru. And I think you recall which of Anderson's stories used "chaos" for our times.
Sean
"The Saturn Game."
Kaor, Nicholas!
Yes, C.S. Lewis wrote a few prefatory words for OUT OF THE SILENT PLANET. I quote from the ninth printing of the Macmillan edition of 1970: "Certain slighting references to earlier stories of this type which will be found in the following pages have been put there for purely dramatic purposes. The author would be sorry if any reader supposed he was too stupid to have enjoyed Mr. H.G. Wells's fantasies or too ungrateful to acknowledge his debt to them."
So, yes, Lewis did appreciate the works of Wells and, by extension, those of other authors of SF.
Sean
Kaor, Paul!
Exactly so! (Smiles)
Sean
Post a Comment