Monday, 12 March 2018

Credibility Gap

In Poul Anderson's History of Technic Civilization:

the planet Scotha is inhabited by horned, white-skinned, sword-wielding barbarians with an elfin Queen;

Alfzar is inhabited by small, blue, sword-wielding hunters of winged dragons;

Nyanza has been colonized by Terrestrials - caucasoids on the single island and harpoon-gun-wielding Africans on, or in, the planet-covering sea.

These sound not just like different planets but like different universes yet Captain Flandry's adventures take him from Scotha to Alfzar to Nyanza. Scotha and Alfzar not only take us back to the pulp magazine space opera of the early 1950s but also seem to transport us both backwards and sideways in time to an alternative universe where sword fights and spaceships coexisted whereas "The Game of Glory," featuring Nyanza, reads more like something that might happen in the near future, assuming only the invention of a faster than light drive.

However, in an inhabited galaxy, different inhabited planets are bound to be at different stages of development and, given interstellar travel, the discordant stages will interact. Terrestrials might colonize some planets and sell spaceships to barbarians on others.

6 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

I didn't think the Scothani or Alfzarians that implausible. I expect some nonhuman races to either resemble mankind or differ drastically from us, in appearances.

And it's view that many planets settled by humans might well have to accept a lower level of technology till enough capital was gained. A point which was made about Dennitza.

Sean

S.M. Stirling said...

Also, weapons are more than tools. Ultimately function drives form, but "ultimately" is a long time. In 1914, the instructions sent out to British officers included one to sharpen their swords before reporting for duty, and the photographs do show them carrying their swords into action. This was generations after revolvers were available.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Dear Mr. Stirling,

Also, for many people, past and possibly even now, swords have higher status, more "dignity" than guns. Swords can be cherished heirlooms and can even have names. Some swords comes down thru the centuries with legends and myths around them. Such as Excalibur, Joyeuse (which actually exists), Holger Danske's sword, etc.

Sean

S.M. Stirling said...

For a long time, until multi-shot pistols, swords were the best close-quarter weapon ever invented. Others had specialist uses, but a sword was the best all-round tool of defense or offense.

Hence Victorian explorers still carried them in Africa -- Sir Richard Burton killed several Somali spearmen with one once. (He was a very formidable hand with a saber.)

Also signs of social status, of course; not least because using one well takes a lot of practice, which shows you have the leisure to pursue swordsmanship.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Dear Mr. Stirling,

And I suspect a rather short sword like the Roman gladius was pretty nearly the most perfect close quarters weapon ever invented (till multi shot pistols became practical).

Sir Richard Burton? One of my books contains selections from his translation of the 1001 NIGHTS.

Sean

paulshackley2017@gmail.com said...

Burton is a hero in Philip Farmer's Riverworld series.
Paul.