SIDEBAR
»
S
I
D
E
B
A
R
«
“Sci-Fi Mavens Offer Far Out Homeland Security Advice!”
March 27th, 2008 by jens

Speaking of Arthur C. Clarke, another of his achievements was to live a long life without making a complete ass of himself. A goal we should all emulate, but one that’s eluded too many other SF writers.

For example! Take Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle, who, having ceased putting any mental effort into their writing at least 25 years ago, now have the free time, in their dotage, to advise top government officials on national security issues … in their own inimitable way:

Members of the group recently offered a rambling, sometimes strident string of ideas at a panel discussion promoting the group at the DHS science and technology conference. Among the group’s approximately 24 members is Larry Niven [...]
Niven said a good way to help hospitals stem financial losses is to spread rumors in Spanish within the Latino community that emergency rooms are killing patients in order to harvest their organs for transplants. “The problem [of hospitals going broke] is hugely exaggerated by illegal aliens who aren’t going to pay for anything anyway,” Niven said. *

[Emphasis mine.] Hmm; this plan wouldn’t by chance require a huge reprint run of a Spanish edition of The Long ARM of Gil Hamilton, to be distributed free at taquerias, would it?

[Disclaimer: I used to love Niven’s books, reading and re-reading Ringworld with slack-jawed amazement. But that was when I was a kid, in that distant era we call “The Seventies”, before he devolved into the Rush Limbaugh of the spaceways. Speaking of which…]

The 45-minute panel discussion quickly deteriorated as federal, local and state homeland security officials, and at least one congressional aide, attempted to ask questions, which were largely ignored. Instead the writers used their time to pontificate on a variety of tangentially related topics, including their past roles advising the government, predictions in their stories that have come to pass, the demise of the paperback book market, and low-cost launch into space.

You have to read the whole thing! Jerry Pournelle goes out on a limb with some far-future speculation that — if portable tele-phone receivers with cameras in them became prevalent — people might use them to take photographs of illegal activities, eliminating the need for professional law enforcement officers! David Brin rants about militias and bangs his shoe on the table!

These people clearly have some brilliant ideas, and should be immediately whisked to an impregnable high-tech Undisclosed Location deep beneath the Rocky Mountains where they can work full time on the long-term project of transforming their thrilling inventions into reality, in time to save the world from terrorists, Communists, fluoridation and injured Mexicans. As a side effect, the quality of SF writing would leap upwards.


8 Responses  
  • Jeff LaMarche writes:
    March 27th, 20089:14 PMat

    There’s a reason why Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein and a few others are known as the Grand Masters of science fiction, and why their books continue to be reprinted over and over again years after original publication. These guys weren’t just interested in science, they were also interested in and fascinated by their fellow humans, and they studied them, and tried to understand them, even (or maybe especially) those who were different from them. They challenged us, and used the future as a way to examine fundamental aspects of humanity away from the bias of our own involvement. As a result, their works remain valuable even when science overtakes the story and makes the technological aspects of the books invalid. 2001 is still a great book now in 2008, for example.

    Then there is a whole slew of second-string SF authors who take mundane stories and set them in the future and surround them with inane techno-babble. Sometimes there is a novelty to these stories, and some of these types of authors are commercial successes during their lifetime, but their books fade away after they die.

    I have no doubt that the works of these two men will just… fade away. You cannot create timeless art with such a shocking inability to understand people not like yourself. I just wish that people would stop giving these guys so much attention for this stupidity. The best response to ill-informed and self-important statements such as these, is simply to ignore them altogether.

  • astrange writes:
    March 27th, 20089:28 PMat

    Niven and Pournelle wrote a book about the Green Party causing a new Ice Age by fixing global warming. It’s all a scam, you know.

    It was at least a well-written book even if it was silly - his engineering-obsessed writing is great if you’re engineering-obsessed yourself. His last few books are unfortunately insane AND bad, though.

  • Jens Alfke writes:
    March 27th, 200811:36 PMat

    Jeff — I appreciate what you’re saying, but I have to disagree. In my opinion, Clarke and especially Asimov were always very weak at characterization. I just can’t read Asimov’s fiction anymore, it’s too wooden.

    Heinlein did create good characters, but he’s even more guilty of writing himself into all of his stories than Niven is — too much of Heinlein’s fiction (especially the later stuff) consists of him lecturing at you through his characters about The Way Things Are.

    Higher up on my personal list of Old School Grand Masters would be the likes of Alfred Bester, Henry Kuttner, C.L. Moore. Moving forward into the 1960s, there’s an explosion of great stuff by Philip K Dick, J G Ballard, Harlan Ellison, and the like. And even Larry Niven — I think many of his works up through the ’70s are classics of the first rank, especially “Ringworld”.

    Actually I’ve been doing a great job of ignoring Niven and Pournelle for about 20 years. I just couldn’t help posting about this one thing, though.

  • mj writes:
    March 28th, 20083:17 AMat

    I find the camera comment to be absolute gold. Who could have known that idiots with cameraphones and youtube would self-incriminate with such ease?

    Are they going to fill said Undisclosed Location with cement once occupied?

  • Jeff LaMarche writes:
    March 28th, 20085:57 AMat

    Jens - no worries, I like having my ideas challenged. :) It’s honestly been many years since I last read Asimov or Clarke, so perhaps I need to re-read them and re-evaluate them. I’ve re-read many books that I thought were just wonderful as an adolescent or teenager (when I had a lot more time for reading fiction) and found them to be not nearly as good as my memory of them, so you could certainly be right on all counts.

    Preachiness was definitely one of Heinlein’s weaknesses, but I never found it as annoying as some people do. Underneath the preaching and surliness, there’s an optimism about the human race that I have always found appealing. And I think you could argue that even though Heinlein was just as radical in some of his views as Niven’s and Pournelle’s, his attacks were generally on attitudes, not people, which seems an important distinction to me.

    I must admit to not having read much by Niven and Pournelle. I generally give authors one chance unless I have a compelling reason to give them a second one: if they don’t impress me with the first book, I just don’t bother with them any more. I bought one of the Ringworld books many years ago in an airport based on several people’s recommendations (don’t even remember which one) , and really just wasn’t captivated at all. Considering I was stuck in an airport alone, that’s saying something, so I’ve not bothered with other books by them. I realize this policy has caused me to miss some good books, but it has also filtered out an awful lot of bad ones.

    I do like Philip K. Dick and Harlan Ellison (though I think Harlan himself is a bit of an abrasive jackass). I will have to check out some of the others you mention. Cheers.

  • Jens Alfke writes:
    March 28th, 20089:15 AMat

    Jeff — I definitely agree that Heinlein never stooped as low in pushing his politics! And a lot of his pre-1960s works are still favorites of mine, especially “The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress”. Niven and even Pournelle had that sort of balance for a while, until 1980 or so. (“Lucifer’s Hammer” may have been the tipping point.)

  • Jeff LaMarche writes:
    March 28th, 20089:32 AMat

    “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” FTW! Definitely one of my top five books of all time, I’ve read it at least once a year since probably 1980, although it’s from 1966, not pre-1960 ;) This was the period where Heinlein produced some of his best work, but was also when he peaked in my opinion. I think the problem was that after Stranger in a Strange Land, he got increasingly popular, to a point where he was able to resist the changes his editors were making. By the eighties, he actually had as part of his contract that he kept complete editorial control. With a few hundred pages surgically removed, some of his later books could have been very good, but he wouldn’t brook any cuts by that point.

    Maybe I’ll check out some of Niven and Pournelle’s earlier works someday, but I’ll get them from the library; I don’t want to support these guys monetarily after those comments.

  • Jens Alfke writes:
    March 28th, 20089:52 AMat

    Whoa! 1966? I looked it up and you’re right. Somehow I had thought it was from the late ’50s.

    Most of Niven’s ’60s and ’70s work is worth reading, IMHO. They’re mostly set in one consistent future history often called ‘Known Space’, and the chronology, up through “Ringworld”, tends to match the order in which they were written. “Ringworld” is excellent; it starts slowly, but really takes off once the characters arrive at the ringworld itself. The short stories in “Neutron Star” are also very good, as is his first novel, “World Of Ptaavs”.

    Even some of the Niven/Pournelle collaborations are worthwhile. “Inferno” is quite interesting as a satire of Dante, and as a character study of a deeply skeptical hard-SF writer who comes up with one SF scenario after another to explain the impossible fact that he appears to be quite literally in Hell. “The Mote In God’s Eye” goes on too long, but has some great human-alien interactions. (One of Niven’s greatest strengths was his ability to imagine bizarre alien species and make them plausibly alien in everything from language to psychology.)


»  Substance:WordPress   »  Style:Ahren Ahimsa