The Envoy crew watches alien technology "terraforming" a planet. Brent's eyes smolder while he ponders "'The power...The power.'" (p. 208) Sundaram wonders whether low gigawattage despite high transmission efficiency means that the population is "'...less greedy?'" (p. 209) I prefer Sundaram to Brent but, if we say that either man is better than the other, then we probably just demonstrate which kind of person we are? Poul Anderson shows us each kind of character so that we can make our judgements. It is like dealing with a real spaceship crew. Ambassadors from Earth will have to be chosen with almost superhuman wisdom. The main task of the first explorers will just be to learn before doing anything. As Carl Sagan said once on TV, we can't just go out into the galaxy and ask, "Hi, there. Are you fellows Prespetarians?'" It is going to be more complicated than that. Will the Yonderfolk think of power or of greed or of something else?
4 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I disagree with both Brent and Sundaram. Brent is too eager to use advanced tech as means of gaining power while Sundaram is far too naive and simplistic. Only un-Fallen races will be free of the corrupting effects of greed and desire for power.
It's my view Captain Nansen combined the best in Brent and Sundaram: appreciative of how power can and sometimes should be used but aware of the need for ethical restraint. Nansen could be hard and decisive when he decided it was necessary to be like that, but not with needless brutality.
And I think that was the point Anderson wanted readers to think of.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Sundaram expressed a possibility. We do not know whether the Fallen/unFallen distinction makes sense. We do not yet know whether the Tahirians are Fallen or otherwise. PA sometimes wrote so that his readers could reach their own conclusions.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
That's because I believe in the need to be wary and watchful when/if mankind gets out into the galaxy. Because the chaotic and violent history of mankind implies that if there are other races as flawed and imperfect as ours then thy too will have their full share of greed. And I do recall how the Tahirians were capable of having disagreements, disputes, fights.
After more than half a century of reading/pondering the works of Anderson, I think I can say, despite him sometimes examining Utopian ideas, his line of thought is more like mine, not that of Utopians.
I'm a slow reader, but I've reached Chapter 11 of STARFARERS.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
It is not in dispute that Anderson's line of thought is closer to yours.
"Utopians" is a loaded term. Some people give reasons why they think that the world can be made better in future.
Paul.
Post a Comment