The Scourge of The Dark Side...Tolkien and Modernism

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Must be why I love it so much...

However, the technology in Star Wars tends to be more of a backdrop to the story. In fact some purists consider it not to be "real" sci-fi for this reason. (Well, that, and the way the laws of physics get flouted.)

I'm not so sure it is a backdrop. Luke's fascination with flying his racer through the canyons is one important aspect of his character and also one that ensures his victory at the conclusion of A New Hope. That fascination comes straight out of Lucas' love affair with the automobile--think American Graffitti. Think also of Han Solo's "special modifications" made to the Millenium Falcon and how that is highlighted when Leia treats it to a sarcastic remark--was that the start of their love affair? I can't imagine Tolkien or Frodo or any of the other hobbits engaging in that kind of love affair with machinery. There could be dwarves who might delight in sledding down cave tunnels, but it wouldn't be powered the same.

I suppose R2D2 and 3PO could be Mutt and Jeff or a human comedic duo, but for me part of the delight in their characters lies in their robotic nature--or its interface with their human aspects. I dreamed of having my own R2D2 to do housework and still have an R2D2 cookie jar which lovingly has never been used, but is carefully wrapped and put away like good china. I don't think 3PO would be as funny if he were merely an abnoxious human, but being a robotic linguist as well as an English butler makes him delightfully entertaining.

Granted lots of the technology, especially the wonky bits, beongs to the Dark Side, but even the great glorification of special effects which Star Wars initiated represents a paen to technology. Someday, and someday soon, a Gollem won't need an Andy, and the current fascination with that began with SW.

As for the laws of gravity, they're a bit like Rodney Dangerfield, eh?

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I'm not so sure it is a backdrop. Luke's fascination with flying his racer through the canyons is one important aspect of his character and also one that ensures his victory at the conclusion of A New Hope. That fascination comes straight out of Lucas' love affair with the automobile--think American Graffitti. Think also of Han Solo's "special modifications" made to the Millenium Falcon and how that is highlighted when Leia treats it to a sarcastic remark--was that the start of their love affair? I can't imagine Tolkien or Frodo or any of the other hobbits engaging in that kind of love affair with machinery.

Yes, but I said "more of a backdrop". Obviously Lucas loves technology... but the story isn't really about it, not in the way "hard SF" is. I mean, you could transplant much of the plot into a pure fantasy setting with minimal changes. (Isn't A New Hope supposed to be based heavily on a samurai film?)

EDIT: Perhaps I should say, "pure sci-fi". "Hard sci-fi" is supposed to be actually plausible– with the result that practically nothing qualifies.

[tumhalad2]

ok guys here is another ingredient we can add to the mix: some intersting articles that contrast somewhat to Brin et al..

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/ID24Aa01.html

there are links to this guys two other articles at the bottom of that page

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

Yes, but I said "more of a backdrop". Obviously Lucas loves technology... but the story isn't really about it, not in the way "hard SF" is. I mean, you could transplant much of the plot into a pure fantasy setting with minimal changes. (Isn't A New Hope supposed to be based heavily on a samurai film?)

EDIT: Perhaps I should say, "pure sci-fi". "Hard sci-fi" is supposed to be actually plausible– with the result that practically nothing qualifies.

Well, even if we could--and I'm not so sure I would concede that, as I think the love of technology is essential to the story--just as we might cross out the "children's passages" in TH to create a dark TH, that wouldn't remain Lucas' work any more than it would remain Tolkien's work: it would be ours.

Definitions are always tricky, as they end up excluding writers who usually are accepted as belonging to the genre. Saying Science Fiction is about technology would eliminate Ursula Le Guin, Judith Merrill, and other writers who also want to consider how technology impacts society, culture, psychology.

I myself prefer the designation Speculative Fiction, as that seems more encompassing--it includes writers who strive to push the edges of the genre.

We also can't overlook the aspects of the cowboy genre in Star Wars. It seems to encompass so many different kinds of stories while weaving its own adventure. In that sense, it is much like LotR, which holds so many earlier narratives in its sight while producing something unique.

[Nerwen]

I'm sorry, I seem to have conveyed almost exactly the opposite of what I meant here.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Saying Science Fiction is about technology would eliminate Ursula Le Guin, Judith Merrill, and other writers who also want to consider how technology impacts society, culture, psychology.

Well no, because I was referring to the definition of science fiction that says it is primarily concerned with exploring the impact of technology on society, etc. Whereas the technology in Star Wars, important as it is, isn't the essence of the story. Does that make more sense?

Mind you, I don't really hold with these strict definitions myself– the setting in my mind does make it science fiction– but I know not everyone agrees. What I do mean is that Star Wars is not exactly at the cutting edge of SF, and indeed gets looked down on as "space opera" or "science fantasy".

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

I myself prefer the designation Speculative Fiction, as that seems more encompassing--it includes writers who strive to push the edges of the genre.

We also can't overlook the aspects of the cowboy genre in Star Wars. It seems to encompass so many different kinds of stories while weaving its own adventure. In that sense, it is much like LotR, which holds so many earlier narratives in its sight while producing something unique.

...Which is actually roughly what I was trying to say.

[Bêthberry]

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I'm sorry, I seem to have conveyed almost exactly the opposite of what I meant here.

My apologies for any misunderstandings.

Well no, because I was referring to the definition of science fiction that says it is primarily concerned with exploring the impact of technology on society, etc. Whereas the technology in Star Wars, important as it is, isn't the essence of the story. Does that make more sense?

Well, part of the story is the idea that the Dark Side misuses technology in its worship/pursuit of power, so I think it is part of the essence. For Tolkien, I think, modern machinery is a blight but for SW, it has a glorious side. But perhaps I should ask what you understand by the essence of the story?

Mind you, I don't really hold with these strict definitions myself– the setting in my mind does make it science fiction– but I know not everyone agrees. What I do mean is that Star Wars is not exactly at the cutting edge of SF, and indeed gets looked down on as "space opera" or "science fantasy".

Sounds to me like SF must have its purists as well as Tolkien. I think Blade Runner is probably closer to what you mean by the cutting edge of SF, right? Yet even there the element of Romance creeps in.

Nice to discuss SF with someone who appreciates it!

[Nerwen]

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Well, part of the story is the idea that the Dark Side misuses technology in its worship/pursuit of power, so I think it is part of the essence. For Tolkien, I think, modern machinery is a blight but for SW, it has a glorious side. But perhaps I should ask what you understand by the essence of the story?

Perhaps if I quote both of us?:

Originally Posted by Nerwen

I mean, you could transplant much of the plot into a pure fantasy setting with minimal changes.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

We also can't overlook the aspects of the cowboy genre in Star Wars. It seems to encompass so many different kinds of stories while weaving its own adventure.

And these stories could be taken from, or brought into, almost any genre– there's very little there that's exclusive to science-fiction.

Yes, misuse of technology is a theme– and as you say, perhaps it is part of the essence– but for some people that doesn't let Star Wars off the charge of being a disguised fantasy. (And after all, it's a secondary theme of The Lord of the Rings too.)

Another example: A "pure" science-fiction story might deal with the development of faster-than-light travel, and how it changes society, etc., whereas in Star Wars it's really just the way people get around– spectacular space battles notwithstanding.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Sounds to me like SF must have its purists as well as Tolkien.

I'll say. I couldn't care less myself... but purists there are, and they consider Star Wars to be not quite kosher, so to speak. The sort of people I'm talking about are fond of rating fiction according to minute gradations of "hardness"– the harder the better. The crew at StarDestroyer.Net must know this perfectly well, which may be why they're jumpy.

Originally Posted by Bêthberry

Nice to discuss SF with someone who appreciates it!

Same to you!

[Boromir88]

Just popping in to say hello and adding perhaps a couple things of interest.

The general conception (of Brin and others) is that Tolkien was a technophobe, and thus should not be taken as a serious author. I wonder where they ever got that idea? I mean sure Tolkien loathed the RAF, and in Letter 75, written to his son Christopher, he doesn't have too many kind words about "The Machine":

Unlike art which is content to create a new secondary world in the mind, it attempts to actualize desire, and to create power in this World; and that cannot really be done with any real satisfaction.Labour-saving machinery can only create endless and worse labour. And in addition to this fundamental disability of a creature, is added the Fall, which makes our devices not only fail of their desire but turn to new and horrible evil.

That's particularly funny after seeing that perhaps planes had some good uses:

Well, I have got over two thousand words onto this little flimsy airletter; and I will forgive the Mordor-gadgets some of their sins, if they bring it quickly to you.~ibid

I believe "The Machine" Tolkien often speaks of is more than "technology" or actual machines, but it's more of a state of mind. "The Machine" is all about control, something Tolkien was most certainly against. And as Lalwende astutely observed in a thread talking about Orcs (take a look at Gorbag and Shagrat) that even Orcs can't always be "cogs in The Machine."

Tolkien does seem to quite often rant about technology (I believe he had a problem with typewriters too), so it's not shocking that Brin paints Tolkien as a technophobe. I would like to point out, however, that the most modern (and dominant!) view in the world is the idea of the "West." I don't think our modern-day West is Tolkien's idea the "The West." But my point is that our West is the dominant, modern way of thinking, and I think we see some of that in Tolkien's writing.

We have the Greeks to thank for this revolutionary way of thinking (at least back in their days), the hebrews added there own contributions, and the Romans spread the their ideas to the rest of the world. Democracy, the idea that the rights of an individual outweigh the "good of Society" was Greek thinking. Hebrews added Christianity, and stories of the "small" overcoming great trials, because the "mighty" were unable to do so, to the "Western" way of thinking. That last bit is one thing which is very strong and evident in Tolkien's story:

The road must be trod, but it will be very hard. And neither strength nor wisdom will carry us far upon it. This quest may be attempted by the weak with as much hope as the strong. Yet such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere.~The Council of Elrond

It's interesting that now when asked what is "Modern?" Technology seems to be the number one answer, but technology is actually only a recent addition to our West. That's rather funny because the Greeks were pretty horrible engineers, they just liked to sit around and think and argue about how to do things, not actually doing things. The Greeks didn't have roads, besides temples most of their buildings were made of mud bricks, the Greeks biggest contribution (besides democracy) to the West, was Science. It was the Romans who were the great technological engineers. Now it seems like technology has replaced Sciece as the #1 answer to what is "Modern?"