Dave Truesdale vs. Predicting the Future
Dave Truesdale’s gone “Off on a Tangent” again:
The Oddball, the Whacky, and the Prophetic in Short SF
From April, 1926 to . . . now?
SF, taken as an official genre and in the broadest sense, has never consciously set out to “predict” the future. Yes, there are exceptions, but they only prove the rule. That it has on occasion happened to do so in its 80+ years of official existence as a genre–April, 2006 marking its 80th year–merely happens to be a sideline plus. But it gave rise to the mistaken notion in its earlier days (after the public began to take notice of our new literature) that this was the primary (if not the only) purpose of SF, and the field was thus defined by many in the general public and the press solely on this basis; as a predictive literature. This popular and long-standing notion still exists among a very few of the unenlightened. Actually, more often than not and truth be told, the imaginative SF writer threw many inventive, creative, wild ideas against the wall–in the service of story–and a few of them, down through the years, have stuck (i.e. have come to pass).
Go read it and then argue with him about it.
F&SF March Acquisitions
March’s acquisitions include:
- The Dinosaur Train by James L. Cambias (6925 words)
- Don’t Ask by M. Rickert (3400 words)
- Exit Strategy by K. D. Wentworth (7000 words)
- Osama Phone Home by David Marusek (6830 words – 2nd Serial)
- Poison Victory Albert Cowdrey by (8000 words)
F&SF Apr. 2007: Favorite Story Poll
What was your favorite story in the April 2007 issue of F&SF? Cast your vote in the favorite story poll.
 |
||
| Selection | ||
| Memorare – Gene Wolfe |  44% |
18 |
| The Equally Strange Reappearance of David Gerrold – David Gerrold |  17% |
7 |
| A Thing Forbidden – Donald Mead |  12% |
5 |
| Titanium Mike Saves the Day – David D. Levine |  10% |
4 |
| Onocentaur – Sophie M. White (poem) |  2% |
1 |
| I wasn’t impressed with any of them. |  15% |
6 |
|
|
|
| 41 votes total | ||
Diamond Concludes Utopian Trilogy
57 and Cute
The F&SF MySpace profile received the following email:
How’s it goin? I’m Kristy, I just moved to the Jersey City area and I wanna meet a nice guy around here :-). I moved here to New Jersey a couple of weeks ago for work and now that I’m here I have nobody to hang out with! I read your profile… You’re cute and I liked what you had to say :-).
I’m 24/F/single and I’m lookin for a guy who is a little bit older or more mature than me. You say you’re 57 and you’re cute so I guess you’re qualified :-)
Gee, should we be flattered?
Pohl Works With Clarke’s Theorem
Galactica: Unity Does Death Rock
Interview with Robert J. Sawyer
SCI FI Weekly just published my Q&A interview with Robert J. Sawyer, whose latest novel, Rollback, should be hitting the bookstores any day now. Here’s a taste:
One of the themes you frequently explore in your fiction is immortality. In Mindscan, a kind of immortality is conveyed via transferring the mind into a robot body, and in your latest, Rollback, immortality is achieved through medical means–a kind of cellular regeneration. Which of these possibilities do you think is more likely to be put into practice someday, and do you think either will be available within our lifetimes?
Sawyer: I say in Rollback that, by the time of the novel–40 years from now–Vernor Vinge’s technological singularity had still not come to pass. But I do think we will see enormous technological strides in the next 40 years, and they will far exceed those of the last 40, and that will include huge breakthroughs in both the areas you’ve mentioned. Absolutely, we’ll make great progress in slowing down and conceivably rejuvenating our bodies. And I’m just as sure that we’ll make a lot of progress in scanning human brains and being able to reproduce the fine structures of the brain–and therefore the mind that arises from that structure–at any level of resolution you care to name.
So, sure, both rollbacks and mindscans will be commercially available in our lifetimes (although only the former at Wal-Mart …). Which of the two will be more popular depends on the prevailing psychology. Flesh and blood has a lot to be said for it, but it also means you can still go splat and die. Still, almost all people would immediately accept that a version of yourself that has been rejuvenated is still you; it’s a bigger philosophical leap to recognize that a copy of you that exists when the original no longer does is also still you.