|
LITR 4368 Literature of the Future  |
Sample answers
for Essay 2:
|
 |
Sarah Hurt
Connecting with High Tech and Low Tech Fiction
With my midterm I wrote about the differences between high and low tech
and why these two styles are both held under the science fiction umbrella and
how they both deal heavily with change. By recognizing that change is a large
part of what science fiction is trying to convey, I feel that I am better able
to connect with some of the literature that at first simply confused me, namely
high tech fiction. One thing I have noticed specifically about high tech
literature, is that when high tech work focuses more on emotions or ideas and
less on the technology I am better able to get past moments of high tech lingo
overload. The low tech fiction I connected best with also focused on characters
and their actions to display ideas rather than just talk about ideas the way
that “Chocco” did.
Within any genre there will be authors who are very good at connecting
with their audience and those authors who the average reader will have trouble
with. In my experience most authors fit either one or the other category only,
but William Gibson has defied this idea of mine because some of his works were
relatable while others were completely alien to me. Sera Perkins in her 2013
final exam wrote about Gibson’s use of metaphor and how it made his works like
“Burning Chrome” more relatable. While I agree that Gibson’s use of metaphor can
be very helpful in regards to clarifying some of the high tech elements in works
like “Hinterlands”, his comparison of the futuristic space travel with airports
and other forms of today’s travel for example, but metaphors can only get Gibson
so far.
“Readers evaluate, compare, and relate to the characters in stories. When
more than one person connects to a story, then discussion happens. That makes
them even better for using in a classroom” (Rachel Jungklaus, final exam essay
2013). Rachel Jungklaus wrote in her final exam about the importance of
connecting with what you are reading, and when it comes to Gibson and his works,
I found “Hinterlands” to be the easiest to understand. This could be because I
have at least some idea of what space travel could look like and am thus
familiar enough with the basic concept that I can focus on something other than
the technology. Gibson’s story of “Johnny Mnemonic” was harder to follow, but
Gibson often compares the high tech world that Johnny is living in to more
relatable ideas such as Johnny’s gun which is less high tech than the world
around him. No amount of metaphors would have been able to get me through
Gibson’s “Burning Chrome” without confusion. This particular story showcased how
much prior knowledge you can need to connect with science fiction, and as
someone with little to no experience with computer hacking or programing I was
left behind.
This is not to say that Gibson had the absolutely most confusing work of
the semester however, as I was left completely confused by Goldstein’s
“Cyberfiddle” which was not always very clear for those of us less technology
inclined. In comparison Ferber’s “Drapes and Folds” which focused more on
relationships, in particular the relationship of Pearl and Xera, the overall
story and idea was not difficult to comprehend while still holding true to the
high tech style. “Drapes and Folds” is a perfect example of how high tech
literature can still be made assessable by shifting the focus from the high tech
and emphasizing the real relationships of those characters within the story.
Gibson’s “Hinterlands” does this to some degree by focusing on the Toby and his
feelings about Leni Hofmannstahl’s death and his relationship with Charmian,
along with his desire to make contact despite the risks and his previous failure
to be chosen rather than simply focusing on all of the technology within the
ships.
Low
tech works can have an advantage over high tech works when it comes to their
relatability. You don’t need to know anything about space or higher mathematics
and you don’t need specialized computer training/experience to connect in some
way to most low tech works the way that high tech works can require. Low tech
works also tend to focus more on relationships and are less likely to have the
cold feeling that is sometimes associated with high tech literature. When it
comes to low tech science fiction Octavia Butler really stands out. Octavia
Butler was by far the most well-received author we read this semester and I
believe it has to do with her ability to create real emotions for those who read
her works. She also has a great way of writing her characters into situations
that make you rethink your entire world without you noticing that she is trying
to make you think. “Speech Sounds” is a great example of how low tech works fit
into literature of the future as literature about ideas and once again Butler
shows how good she is at writing relatable characters. Butler is not just a
great writer because she makes you think, she is great because she does not
target any particular part of the community when writing. While her works are
most likely to be read by women, what I enjoy most about her works, both that we
read in class and what I have read of her before, is that women of all race, age
and education can find something that they can connect within her works. “Speech
Sounds” in particular is Butler at her best because as we discussed in class,
until at least half way through the short story, everyone had different ideas on
what Rye looked like and how old she was making Rye more universally appealing
to both reluctant and avid readers. Butler also does not sacrifice the quality
of her story telling by not focusing on such details, the same way that the most
relatable high tech works don’t have to sacrifice their futuristic elements to
remain readable for those less educated in regards to technology.
In
her 2013 final exam Adria Weger wrote about the narrator of “House of Bones” and
how the “gap between the low-tech and high-tech separates the narrator from the
people of this time.” (Adria Weger, final exam essay 2013). While the narrator
eventually is able to connect with the ancient people he now lives with, he
struggles even when fully amerced within their culture and requires an epiphany,
that they are not savage or monstrous killers of those who are different (the
Neanderthals). This concept of being separated by technology and their
understanding of technology can also be seen as an example of how writers of
high tech literature and those uninitiated into the high tech culture are
separated.
While
not as extreme as hunter gatherers compared to modern man, some high tech
fiction for those unused to the ideas high tech stories focus on, can leave the
reader as lost as the tribe would have felt if the narrator had tried to explain
modern technology. That’s why high tech writers that can be enjoyed by their low
tech readers tend to have elements of humor or human emotions which can make an
otherwise alien world more comprehensive and less intimidating the way that low
tech fiction tends to be naturally. This is important within the literature of
the future genre, because it is only when someone can connect with what they are
reading that they can truly learn and build on ideas. Within a genre that relies
so heavily on ideas, comprehension and feeling confident that you can understand
at least the majority of the story are necessary to create discussion which is
part of why literature of ideas exists in the first place.
