Picture of Dorian Gray

I just finished the Picture of Dorian Gray, which is a mythic fantasy-like novel by Oscar Wilde. It is a really interesting take on the corruption of the aesthetic ideal. What is so fascinating about the novel is that Wilde satirizes himself, particularly his well known reputation for being a dandy. Reading Dorian Gray is a tremendously sad experience, when knowing the facts of Wilde's life (He was put on trial for being gay, and sent to a jail that physically broke him. He died shortly after his release from prison). Wilde's writing, I think, should be the starting point for gay science fiction aesthetics, as he is a brilliant artistic theorist. His work has spawned more re-interpretations than any gay sci-fi\fantasy artist, with the exception of Samuel Delany. So please, check Dorian Gray out.

Where are Sci-Fi Television's Colleges

A good question. Very little effort has been made to portray the college of the future. What would it look like? What would be studied in fields like literature, history, psychology? What fundamentally new concepts would these colleges have come up with, differing them from the colleges of today. Most depictions of colleges in space operas and cyberpunk TV shows show them to be little different from colleges of today, either hyper-militaristic West Points or stereotyped stuffy academic institutions like those shown in season 4 of Babylon 5. Who would be the hated Heideggers and Foucaults of future generations? What would they be set up against? It's a good question. I wish I had an answer to it.

We Need a Better Class of Sci-Fi Racists\Racial Dialogue

In recent years, mainstream filmmaking has made tentative but sure steps to portraying racists with greater complexity. Three films have been particularly emblematic of this: American History X, This is England, and The Believer. American History X is well known, but the Believer is an obscure film that shows how a self-hatred for one's own racial\religious group (here Judaism) can lead to the very bigotry that victimizes you. What makes The Believer such a great movie is that its protagonist, Danny Balint, is a three dimensional racist, not someone who is just solely committed to ruining every minority person's day. I believe that American racial dialogue really needs this kind of honesty, because the mainstreaming of simplistic binaries between good anti-racists and bad racists simply does not work. People know real life is not that simple, and they also are aware of the class advantages that many proponents of anti-racism have had. I think science fiction badly needs some honest racial dialogue. The last time we had an honest movie about race was probably Brother from Another Planet, and that is almost three decades old. Series like Alien Nation tried to say something about race, but they were simply too embarrassingly simplistic to do any good. Star Trek, the most race-obsessed series on television, usually settled for simplistic racial signifers: mean Klingons, cunning Romulans, good humans, mercantile Feringi. If we're going to get somewhere with the genre, sci-fi authors and television producers need to take a good hard look at real racial anxieties in America. I think the ideal place to start is with Octavia Butler's excellent and complex meditations on race, such as Lillith's Brood and Kindred (especially the latter; the former occasionally becomes a feminist jeremiad). Only by doing so will the genre really become the racially sensitive genre it's ostensibly supposed to be.

Commercialism ruins sci-fi

In a spirit not in tune with the season, I want to say how much I detest the commercialization of sci-fi that occurs during the holidays. Transformer toys, Star Wars toys, mass productions of second rate science fiction novels, the obligatory big budget, not big idea sci-fi Christmas epic. It's enough to make one sick. What about the old days, when everyone was justly cynical about the spirit of the season, and we had our own genre "Imagines," rather than Mercy Me Christian Christmas songs. I want Tim Minchin kick ass anti-Christmas lyrics in my sci-fi, not a return to the early sixties, in which science fiction still did an occasional Christmas episode. It's enough that we commercialize the other 364 days of the year . . . do we really have to make Christmas day yet another effort in capitalist consumerism? Rant over.

New Sci Fi Novel: Francis Schaeffer, Galactic Warlord

Hey guys, just wanted you to know that when I was in the hospital I started plotting out a new novel featuring Francis Schaeffer as a sci-fi character. The novel's kind of a thought experiment, to see if I can write a convincingly interesting sci-fi novel that does not explicitly endorse my own pro-evolutionary views. Yes, I know, very hard, but worth a try anyway. I'll give you more details if the project makes it beyond the extensive planning I've already done for it.

Francis Schaeffer and Adolf Hitler: A sci-fi couple made in heaven

Francis Schaeffer was a famous evangelical apologist, who was pretty much a failed art critic, while Hitler was a failed artist, who became a successful politician. I think the contrasting views of these men would make for great sci-fi, especially since Schaeffer is in many ways more similar than most evangelicals would like, to Hitler (he had intense political aspirations that went hand in hand with his religious ones). Tell me what you think though.

Demons and Science Fiction

One thing I really hate is the use of demons, devils, etc. in science fiction novels and films. I am a religious person, but I think the idea of a personal devil is poisonous nonsense that hurts people. Yet in popular TV programs like Charmed, movies like the Exorcism of Emily Rose, and even an occasional Doctor Who, features these figures. People do not realize that real people suffer exorcisms and are even killed, because of the belief in demons. In Africa, hundreds of children have been hunted down and slaughtered in Pentecostal-inspired witch hunts. Therefore, using demons in popular sci-fi, while not sacrilegious, only inspires certain extremist sects of Pentecostalism and other religions to go out and kill some more people. Or cleanse them of their anorexia (Mercy Ministries Australia), or expel demons through farting (Restoring the Foundations, I kid you not). I'm all for a mythological religion, but that might be taking things a bit too far.

What sci-fi class would you like?

So, I've thought of a number of sci-fi classes to teach eventually, and I wanted to throw the reading lists by you guys:

Science Fiction and Religion: Dune, Case of Conscience, Speaker for the Dead, Canticle of Leibowitz, Hyperion, Fall of Hyperion

Science Fiction and Politics: Neuromancer, Dune, Dune Messiah, That Hideous Strength, Anthem, 1984, Clockwork Orange.

Dystopian Fiction: 1984, Clockwork Orange, After Dachau, Handmaid's Tale, Anthem, Children of Men.

What do you guys think of these lists? Obviously, they lean slightly in the religion direction and perhaps pay too much attention to fascism, a phenomena I have only begun studying again over the last 2 years (I did study it a lot in high school and undergraduate studies as well). I also have a great fondness for the Dune series as a political instruction tool, hence its (potential) overemphasis. Tell me what you think. I might post again on this topic later this week.

Note: Posts may be a little more infrequent for a while, as I am now working two jobs. I plan to continue running the blog though.

New Spielberg Science Fiction Series

Has anyone heard about this new Spielberg science fiction series, Falling Skies? It looks potentially intriguing, but I'm hesitant to give Spielberg my endorsement on anything. E.T. and Close Encounters were nauseating in their cuteness and coyness, as was much of his eighties output (of course his non-sci fi is great.). On the other hand, he did a very good job with A.I. I thought, so maybe he can bring another hip political sci-fi show onto the air. Lets hope so.

OCD and science fiction's responsibility to the mentally ill

Budd recently brought up Orson Scott Card's novel Xenocide, which created a religious movement out of OCD. As someone who suffers from OCD, I have always been fascinated by Card's depiction in Xenocide. I think OCD is a deeply underused mental illness in science fiction, even more than the almost equally underused schizophrenia and bipolar. Phillip K. Dick, at least, portrayed the complexity of schizophrenics lives in unusual, tender terms. But OCD is even a more interesting mental illness, in sci-fi terms. What Xenocide pointed out is that OCD has some evolutionary benefits. For instance, my OCD gives me literally almost superhuman powers of concentration. I can read 300, 400 pages a day often, or work on a paper for 10 hours straight, and not be tired. I think contemporary science fiction too often emphasizes the victimized or maladaptive elements of mental illness, without realizing that mental illness is not necessarily maladaptive, if channeled in the right directions. Of course it causes problems. But so does one's sexual orientation and science fiction authors don't routinely demonize LGBT people (nor should they).
I think science fiction really needs to come to terms with its own history of psychophobia. Obviously, I am in part talking about Scientology. I don't think its any accident that it was science fiction that created the most deeply anti-mentally ill ideology of the last century. Science fiction, from its conception, has always emphasized the power of the ubermensch, and therefore neglected the hidden powers that undermensch populations can also have. Science fiction's history of ableism and racism is directly linked to its inability to divorce itself from the myth of the superhuman. But I'd really like to science fiction to link itself to the underdog for a change, not for the Paul Atreides's, Enders, and Supermans of the world. Science fiction, quite simply, owes mentally ill people for the crimes done in science fiction's names. And it's about time that mentally ill people collect.

The Holocaust and Contemporary Science Fiction

Contemporary science fiction, particularly television science fiction, does not often deal with the Holocaust, and when it does it does so in relatively allegorical terms. The most concrete references to it occur in "Genesis of the Daleks" and the 3rd and 4th seasons of Babylon 5, but both series ultimately shy away from the precipice. I think that for the genre to evolve, it has to be willing to take such portrayals to the hilt. For instance, a depiction of an interstellar Nazi state could be a major work of art, if done correctly, and a good cautionary tale as well. Some of the best depictions of the Holocaust have come from alternative history tales, such as The Portage to San Cristobal of A.H., Boys from Brazil, After Dachau, and Iron Dream. These are truly memorable portrayals of evil that deserve and demand a second reading. More complex visions of fascism, such as those offered in movies like The Believer and books like Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics. Realizing that Nazism has a perverse fascination on us that is not always salutatory will go a long way to at least partially mitigating its evils. I hope that in the future, television sci-fi can have the courage to show the Shoah, in the hopes of creating a more productive dialogue about what might have been, had the Nazis won the war.

Category: Politics

Glenn Beck and science fiction

Yes, Glenn Beck and science fiction. Despite the huge popularity of media celebrities like Beck, there has been relatively little attention paid in science fiction television and film to the possibilities of the Father Coughlins of the airwaves and broadband. Babylon 5's Dan Randall is probably as close as any of these shows have come to dealing with the cult of media worship that surrounded Beck, Limbaugh, Coughlin, etc. Making matters worse, these programs always show some safe CNN-like champion of bland liberalism replacing the conservative media of the right, a result that is both unlikely and seemingly not much better than the alternative. Partly, science fiction is cautious about its portrayal of the media because it is unsure what forms of mass media will be used to inflame the conservative masses of the future. Yet there is plenty of material to play with here. For instance, a talk radio host or a televangelist getting ahold of nanotechnology and using it to control his followers every thought and mood. Or a right wing rabble-rouser on the level of Tom Zarek, with or without the strong political critique that Zarek offers of centrist liberalism (preferably with a good right wing critique of liberalism, as oppossed to the cornball stuff Hollywood comes up with). So science fiction TV, you are on notice: We need some mass media personalities on our shows, if only to critique the mass media.

The Abuse of Exorcisms in new films

Well, with the new release of The Last Exorcism, and the continuing popularity of films like The Exorcism for Emily Rose, I thought it would be a good idea to caution science fiction producers not to follow the same path. These new films on exorcism clearly exploit mentally ill populations, which after all are the victims of exorcisms. The mentally ill often have no choice as to whether or not to get an exorcism, as the recent scandals concerning Mercy Ministries Australia testifies to. Exorcism is not some cool religious rite tailor-made for horror movies, but an abusive, denigrating religious practice, primarily aimed at the mentally ill. It has no place in any modern religion, still less as the subject for exploitative Hollywood films. Fortunately, to my knowledge, only Space 1999, among major sci-fi series, has had an exorcism in it, though that Scotty-murder episode in the original Star Trek got pretty darn close. Hopefully, science fiction television won't follow the examples of horror films.

The Moral Ambiguity Divide

Science fiction television is divided into basically two halves: series that present basic battles between good and evil and tend to see the universe in terms of absolutes, and series which stress moral ambiguity. Here's how I'd divide the series:

Absolutist shows: Star Trek, TNG, Voyager, Enterprise, SG-1, Doctor Who (original), BSG (original), Buck Rogers, The Prisoner, Earth 2, V (original), Twilight Zone, Outer Limits

Ambiguity shows: Andromeda, Firefly, Farscape, Blake's 7, BSG (reboot), Torchwood, DS9, X Files

In the Middle: Babylon 5, Crusade, Doctor Who (reboot)

This is obviously not a full list of series. Which kind of series you like tends to depend a lot on your cultural and ideological background. As a rule, though I hold to some absolutist beliefs, I prefer the more ambiguous shows, because the writing is much better. Of my favorite series, only the original Doctor Who and The Prisoner are absolutist. Some of the other absolutist shows are fine, like The Twilight Zone and Outer Limits, but as a whole I just don't think these absolutist shows can match the nuanced characterizations of Farscape, Blake's 7 and Babylon 5. On the other hand, some shows have taken the ambiguity so far, such as Firefly and the BSG (reboot), that their characters are essentially cyphers and lack the depth of personality of a Kerr Avon or a G'kar. My other problem with the more ambiguous series, particularly with the new BSG (reboot), is that they sometimes sound too sympathetic to horrendous ideas, like the government eliminating certain civil rights during a time of war. I for one was more than a little pissed when Rosselin outlawed abortion for the good of the body politic in the new BSG, and I'm a pro-lifer! I thought Rosselin should stick to her guns and not give in to the "ends justify the means" rhetoric that has come to characterize the entire rebooted BSG franchise. I think JMS's position on Babylon 5, in which there are always choices, but always consequences to one's choices, is less likely to lead to this kind of relativistic anything-goes approach to civil rights and legal morality. But then again, I do like Blake's 7, which takes BSG's ambiguity and ramps it up ten degrees. I guess, though, that is because there is no sanctimonious pretense to moral strength on the part of Kerr Avon, which makes Blake's 7 more palatable than BSG, with BSG's constant desire to stay "relevant". Long term, I think Blake's 7 has been far more significant to the genre, because it refused to give some of the cheapened answers to moral questions that BSG delights in. Just my opinion though. Tell me what you think.

Category: Science fiction politico, science fiction politics

Karl Marx and the Triumph of Libertarian Sci-Fi

One of the most peculiar aspects of the science fiction genre is that it has been dominated, not by liberals, as is traditionally supposed, nor conservatives, but libertarians. Poul Anderson, Greg Bear, Gordon Dickson, The Prisoner, H. Beam Piper, and Robert Heinlein, among many others, could all be labeled libertarian in their outlook. So far as I know, only Mieville and Kim Robinson, among major authors, are socialist in outlook. The picture becomes even worse when one looks at fantasy, though the situation in both genres is improving. Fantasy literature has too often been dominated by right wing ideologues, like J.R.R. Tolkien and C.S. Lewis. So what needs to change in the genre? I think, first of all, there needs to be a greater awareness of the plight of working class people, something Marxist fiction is particularly good at supplying. Secondly, publishers need to be challenged to diversify their production lines beyond the conservative\liberal, libertarian banners, to something more original, inviting voices from socialism and anarchism as well. Lastly, as the Sci-Fi Politico has pointed out before, the genre needs to accept individualistic voices, especially in TV and Film, rather than rely on retreads of old ideas. Only then will we have a genre that both Rand and Marx could be proud of.

Punishment Park

Peter Watkins's Punishment Park is probably the most radical sci-fi film ever produced. Punishment Park tells the story of a group of political prisoners (actually 2 groups), of leftist persuasions, who are taken to a government park and used as training material for police exercises. Perhaps the most famous scene in the movie is a straight-by-the-numbers repeat of the gagging of Bobby Seale, an infamous act that occurred in the 1968 Chicago trials, when Seale, a black man, was ordered gagged by a judge. Watkins used a number of experimental techniques in the film, the most interesting of which is the use of amateur actors to get more "natural", less acted reactions. Though this amateur acting can be a little unnerving at times, it overall is a success, though not to the extent it was in Privilege, Watkins's even better 1967 movie. Punishment Park was part of the sci-fi bonanza of the late sixties and early seventies - a time period in which science fiction films actually said something about the world, rather than copying it. Watkins is a justifiably acclaimed director, and I sincerely hope that he has not made his last film. Science fiction needs more visionaries in his image.

The Science versus Military trope in science fiction

Pictured here is Edmund Gwynn, who plays a scientist in the fifties giant ants classic. The fifties are famous for their division of the world into science vs. military, a kind of substitute for science versus religion. Gwynn represents one of the rare portrayals where the scientist is clearly in charge. At the opposite end of the spectrum was 1951's The Thing, in which scientists' attempts to make peace with the alien, only ends in disaster. Science fiction television series, as a rule, have followed a mad scientist versus wise military in most series. Star Trek had several notable mad scientists, most notably Richard Daystorm, who had to be handled with kid gloves by the compassionate Star Fleet. BSG (the original) followed in this tradition, as did the new BSG, whose chief villain is the scientist Gaius Baltar. Doctor Who had many mad scientists: Davros, the Master (argueably), and Dr. Kettlewell (from Giant Robot), Tobias Vaughn, among many others. What is left us, then, is a tendency in modern science fiction to reject the mental for the physical, the intellectual for the jingoistic warrior. I find this trend deeply troubling, for what it says about American (and British) nationalism. Clearly, we need series that are much more critical of the military, not knockoffs of Stargate SG-1.

Science Fiction's brave stand against aversion therapy

Cinematic and televised sci-fi is not well known for its courage concerning politics. But science fiction has done a good job in condemning one particularly abusive practice: aversion therapy. Aversion therapy is the practice of trying to make people renounce a sexual or psychological process by the use of behavioral conditioning to create a new,"conditioned" person. Science fiction, aside from B.F. Skinner's nightmarish Walden Two, has always taken a stand against this practice. Clockwork Orange is the most famous example, a movie that dealt seriously with the pros and cons of trying to enforce the state's morality through the use of psychological conditioning. Also successful was the series The Prisoner, which dealt with aversion therapy in several episodes; Star Trek, which dealt with aversion therapy in two excellent episodes on the abuse of the mentally ill; and STNG. Now, in part, sci-fi's resentment of aversion therapy comes from the genre's mild anti-psychiatric bent, which I happen to disagree with. But all these series and movies also had a real concern that the state would use aversion therapy against political opponents: the mentally ill, prisoners, political detainees, and homosexuals. My only complaint, is that none of these series dealt with another group that uses aversion therapy frequently: religion, or to be more specific certain fundamentalist groups with prejudices against the mentally ill and LGBT people. As someone with OCD, I fell victim to one of these groups, was locked in a room for 6 hours, told I was cursed by God, and screamed at to repent of my disease or face that curse forever. That use of a.v. therapy has had a profound effect on my life. So, I can only thank Burgess and Rodenberry and Mcgoohan for having the courage to take on this practice when it was still in its infancy. I only wish people had listened to them.

Note: I have another blog, Against Biblical Counseling, that deals with abusive religious psychotherapies. Please do not mistake it with the site run by the Bobgans, which is itself psychiatrically abusive.

Best Hitler stand ins

So, I decided to make a list of my best sci-fi Hitler stand ins. Scorpius is on that list of course. He is suitably evil and though not concerned with genetic purity, he does have that certain sense of menace that all great villains have. From Doctor Who, I would nominate Davros, particularly in the episode Genesis of the Daleks. Davros is intensely committed to genetic purity, and has that desire for self-perpetuation that is at the heart of all genetic dictatorships. Servalen, from Blake's 7, has that Nazi-like demeanor and uncaring nature for other life, characteristic of all the best of the worst dictatotrs. Star Trek never really gave us a sufficiently menacing dictator, but Khan Noonian Singh wasn't bad. Finally, Babylon 5 gave us the eponymous President Clark and his henchmen among the Shadows. Which sci-fi dictator would you rank first (from this list or any other). Personally, my vote would go for Scorpius or Davros. Who do you think is science fiction's ultimate baddie?