Reviews

'In Other Worlds: SF and the Human Imagination': Atwood Finds the Connection Between Wells & Orwell

Childhood reading, the emphasis upon obscure texts, and searching out forgotten and under-appreciated works form Margaret Atwood-the-novelist’s DNA.


In Other Worlds: SF and the Human Imagination

Publisher: Virago (UK), Random House (USA)
Length: 255 pages
Author: Margaret Atwood
Price: £17.99/$24.95
Format: Hardcover
Publication date: 2011-10
Amazon

Vindication is a wonderful thing. Or I imagine so, having not yet experienced that sense of completion and satisfaction with my doctoral research, quite yet. I hope to some day.

Margaret Atwood knows what it’s like, seeing as the topic of her unfinished PhD thesis predicted many of the now current and fashionable fields of study. The range of genres and authors that she chose to examine suggests an early ability to perceive tastes and preferences in the general readership. She hit upon a ‘line of literary descent’ that demonstrates the origins of science fiction and fantasy literature through George MacDonald, H Rider Haggard, C.S. Lewis and J.R.R. Tolkien. And she remarks upon her foresight: ‘…at that time no one of any academic respectability was paying any attention to this kind of writing, to “science fiction” and its related forms or subforms, such as fantasy and ustopias.’ (Atwood: 78)

That last type, ‘ustopias’, is her coining; a conflation of ‘utopia’ and ‘dystopia’, the two kinds of societies typically depicted in the literature she analyses. One is a paradise, tainted from within; the other a nightmare in which glimpses of bliss can be discerned. ‘I was on my own’, she remembers, outside the accepted conventions of academia. And to a great extent she has remained so.

Academia has had to keep up with Atwood. She has energised literature in a unique fashion – with insight and intellect, and riveting narratives. Science fiction, fantasy, speculative fiction – all terms she enjoys using and questioning – have become trademarks of her writing. She accounts for her journey of discovery in this collection of essays, critiques and commentaries, drawn from a variety of outlets: radio, journalism, symposia, etc. She takes us through the compositional process of The Handmaid’s Tale (1985) and reflects upon how George Orwell’s 1984 (1948) was inspirational for her.

Childhood reading, the emphasis upon obscure texts, and searching out forgotten and under-appreciated works form Atwood-the-novelist’s DNA. It will always be engaging when a writer cites their influences and represents the formulation of science fiction (which she still considers a contested term) as being Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels, through Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein to the more recognisable form of H.G. Wells. She treats genre as something fluid and changeable and is very persuasive in perceiving the artform of the novel in this way, relating Defoe’s Robinson Crusoe to Wells’s difficult work The Island of Dr. Moreau. She removes the rigidity of the novel form and encourages us to re-visit classics, drama, film, and out-of-fashion works in order to re-evaluate their significance.

What started out as her seeming disparagement of science fiction, for which she supposedly offered negative criticism of Ursula K Le Guin, and was accused of not wishing to be labelled as a science fiction or fantasy writer herself, has now been thoroughly contradicted. This collection serves to confirm her admiration for Le Guin’s work (she devotes an entire chapter to her stories and the whole collection is dedicated to her) and also asserts her position as one that is far from negative. Instead, she is a champion of marginal but popular forms and one who reinforces the need to interrogate such works. This collection will only function to enliven the debate and further the possibilities of how science fiction, ‘speculative’ fiction and ‘ustopias’ are assessed and represented in future.

8

So far J. J. Abrams and Rian Johnson resemble children at play, remaking the films they fell in love with. As an audience, however, we desire a fuller experience.

As recently as the lackluster episodes I-III of the Star Wars saga, the embossed gold logo followed by scrolling prologue text was cause for excitement. In the approach to the release of any of the then new prequel installments, the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare, followed by the Lucas Film logo, teased one's impulsive excitement at a glimpse into the next installment's narrative. Then sat in the movie theatre on the anticipated day of release, the sight and sound of the Twentieth Century Fox fanfare signalled the end of fevered anticipation. Whatever happened to those times? For some of us, is it a product of youth in which age now denies us the ability to lose ourselves within such adolescent pleasure? There's no answer to this question -- only the realisation that this sensation is missing and it has been since the summer of 2005. Star Wars is now a movie to tick off your to-watch list, no longer a spark in the dreary reality of the everyday. The magic has disappeared… Star Wars is spiritually dead.

Keep reading... Show less
6

This has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it.

It hardly needs to be said that the last 12 months haven't been everyone's favorite, but it does deserve to be noted that 2017 has been a remarkable year for shoegaze. If it were only for the re-raising of two central pillars of the initial scene it would still have been enough, but that wasn't even the half of it. Other longtime dreamers either reappeared or kept up their recent hot streaks, and a number of relative newcomers established their place in what has become one of the more robust rock subgenre subcultures out there.

Keep reading... Show less
Theatre

​'The Ferryman': Ephemeral Ideas, Eternal Tragedies

The current cast of The Ferryman in London's West End. Photo by Johan Persson. (Courtesy of The Corner Shop)

Staggeringly multi-layered, dangerously fast-paced and rich in characterizations, dialogue and context, Jez Butterworth's new hit about a family during the time of Ireland's the Troubles leaves the audience breathless, sweaty and tearful, in a nightmarish, dry-heaving haze.

"Vanishing. It's a powerful word, that"

Northern Ireland, Rural Derry, 1981, nighttime. The local ringleader of the Irish Republican Army gun-toting comrades ambushes a priest and tells him that the body of one Seamus Carney has been recovered. It is said that the man had spent a full ten years rotting in a bog. The IRA gunslinger, Muldoon, orders the priest to arrange for the Carney family not to utter a word of what had happened to the wretched man.

Keep reading... Show less
10

Aaron Sorkin's real-life twister about Molly Bloom, an Olympic skier turned high-stakes poker wrangler, is scorchingly fun but never takes its heroine as seriously as the men.

Chances are, we will never see a heartwarming Aaron Sorkin movie about somebody with a learning disability or severe handicap they had to overcome. This is for the best. The most caffeinated major American screenwriter, Sorkin only seems to find his voice when inhabiting a frantically energetic persona whose thoughts outrun their ability to verbalize and emote them. The start of his latest movie, Molly's Game, is so resolutely Sorkin-esque that it's almost a self-parody. Only this time, like most of his better work, it's based on a true story.

Keep reading... Show less
7

There's something characteristically English about the Royal Society, whereby strangers gather under the aegis of some shared interest to read, study, and form friendships and in which they are implicitly agreed to exist insulated and apart from political differences.

There is an amusing detail in The Curious World of Samuel Pepys and John Evelyn that is emblematic of the kind of intellectual passions that animated the educated elite of late 17th-century England. We learn that Henry Oldenburg, the first secretary of the Royal Society, had for many years carried on a bitter dispute with Robert Hooke, one of the great polymaths of the era whose name still appears to students of physics and biology. Was the root of their quarrel a personality clash, was it over money or property, over love, ego, values? Something simple and recognizable? The precise source of their conflict was none of the above exactly but is nevertheless revealing of a specific early modern English context: They were in dispute, Margaret Willes writes, "over the development of the balance-spring regulator watch mechanism."

Keep reading... Show less
8
Pop Ten
Mixed Media
PM Picks

© 1999-2017 Popmatters.com. All rights reserved.
Popmatters is wholly independently owned and operated.

rating-image