Again, we quote Alexei Panshin on Robert Heinlein, then see how this applies to Poul Anderson.
Elements
Context (physical and social setting, needing exposition especially in sf)
People (consistent, interesting characters)
Structure (the plan of the action)
Problem (arising from people interacting in the context; requiring resolution)
Context
Heinlein shows in consistent detail how his imagined societies work.
His most ambitious context is his Future History: "...twenty stories written and rewritten over more than twenty years." (V., p. 122) (By my count, twenty-three or -four.)
Panshin lists Piper, Blish, Anderson and Asimov as successors of Heinlein.
Panshin concludes that, although the Future History is not a complete whole, its time chart is an impressive context, generating an impression of connectivity.
I have thought of future histories as major works or bodies of work. Panshin shows each of them as a context and thus as one story element.
Poul Anderson's Technic History is forty-three stories written or rewritten over thirty-four years.
Problems
Heinlein's Future History: technology progresses but society regresses.
Anderson's Psychotechnic History: a predictive science of society is applied for post-war reconstruction.
Anderson's Technic History: the Polesotechnic League becomes cartelized.
4 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
Humans being what they are, all too human, I expect their societies/states to progress/regress, rise and fall, etc. The best indicator of how men and women are likely to behave in the future is how they have behaved in the past and behaving now, in the present.
Merry Christmas! Sean
Sean,
I have replied to that.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
A reply which did not convince me.
Merrry Christmas! Sean
Sean,
Well, of course not.
People behave differently in different conditions. Conditions will be different in future. Therefore, people will behave differently in future.
But surely we are by now long past trying to convince each other on such issues?
Paul.
Post a Comment