Where Next?
This essay is supplementary to my ancient
"Star Trek: Mark Two" rant, where the
topic-drift of my Babylon Five postscripts is getting ridiculous, so
I'll make a fresh start here. While that essay was about the
possibility of TV science fiction better than Roddenberry's
brainchild, this is a similar fantasy about improvements on
Straczynski's. It is inspired by discussions with various
friends and e-acquaintances, and by several webpages including of
course Alison Rowan's
B5
Gripes Page.
I've been on record for a while as believing that Babylon Five is
the best SF to hit our TV screens since Quatermass
back in the fifties - and looking back at the whole thing, I
think that was a conservative estimate. The central season or
so at least was consistently better than Star Trek could ever dream
of! But now as its five year mission draws to a close (see
afterthoughts below) I find myself looking around
to see what else is coming along. Spinoffs are all very well,
but let's not pin our hopes on the JMS equivalent of "Star Trek:
Voyager"... It could easily be another thirty years before
visual-media science fiction takes another step up, and in the
meantime our standards have risen enough that things like
"Space: Above And Beyond" or "Deep Impact" just
don't cut the mustard any more. In fact most of the TV or
movie scifi that I've enjoyed recently
has succeeded on humour/nostalgia/eyecandy value, not as science
fiction.
But (if you'll pardon a digression inspired by Mark Rosenfelder's
lament that Science Is
Killing SF) that's not because the horizons of modern science
have grown too restrictive, it's because there are too few real
science fans and too many downdumbers in the Meejuh. There are
still huge untapped reserves of sense-of-wonder potential in
literary SF - even such well-established subgenres as the
Alternate History, the Far-Future Earth setting or the
Xenobiology/ethology Puzzle plot have been left essentially
untouched by Hollywood.
As I imply by my harping on about science, quasiscience and
pseudoscience, SF doesn't have to be limited to what is orthodoxly
considered to be possible; it just has to make some pretence of
having excuses for its extravagances. Fond though I am of the
"hard" stuff that restricts its inventions to a minimum, I
would reject any definition of "science fiction" that
excluded such unscientific classics as "Lord Of Light",
"The Man In The High Castle", or "The Lathe Of
Heaven"! In fact, I would define science fiction and
fantasy not in terms of fidelity to current scientific dogma but in
terms of divergent attitudes to ideas and explicability: where
fantasy writers invoke mystic archetypal imagery, science fiction
writers map novel conceptual territory.
Now, it's true that modern physics is making it harder to get
away with scenes in which space-pirates blaze away at one another
with Coruscating Beams Of Death, but this kind of Marvel Comics
quasiscience was never intended to stand up to a moment's
scrutiny - indeed, FTL travel only became popular in the pulps
after Einstein had established that it was impossible! The
sort of SF that relies directly on state-of-the-art stuff like
micro-black-holes or Piltdown Man is the only kind that really
suffers when scientists move the goalposts. Some of the old
buzzwords for superscience power-fantasies (like "psionic
vibrations") may have evaporated, but others ("quantum
singularity") are still going strong, and new ones (as in the
TransHuman Lexicon)
continue to arise. Besides, who says physics has run out of
big surprises? As I see it, the main problem in designing a
plausible 23rd century these days isn't lack of grandeur, it's the
imminence of changes so fundamental and unpredictable they're likely
to make the dramas of 2298 as unintelligible to us as the Microsoft
Anti-Trust Suit would be to Joan of Arc.
So okay, while I'm pining for a "B5+" taking the next
step towards real televisual SF, here's my Wishlist of background
design points that could do with forethought and topics I'd like (in
an ideal world) to see built in from the start. If by some
freakish chance it contains original story ideas, I disclaim any
copyright on them! By the way, don't tell me "Oh, they
had one of those on the X-Files once" - I don't want
improvised one-offs, I want running themes. And I'm ignoring
the need for good characters, dialogue and so on because those apply
to any drama, whatever the genre.
- Jargon
- Who told those Hollywood moneymen that the public would never
accept accurate science, anyway? The audiences for crime and
hospital dramas are routinely treated to unintelligible jargon
dialogue; the real reason we never hear space pilots say anything
like "Adopting a ten-kay-perigee elliptical" is that the
writers and producers can't tell the difference between plausible
background techspeak and treknobabble!
- Futurology 101
- Questions that I'd hope might be answered, if only tacitly,
include: what are the economic effects of self-replicating devices,
off-world resources, fusion power and the automation of
genius? How bad is our climate and ecosystem going to
get? What is going to happen to the Third World? How
will the populace be kept healthy, entertained, housed, policed,
fed, and educated? And how long am I personally going to
live?
- Star Wars
- What sort of toys do the military (or indeed the traffic cops)
get to play with? Viral subversion grenades?
Relativistic antineutronium projectiles? How much of the
planet will they have broken? If we get to see any
Nearly-As-Fast-As-Light space combat, I should hope that it
explicitly involves computer-enhanced tactics and visuals.
Even if the storyline is only there as an excuse for space-opera
FX, realism can be fun.
- Space: $19.99
- Will anybody ever find any reason to move off Earth? Can
we expect domes full of colonists living on Mars and freezers full
of explorers orbiting Titan, or is the space age best left to
machines? Is any kind of interstellar probe workable?
Preferably one capable of giving results within the builders'
lifetimes? And above all, when will somebody produce a
plausible special-effects representation of low gravity?
- Cog-Sci-Fi
- Ideas from twentieth-century philosophy, neurology and
artificial intelligence, as opposed to dualistic hogwash like
Mutant Mind-Powers. Are people in the fictional world still
working on AI, or is it working on them? Does software have
rights? And how far can casual net access and
data-manipulation facilities be integrated into people's minds
before they become unintelligible as TV characters?
- Handwavionics
- Is there much of a future in biotech? (Gen-eng
pharmacology? DIY animal design?) How far will
nanotech get? (Synthetic meat? Utility fog?) And
are quantum-computers, space-time wormholes and similar
wibbly-seeming concepts actually possible? I don't ask if
molecular-engineered self-replicating thinking-machines are
feasible because I'm one myself.
- Cyberpunk
- Never mind the Gibson-wannabe techno-yuppies who copied the
superficial features of this genre; what I mean is that I want to
see some real incorporation of technologies like prosthetics or
Intelligence Amplification into a plausible society (including
subcultures). Elective cyborging and neurosurgical
personality-modification may seem abhorrent to some, but then
again so do tongue-piercings and silicone implants.
- Future -Isms
- What will people believe in - representative democracy,
Shinto, consumerism, ufos, biochauvinism, or something new?
How long will it be before a Denebian AI becomes Pope?
Nonhumans, whether alien or terrestrial, may claim a quite
incompatible set of basic civil rights (to seize unused property;
to run amok; not to be talked about!); and among the normal humans,
give us a bit of political content. Never mind 1984 homages,
let's have some Ken MacLeod scripts, for instance, with
anarcho-syndicalists fighting ecofreak communists. (Somehow,
I can't see this getting out uncut on network television...)
- Fermi's Paradox
- If (as is statistically plausible) intelligence has evolved
elsewhere in the universe, why hasn't it (detectably) contacted
us - if not "in person", then via self-replicating
robots? Do civilisations naturally achieve rapid nirvana (or
extinction)? Is the Galactic Federation waiting for us to
design something worth talking to? Is hyperspace full of
genocidal berserkers? Any setting involving aliens or the
marked lack of them needs some answer for this paradox, preferably
showing some understanding of the depth and scale of cosmic
history, and how full of von Neumann probes, billion-year-old
civilisations and Big Dumb Objects space could be!
- The Campaign For Real Aliens
- If we're getting ETs, I want plausibly unearthly ones based on
a real understanding of the xenobiological probabilities, rather
than another lot of white males with latex bonces - even
Jabba the Hut was ridiculously humanlike by the standards of real
evolutionary biology. Yes, I know this is beyond current
special effects technology, but if Starship Troopers can fill the
screen with Bugs then it can't be far off - and this is a
wishlist, after all. A more important argument is the
offputting effect of faceless characters; but this sounds to me
like an excuse for fun with synthetic diplomats!
- Xenosociology
- We may be limited for practical reasons to betrousered
humanoids, but rather than a constant supply of starfaring feudal
patriarchies, it would be nice to meet a species whose social
structure (under the layers of cultural accretions) followed
interestingly from their biology - hominids have football,
soap-opera, and rock'n'roll; what do triffids have? Or even
to see evidence of aliens with some diversity of beliefs,
"races", and fashions... not to mention languages.
That's a whole separate
diatribe! (And further "extended remix"
coverage of some of these topics is now available as
Astronomically Unlikely.)
The point of all this is not to predict things accurately (cf. my
reviews of people's attempts), but to
produce a detailed and robust imaginary world without the glaring
absurdities and contradictions of the made-up-week-by-week
approach. In the process you can build in some contending
forces (all claiming to be The Good Guys); a bit of general-purpose
imagery (compare B5's "gathering darkness" metaphor); and
of course a few layers of personal secrets, ancient conspiracies and
unsuspected hideous cosmic truths.
1999 Afterthoughts
Well, at last I've seen the finale and I'm spoilerproof (what a
strange feeling after all this time on tenterhooks)! It was a
sadly condensed-then-rediluted season thanks to the show's brush
with cancellation, but that's the fault of those Evil Network
Executives I've been warning you about. Indeed, it seems to me
in retrospect that the best thing JMS could have wished for is a set
of voodoo dolls to give him total control over his actors, so he
could build up a good stock of regulars without them vanishing
between seasons - and more importantly, control over the
distributors (Channel Four's betrayal of UK B5 fans was particularly
sickening). Or for a more practical version of that wish,
perhaps next time a three-year plan would make everything
more manageable?
- Where next? Some related pages...
-
Star Trek Stinks - rants by fellow trekophobes
- Homoerotic
Enablement In ST6 - po-mo trek-crit
-
Useless Star Trek Sites - lists of world wide
dweebs
-
The Particles Of Star Trek - a treknobabble
compendium
- Xeromag II-i -
Star Trek as pathology
-
ZUG - Star Trek Must Die
- Postscript: no, my
Fandom Mince page isn't subtitled
"Star Wars: Mark II"... but
this (ex-)site
could have been.