Be that as it may… Someday we will probably be able to do this. Should we?
PROS: It would be really cool and scientifically interesting!
CONS: Sad if you end up with one lonely confused mammoth. Then there’s the perpetual issue: should we really be worrying about bringing back extinct animals when we’re actively engaged killing off all the other animals at the same time?
I’m cautiously pro. Of course the calculus can change pretty easily. Lets say it’s a neanderthal, not a mammoth. Or heck, let’s say it’s Einstein, or Jesus.
We have thoughts on how we might translate questions that arise from current events into scenes on the future.
But we’d like to get your thoughts! What news events make you think about how the world and the people in it are changing?
We not sure what the results of this experiment will be. Always thought provoking, sometimes outlandish? But not in a conspiracy theory kind of way. They’re thinking of the past. We’re thinking of the future.
PS: An update - the ants in our recording site have cleared out! And we’ve laid down some good tracks. Stay tuned to an internet near you.
Orson Scott Card’s “Ender’s Game,” is finally being adapted into a movie. Check out the trailer.
Orson Scott Card is an interesting guy, with views, political and otherwise, that a lot of people — including some who love his books — find hard to take.
Recently, Card made the news when he was announced as the author of a new Superman comic, which many Superman lovers found distasteful enough to launch a boycott that basically scuttled the whole project.
It raises the question of what an author’s relationship to his or her work is. Can you love a book if you disagree with its author on nearly everything of substance? In the case of Card, for plenty of people the answer seems to be yes.
I do think the situation is different when you’re talking about science fiction as opposed to other genres. Insofar as as sci-fi is predictive, or involves future societies that are marked in some way as “good” or “bad” by the author, that would often seem to necessitate having some of the author’s political stances baked into the cake of the work he or she produces.
And there are plenty of examples of that, from the positively portrayed militaristic society in “Starship Troopers,” to Star Trek’s Utopian Federation and Margaret Atwood’s various nightmare versions of the religious right. (Check out this article for a crazily in-depth analysis of what kinds of sci-fi is liked by people of various political stripes.)
Of course, you would hope that a really good author could include enough complexity enough in his or her work that it can be enjoyed by people of varying views. And I think it speaks to the diversity of science fiction that it includes authors who hold an extremely diverse set of views, from Robert Heinlein to Harlan Ellison.
What do you think? How does science fiction intersect with politics? Can you appreciate a vision of the future that originates from a set of views you disagree strongly with?