The media botches Ray Bradbury’s legacy

Please note: This post draws on a class I took at Penn, STSC 110 Science and Literature with Mark Adams. If you like reading and fun books, and still go to Penn, I highly recommend it.

I’m sure it does not come as news that Ray Bradbury passed away last week at the age of 91; when he died, major news outlets rushed to eulogize the beloved author of science fiction.

In doing so, they got the story completely wrong.

Nearly every obituary did two things: One, call Bradbury a writer of science fiction. Two, include the following quote, in which Bradbury desperately tries to prevent the occurrence of One:

I always wanted to be a magician, and of course that’s what I turned out to be. The best description of me is a magician, and not a science-fiction writer.

While I imagine that those who knew Bradbury through Farenheit 451 or The Martian Chronicles might have lingered over the excerpt, readers familiar with some of Bradbury’s other work – Something Wicked This Way Comes, or one of my favorite books written by anybody ever, Dandelion Wine – likely considered this ‘revelation’ trivial.

Yet while writers almost uniformly considered the quote sufficiently remarkable to include in Bradbury’s obituary, they apparently considered it insufficiently serious to incorporate its message into their headlines:

So let me reassure you, Bradbury got it right:

I’ve written only one book of science fiction [Fahrenheit 451]. All the others are fantasy. Fantasies are things that can’t happen, and science fiction is about things that can happen.

A single work of science fiction does not a ‘science fiction author’ make. But while Bradbury may have been a certifiable non-author of science fiction, he wasn’t making things up. You might not know this from walking into your neighborhood Barnes & Noble,* where you’ll find a single shelf devoted to ‘Science Fiction/Fantasy’, but science fiction and fantasy are – without qualification – distinct genres.

Noted [actual] science fiction author Robert Heinlein explained the difference between science fiction and other forms of fiction – like fantasy – using a table that looked like this:

According to Heinlein, it’s not when a story takes place that determines whether it is a work of science fiction, but how. While the X denotes most science fiction, it can also be set in the past (e.g. ‘A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away…’) or the present (possibly involving time travel, the internet, or possibly not – feel free to suggest specific examples). The need for realism is the genre’s most important requirement.

Since I just quoted it, allow me to explain using Star Wars: the Force may sound an awful lot like magic, but we learn in Episode I (sorry) that it is produced by midi-chlorians, microscopic life forms that live symbiotically within human cells. George Lucas might not be able to publish a scientific paper explaining exactly how midi-chlorians can make a light saber fly, but the fact that he sought to provide an explanation at all plants Star Wars firmly in the camp of science fiction.

On the other hand, here’s a wonderful sketch of ‘How the Lord of the Rings should have ended’ – if only it had been a work of science fiction:

But wait a second! The Martian Chronicles sounds like a book that takes place on Mars, so what’s that if not science fiction?

Like ‘when’, where a story takes place does not suffice to qualify it for the designation ‘science fiction’. The Martian Chronicles is indeed set on Mars, but hardly meets the requirement that science fiction be realistic. It is more a collection of lyrical short stories – a Dandelion Wine that happens to be set on Mars – than any attempt to paint a coherent vision of the future that matches scientific reality as Bradbury understood it.

Sounds like a lot of news outlets owe Bradbury’s estate an apology.

————————————————————————————————————–

*The decision to lump science fiction together with fantasy is not simply an expedient made necessary due to limited space, but is also perpetrated on the retailer’s website:

I also find it cute when I hear people fretting over the future of B&N and how it’s closing stores because Amazon has been so successful. Feels like only yesterday I heard the same thing about small, independent bookstores closing because Barnes & Noble had been so successful.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “The media botches Ray Bradbury’s legacy”

  1. ‘ but the fact that he sought to provide an explanation at all plants Star Wars firmly in the camp of science fiction.’
    Oh come on! Sweet Jebus!
    Look, after the backlash from Episode I, Jorge wisely decided never to mention midichlorians again. But putting that aside for a second – tapping into the Force is essentially a mystical, personal, and profoundly psychological experience and there is little, if any, speculation or introversion about how any given technology has affected the human condition. The technology in Star Wars is incidental to the story – with the obvious exception of the Death Star. But even then – how the Death Star came to be, who built it and how, what idiot decided that leaving a small thermal exhaust port right below the main port unsecure was a good idea: that is not for us to know, or even give a crap about enough to even speculate. Sorry, but the idea that Star Wars is squarely in the scifi camp because of the mentioning of midichlorians…that is probably the most ludicrous thing I’ve read about Star Wars ever, barring the following claptrap:
    http://movies.yahoo.com/news/why-star-wars-prequels-better-original-trilogy-160300514.html
    I mean, frak, even within the context of Episode I, Anakin’s high midichlorian count is secondary to the concerns of the Jedi council, who seem none too impressed by that fact. But, putting Episode I aside again – understand that the story of Star Wars has been continuously evolving since 1975, despite Jorge’s protestations that he had the whole story down pat back then. The lie is put to this by comparing his public statements and memoir from earlier decades with what he says now, among other things; here’s the book to read on this:
    http://www.amazon.com/Secret-History-Star-Wars/dp/0978465237/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1339568436&sr=1-1&keywords=the+secret+history+of+star+wars
    So even *if* by some rubric you say ‘Episode I is scifi’, retroactively labeling the entirety of the Star Wars machine that way just ain’t right.
    Phew.
    Besides all that – I for one am fairly surprised that you didn’t mention Bradbury’s short stories. I haven’t read Dandelion Wine, The Martian Chronicles, Golden Apples or any of it, but his short stories are fan-frikkin’-tastic.

    Like

    1. Haha, OK Maybe it was a bad example. I was trying to come up with something people would be familiar with. It’s tough to find universally-recognized science fiction stories. That said, at the end of the day, the explanation isn’t magic. Star Wars is not Harry Potter.

      As for the short stories… Dandelion Wine and The Martian Chronicles are basically collections of short stories.

      Like

      1. ‘Star Wars is not Harry Potter.’
        Oh yeah, but I think the fantasy genre is broad enough to include swords-and-sorcery and swords-and-sorcery in space
        ‘As for the short stories… Dandelion Wine and The Martian Chronicles are basically collections of short stories.’
        Holy crap, really? I needed to read those *yesterday*

        Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s