Isaac Asimov: Science, Technology and Space

Article Tools

Image Gallery

Print

E-mail

Comments

RSS

PLOWBOY: But what is your own definition?

ASIMOV: I think science fiction is the very relevant branch of literature that deals with human response to changes in the level of science and technology. And such writing goes to the heart of matters that trouble us now, because the world is changing at whirlwind speed. Moreover, any person who is, let us say, between 15 and 30 years of age today is likely to live well into the twenty-first century. The world is going to be completely different then!

Now you may think that's a pretty obvious truth, but it isn't at all! Very few people realize that change is inevitable and that it will occur more and more rapidly as time goes on. So it's absolutely essential to consider the future in making our decisions . . . and to face that future with daring and guts.

I believe no amount of reading in any field but science fiction is going to convince anyone of the inevitability of change. When` a person reads science fiction, though, he or she starts out assuming in the story at least—that the future will be different.

PLOWBOY: So science fiction helps one adjust to the fact that the world is going to be continually changing. But such writing doesn't usually try to give an accurate picture of what that world will be like, does it?

ASIMOV: I don't know of any science fiction writer who really attempts to be a prophet. Such authors accomplish their tasks not by being correct in their predictions, necessarily, but merely by hammering home—in story after story—the notion that life is going to be different.

PLOWBOY: And, as you see it, the keys to such world changes will be advances in science and technology.

ASIMOV: Science fiction always bases its future visions on changes in the levels of science and technology. And the reason for that consistency is simply that—in reality—all other changes throughout history have been irrelevant and trivial. For example, what difference did it make to the people of the ancient world that Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire? Obviously, that event made some difference to a lot of individuals. But if you look at humanity in general, you'll see that life went on pretty much as it had before the conquest.

On the other hand, consider the changes that were made in people's daily lives by the development of agriculture or the mariner's compass . . . and by the invention of gunpowder or printing. Better yet, look at recent history and ask yourself, "What difference would it have made if Hitler had won World War II?" Of course, such a victory would have made a great difference to many people. It would have resulted in much horror, anguish, and pain. I myself would probably not have survived.

But Hitler would have died eventually, and the effects of his victory would gradually have washed out and become insignificant—in terms of real change—when compared to such advances as the actual working out of nuclear power, the advent of television, or the invention of the jet plane.

RSS | Comments | E-mail | Print