Poul Anderson's Technic History surpasses Robert Heinlein's Future History not only because it is over three times as long, recounting events on a vaster spatio-temporal scale, but also because it is complex enough to incorporate that incomparable future historical collection,
The Earth Book Of Stormgate. When the two Ythrian volumes,
The People Of The Wind and the
Earth Book, followed the Polesotechnic League tetralogy,
Trader To The Stars,
The Trouble Twisters,
Satan's World and
Mirkheim, the second Ythrian volume, the
Earth Book, completed the story of the League and almost completed the story of human-Ythrian interactions on Ythri, in space and on the jointly explored and colonized planet, Avalon. Further, these six volumes are well under half the total Technic History.
Read Heinlein's Future History, then Anderson's Psychotechnic History, then Anderson's Technic History, and please tell me if you know of any comparable future history series. I know of some, of course, but I still regard Heinlein and Anderson as the main line of development.
10 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I will take to heart your urging that SF readers should reread Heinlein's Future History, which I agree is well worth reading, despite being surpassed by Anderson's Technic History.
And besides these works of Anderson and Heinlein, I thought very well of Jerry Pournelle's Co-Dominium timeline, which he opened to contributions by other writers (besides his original co-author, Larry Niven). For which Stirling and Anderson wrote their own stories."
I know you didn't care for them, but I liked very much Cordwainer Smith's Instrumentality of Mankind stories. And I think Frank Herbert's DUNE and its first two sequels are worth reading. And let's not forget Larry Niven's Known Space and Man/Kzin Wars stories (the latter including contributions by many SF writers, such as Anderson and Stirling).
And disenchanted tho I now am by them, I have to mention Asimov's FOUNDATION series, if only because he, like Heinlein, was a pioneer in the future history sub-genre of SF.
S.M. Stirling, along with Harry Turtledove, are the two acknowledged masters of alternate history SF. But I would argue Avram Davidson preceded them with his beautiful stories about Dr. Engelbert Eszterhazy, set in the alternate Europe of the wonderfully named Triune Monarchy of Scythia-Pannonia-Transbalkania.
Ad astra! Sean
*Here I had in mind mostly the War World sub-branch of the Co-Dominium timeline.
Sean,
I really don't buy into Pournelle.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
May I ask why? Was it because the Co-Dominium timeline came to include too many writers adding contributions, besides Larry Niven? I thought the John Christian Falkeberg stories, A SPACE SHIP FOR THE KING, GO TELL THE SPARTANS, THE MOTE IN GOD'S EYE, etc., fun to read.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But we have discussed this before - and disagreed before.
A SPACESHIP FOR THE KING is good, almost like an Anderson novel.
The series is far too militaristic. The colonized planets are impoverished - human colonists, imported Terrestrial animals and nothing else, plus extreme, exaggerated social divisions. The growth of an Empire with an Emperor seems implausible, merely what Pournelle wanted to write about.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
It is late, or early, so I should be brief. I would argue that the problems you cited goes back to how the Co-Dominium mishandled extra-Solar colonization. Instead of letting private enterprise carry out colonization, the Co-Do Grand Senate seized the opportunity of using the newly discovered planets for exiling political malcontents of all kinds or dumping shanghaied sweepings from the Welfare Islands of Earth. That will inevitably lead to the exaggerated social divisions you mentioned.
What is "militarism"? I never saw Col. Falkenberg glorying in and rejoicing at slaughtering people. Rather, war was often a regrettable necessity and we see him trying to have the victories he won be used by politicians for building new and stabler structures.
An "empire" can have more forms than the overtly monarchical. They can just as easily be called a federation, commonwealth, or confederation as "empire." And a president or PM can be as powerful as any Terran Emperor. The ACTUALITY is what matters, not the form.
That said, Jerry Pournelle has defended the choices he and Niven made for THE MOTE IN GOD'S EYE in his essay "Building THE MOTE IN GOD'S EYE," which I hope you have read.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Militarism is glorification of the military. I find the "dumping" from "Welfare Islands" and the extreme social polarization simply unpleasant.
Paul.
Sean,
You don't have to ask, "What is militarism?" You know what it is because you deny that it exists in Pournelle's works! I will respond further in a post instead of in a combox.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
But a RHETORICAL question can be asked to help clarify matters. That is why I asked "What is militarism?" And I simply never saw Pournelle, Niven, Stirling, or Anderson himself "glorifying" the military in ways I thought bad in the Co-Dominium timeline. Respect and admiration for brave and honorable military, yes, but not "glorifying."
And I agree with you in finding the way the Co-Dominium handled political malcontents and randomly dumping the sweepings from the Welfare Islands of Earth on the colonial planets VERY unpleasant. Such a hodgepodge of randomly dumped people will have no knowledge of each other, have common ideas/beliefs, or almost anything else in common of the sorts that would moderate socio/political extremes.
Pournelle was speculating about what might have happened if very disparate nations like the US and the USSR allied together so they could dominate Earth AND the early discovery of the FTL Alderson drive.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
And I said that "glorification" was an initial response but that there was room for further discussion. I tried to broaden out the applications of "militarism" by including those dictionary definitions, some of which I do think apply to Pournelle. Maybe "celebration of military life and military achievements" would be a less unacceptable characterization of Pournelle's persistently military sf? Meanwhile, "glorification" definitely applies to Heinlein. But none of this matches up to a discussion of either the Future History or the Technic History which was where we started from. The CoDominium is not in the same league.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
One problem is that, rightly or wrongly, when people see "militarism" they almost always think first of the negative meanings attached to that word. And that too easily leads, at best, to a confusing and murky discussion.
I did note the later discussion you made of the multiple meanings of "militarism," as given by the Chambers dictionary. I agree some of those meanings fits with Pournelle's own views. But I think "celebration" too strong a word for how he thought of the military. "Respectful admiration" for the best parts of military life is how I would put it.
It probably hows how unobservant I am, but I've thought the passionate attacks on Heinlein's STARSHIP TROOPER excessive and overdone.
I agree the Co-Dominium timeline is not on the same level as the stories in the Future Histsorsy (RAH) or the Technic History (PA). No argument there! But I did enjoy them, esp. the books co-authored by Pournelle and Stirling.
Ad astra! Sean
Post a Comment