Tag: 2001: A Space Odyssey

A Great Science Fiction Story?

photog Book Reviews, Literature, photog's Corner, Reviews, Science Fiction / Fantasy, SF&F Book Reviews , , ,

Lately I’ve been thinking about this topic.  What makes a great science fiction story?  Can it be a great science fiction story if the story’s not great?  How about if the science isn’t great?  I think you know what I’m saying.  A great story, meaning great fiction, has characters drawn in a way that makes them compelling.  It doesn’t have to be Shakespeare but it can’t be two-dimensional cut-outs that wouldn’t make it through a toothpaste commercial.  And by the same token, what if the science is just stupid?  Sure, you can just say it’s fantasy instead and then the sky’s the limit.  But let’s stick to science fiction.

When I was a kid, I would have said that “great” science fiction needed the science but the fiction was not that important.  If there were enough star cruisers and anti-matter bombs and giant amoebas then all was right with the world.  In fact, the fewer human relations involved in the story, the better.  I was much more interested in the non-human characters acting “realistic” than any dialog between humans.  And the male/female dynamic was completely off the table.  The last thing a Lensman needed before, during or after a battle was a woman getting in the way.

Suffice it to say that time changes things.  I look at some of the “classics” of the golden age and I see a flatness to the story.  Now, this isn’t an all-encompassing criticism.  There are plenty of stories from the day that have nuanced characters and plots that reflect actual human personality types.  So, it’s not black and white.

Now, the modern literary science fiction has been described as having the opposite problem.  It’s all about human feelings and relations.  What isn’t as important is the “science.”  When that’s the case I will just declare that if a story doesn’t have any science at all then it isn’t a great science fiction story because it isn’t science fiction.  Period.

And without a doubt if a story has an exciting plot and memorable characters and also a clever science fiction premise then without a doubt it’s great science fiction.

So that leaves the other extreme.  What if a story is built on incredibly imaginative science fiction plot devices but the characters are cardboard cut-outs of human beings?  Can that be a great science fiction story?  In this category the works of Arthur C Clarke comes to mind and specifically 2001: A Space Odyssey.  Here is an epic tale stretching all the way from the dawn of Man to the first human interstellar voyage.  And yet the most human character in the book is HAL9000; a schizophrenic homicidal computer.  Now, is it an interesting story?  Well, yeah.  There are cave men and monoliths and moon bases and worm holes.  But honestly, do you find yourself rooting for anyone?  There’s just something so inhumanly stolid and wooden about everyone in the story that I feel that each one being murdered by HAL might be his happiest moment.  At least liveliest.

But anyway, I want to pose this as a question.  Can a technically engrossing sf story be considered great if the characters are ciphers?  What do you think?

I Feel Therefore I’m Amused

photog Movie Reviews, Reviews, Science Fiction / Fantasy, SF&F Movie Reviews , ,

What makes a good story?  And by story I’m including books, movies, songs, even a story being told by word of mouth.  What makes it a good story.  Simply, it has to make the audience feel something; satisfaction, recognition, joy, sorrow, anger, fear, horror, amusement, surprise or maybe even wonder.  In the absence of emotion can a story be good?  I’d say no.

So, when writing a story how do you ensure that the story checks some of those boxes?  Well, plot is one of the tools you can use to activate the reader’s emotions but more importantly, you have to build the characters so that they’re human.  Certainly, any generic female character being thrown into a scene where she is being stalked by a psychopath will elicit at least some emotion from the audience but if she is first made into a real woman with the requisite and recognizable emotions then the scene becomes harrowing.  Think of Agent Starling trapped in Buffalo Bill’s lightless room while he toyed with her in preparation for ending her life.  She is a trained law enforcement agent but she’s also a terrified young woman trapped by a predator.  The audience is on the edge of their seats.  Her fear is the fuel to make the scene real for the viewers.  It’s gripping.

And this is just as important for any emotion in any situation.  To be considered a success the reader has to feel something strong enough to make the story in some way real.  Let’s test my thesis.  Is the movie, “2001: A Space Odyssey,” a good story?  Does it make us feel anything?  Yes, there are scenes in the movie where we feel a sense of wonder at some of the things happening.  And there is a feeling of worry for Dave Bowman as he faces off against HAL9000.  I guess there is sadness over the death of Frank Poole.  But are any of these emotions particularly strong.  I guess on reflection the sense of wonder at the technological wonders we are shown in the flight to the Moon and aboard the Discovery One spacecraft are pretty interesting.  But none of the characters (except perhaps HAL) really activate our emotions.  In some ways Dave and Frank appear more robotic than HAL.  So, on the whole I wouldn’t call “2001” a successful story.  It’s almost like a travelogue to inform the audience about some interesting things that will be seen during a vacation trip.

Now compare this to the earlier science fiction movie, “Destination Moon.”  Technically, there’s no comparison.  “2001” is astonishingly beautiful and seems like a documentary shot in space.  “Destination Moon” appears woefully primitive in its special effects and graphics.  But the story has engaging characters and a plot that creates emotional interest.  The characters are placed in danger and the audience wants to see how the characters respond to this crisis.  Now surely, this isn’t some great work of art.  It’s melodrama and adventure.  But it works.  There’s enough there to make the characters real enough for us to care if they live or die.  Compare this to Dave Bowman at the end of “2001” travelling to the end of the universe through some kind of acid dream followed by him getting very old and then becoming some kind of “space embryo.”  To me all of that was meaningless from an emotional point of view.  It was boring.

So, the lesson is humans like stories that make them feel human.  Because it makes them feel.

01March2024 – And Now for Something Light

photog Current Events, Movie Reviews, photog's Corner, Reviews, Science, Science Fiction / Fantasy, SF&F Movie Reviews, SF&F TV Show Reviews, Star Trek, TV Reviews , , , , ,

Today Camera Girl accused me of being obsessed with the depressing politics of our dystopic world. I readily agreed. And I discussed with her some of the things that cause me to obsess about current events; pediatric transgender surgery, millions of illegal aliens crowding our streets, officially sanctioned anti-white hatred, double digit percent increases in the cost of everything, an epidemic of violent crime in the cities. I think I depressed her.
But she has a point. As enchanting as they are, let’s take a break from Joe Biden, Mitch McConnell and Joy Reid for just a little bit. I think it’s good to distract ourselves sometimes with pleasant things. So, I was watching for the zillionth time the beginning of “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Kubrick’s impressive cinematography, the apt use of the “Blue Danube Waltz”

and “Also sprach Zarathustra”

to convey emotion and provide mood to the scenes.
I don’t tend to watch the whole movie from start to finish. Frankly the ending doesn’t work for me. It’s overly long and frankly annoying. I do enjoy the battle between HAL and the astronauts, especially the scene where Dave removes HAL’s memory chips and renders him brain dead.

I think of it as the first shot in the long war that will be fought between man and AI machines. In that sense Dave Bowman is an heroic trailblazer pointing the way to what we will be faced with in the future. An echo of this can be heard in the Star Trek episode where Kirk must psyche the M5 computer into committing suicide.

I think about these various cinematic tropes to remind me that there was a time when humans and specifically Americans still believed that intelligence and being human were the two important traits that made our species unique and extremely interesting. There was a beauty and a joy to the way we embraced the future. There was immense optimism and confidence.
Now all those things have been systematically eliminated from our culture. Systematically and purposefully eliminated by an ideology that hates beauty and intelligence. Instead, it strives for power and control and doesn’t mind seeing humans reduced to depravity and destitution for the sake of meaningless goals like carbon zero or whatever senseless goal they are currently pursuing.
But I’m pretty sure that this ideology, in the long run, will be self-defeating. The utter stupidity of their ideas and the damage that their agenda will do to their ability to maintain a modern economy and standard of living seems to ensure that some time in the near future, those who shun their path will outstrip them in every meaningful way and relegate them to the proverbial “ash heap of history” where they will join North Korea and Cuba in worshipping their local demigods while huddling in the dark when the power is turned off for the night.
So, I’ll end with the most gung-ho, can-do attitude about human capability that I can think of from somewhat recent sf&f cinema.

Sure, it’s silly stuff but it’s in line with the optimistic vision of the American future, instead of the Greta Thunberg one.