Science Fiction: The War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells - Research Paper Example

?Science Fiction. Compare ONE science fiction story that appears in our speculative literature anthology and compare it to ANY science fiction movie.How is film different than text? How is the portrayal of possible futures different from medium to medium? Name: Date: Abstract The science fiction genre is very diverse. From an early fascination with the sciences of the enlightenment, attention gradually shifted to thoughts about the planets, and the possibility of other kinds of non-human life. This paper compares one of the classic stories of science fiction, The War of the Worlds, by H.G. Wells, with a recent science fiction film, called I Robot, which is somewhat loosely based on an earlier written text. It draws out the main differences which emerge between the medium of writing and the medium of film, showing how narrative voice in the book is replaced by visual imagery in the film to provide the main emotional tone of the story. This both adds something to the original story, and takes something away, with the result that book and film communicate to their audiences in very different ways, and emphasize different parts of the science fiction message. [150 words] Compare ONE science fiction story that appears in our speculative literature anthology and compare it to ANY science fiction movie. How is film different than text? How is the portrayal of possible futures different from medium to medium? The science fiction genre is very diverse. One of the true classics is surely the famous novella War of the Worlds by H.G. Wells. It is hard to believe that it was written at the end of the nineteenth century, long before our modern world of computers, spaceships and technology ever existed. This book introduces a rather formal unnamed narrator who describes in detail an invasion of the earth from the planet Mars. Its style was exciting and radical for that early period, and the book is still read and enjoyed by modern readers, despite the fact that more than a hundred years have passed. In this paper the classic text of H.G. Wells is compared with an extremely modern form of science fiction: a blockbuster film with spectacular special effects, starring one of Hollywood’s most versatile actor heroes: Will Smith. The film is I Robot is based from an earlier book of the same name by Isaac Asimov (1920-1992). The main features of each work are described, and the two are compared, with special reference to the similarities and differences between them. The task of H.G. Wells writing in the late 1990s was made difficult by the fact that he had no real models to use as a template for his story. The closest genre to science fiction at the time was the Gothic horror novel, such as Mary Shelley’s tale of the monster Frankenstein or the macabre stories of American writer Edgar Allan Poe. In this period science was a relatively new discipline, and people regarded it with a mixture of awe and suspicion. It was also a time of rather strict moral codes in society, with prohibitions on drinking and immorality from the Church and a rather formal and restrictive separation of different classes. In those days war was a gentlemanly affair, fought with imprecise technology and conceived of as a useful career for middle class men. Some would say that the depiction of a battle using weapons capable of mass destruction are a prophetic warning about the gradual arming of European countries in preparation for their bloody repression of colonial uprisings, and their eventual mass slaughter in the First World War. Certainly the narrator of The War of the Worlds is a highly intelligent man, qualified in the physical sciences as well as a man could be at that time, and able to tutor the reader in unfamiliar concepts when required. An example of this teacher-like approach can be seen at the beginning of the novel, where the narrator explains “The planet Mars, I scarcely need remind the reader, revolves about the sun at a mean distance of 140,000,000 miles, and the light and heat it receives from the sun is barely half of that received by this world.” (Wells, chapter one) The tone is flattering, and at the same time quite detailed, as if the writer wants the readers to have the impression that they are as intelligent and well informed as the narrator. It is likely that many readers will never have considered these facts and figures before, and so he is explaining them as he tells the story. An interesting aspect of the novel lies in its careful presentation of the alien species as “intelligences greater than man’s” (Wells, chapter one) They are called “ugly” and “repulsive” but at the same time there is a grudging respect in the way that they are shown to unfold their tactical attack on the citizens of the world. In some ways the alien creatures are god-like, but this is not so much stated, as hinted at in the description of how they move and act: “… and an invisible hand, as it were, lit the bushes as it hurried towards them in the twilight.” (Wells , Chapter 6) Their clinical advance is contrasted with the gibbering and crazy ramblings of the clergyman, who assumes that the Martians are connected with the Christian scriptures foretelling a catalcylsm of war that signals the end of the world. Although the creatures are described in cold terms as Thing and Monster, and their machines are likened to spiders, all of which is guaranteed to terrify the reader, the narrator is careful to maintain a morally neutral stance towards them. He notes, for example, that the foliage which is gradually engulfing the English countryside is blood red, rather than earthly green, but he does not blame the Martians outright for the ecological damage that ensues since he refers to the seeds that the Martians brought with them “intentionally or accidentally” (Wells, Chapter 2). The reader’s shock and horror is held in check by the narrator’s fair minded and scholarly analysis of the facts, trying to put himself in the minds of the aliens, as well as the the minds of the human victims. The underlying message that Wells appears to be giving in this story, is that man is not nearly as powerful as he thinks he is, and that his small grasp of scientific theories is nothing compared to the vast and deadly forces that are out there in the wider universe. It is a vision without god, and with only a moderate amount of faith in human beings. The resolution of the plot does not come through human victory over the aliens, but by a virus which kills them. It is as if science itself, without any moral judgement one way or the other, provides a random means that just happens to wipe out the threat. One cannot help thinking that it could easily have fallen the other way, and the aliens could have taken over the planet, leaving manking the victim of a senseless proof of Darwinian survival of the fittest. H.G. Wells paints a picture of mechanised war that gives a foretaste of the coming carnage of the twentieth century. The aliens are without compassion, and this is exactly how the mass slaughter in Europe appeared to the population. His work looks forward to a future that can be foreseen in terms of its technologies, to some extent, but it cannot be fathomed on a moral level. More than a hundred years later, with the benefit of hindsight, the film of I Robot looks back on this century of madness and investigates precisely this moral dimension. The key theme of the film is the struggle for robots, who are man-made machines, to grasp the elusive concepts that make human beings the moral creatures that they are supposed to be. Once again there is a certain insect-like form in the robots who rebel against their creators, especially when they gather together in large numbers. The medium of film can evoke in an instant some of the deepest fears of human beings. Where Wells plays on the fears of his readers and engages the intellect to understand what the main issues are in the plot, the film of I Robot evokes a set of ambivalent emotions about the creatures, and explores the area of conscience and moral decision making. The individual robots who live with human families are portrayed as sweet and innocent, not recognizing their own strength, and longing to share the qualities that humans take for granted. The ancient fairy tale of Pinnochio, and the Greek myth Pygmalion, who loves his own stone creations are echoed here: man-made objects are at the same time credited with having warm human qualities, and condemned for being cold machines. The underlying message behind the film of I Robot is the same as the message that H.G. Wells was conveying: science is both awesome and dangerous, and mankind is under threat from strange new beings who do not share his particular origins and history. The difference that comes with the visual medium, however, is that the audience is lured into having an emotional bond with the robots. In the film the special effects make the aliens have large eyes, and these remind the audience of a human child. There is a sad expression at significant moments in the plot, and though Asimov’s book contains some complex moral philosophy about first, second and third level commandments, the film focuses very little upon these difficult moral issues. The biggest Hollywood addition to the genre of science fiction is the insertion of an all-action hero, wielding big guns, and leading the humans in a battle to the death against the evil alien hordes. This emphasis adds to the entertainment value of the film. Hollywood films are aimed at a particular audience, in this case mostly teenagers, and so every effort is made to hype up the killing and the element of armed conflict. The fast pace of the action leaves the audience little time to reflect deeply on the issues referred to, and instead there is a focus on whether or not particular characters will survive, and how, in the end, the hero saves the world. In some ways, therefore, the medium of film over-simplifies the deeper themes of science fiction narrative. The images are memorable and the emotional turmoil creates a thrill for the viewer, but most of this does not reach the part of the audience that thinks through the implications of mankind’s arrogance and thoughtless exploitations of technologies which he barely understands. The main character Spooner, played by Will Smith, stamps through every scene like the rogue detective that he is, hunting down a robotic murderer. It is as if the creative industry has not digested the lessons of the twentieth century at all: there is still a naive faith in the power of science, since the cause of the robot uprising is depicted as some conveyer belt flaw, rather than a deep and meaningful paradox between fixed laws and fee will. In summary, then, each genre has its particular charms, and both are able to convey a message of human struggle against the effects of science that is more powerful than they had ever imagined. The novella form is, however, a far better medium for presenting the deeper and more subtle philosophical and moral points that science fiction raises for society. Both media present another world not too different from the one that everyone normally inhabits. Of the two, the world of Wells is far more believable, and therefore far more effective as a vehicle for social criticism, than the spectacular special effects of the modern film. [1727 words] References Proyas, Alex. (Dir.). I, Robot. Film. Starring Will Smithn Bridget Moynahan, Bruce Greenwood. Hollywood: 20th Century Fox. Wells, H.G. War of the Worlds. 1898. Available at: http://www.gutenberg.org/files/36/36-h/36-h.htm Read More