Learning my (sci-fi) ABCs

Can you believe it? The semester and the year are nearly over, and while I have plenty to look forward to (the holidays, meeting my dog again, catching up on hundreds of hours of sleep), there is a lot to look forward to in the world of science fiction as well. The release of Star Wars is just around the corner, and there is news of a Star Trek revival too!

I’m going off on a tangent now. I guess I’m trying to combat my melancholic feelings of this class coming to an end with the promise of new things. Coming back to the blog post! This is my very LAST post of the semester, and while I did start off with writing stories, and am now finishing up on my final paper, an original sci-fi story, I wrote a few analytical pieces on Gravity, Snowpiercer, and The Martian. But I want to sign off with a fun post to show much sci-fi knowledge/lingo I’ve picked up along the course of the semester. So here are my ABCs of science fiction:

A| Aliens. It seems a bit clichéd to start with aliens, but after growing up watching The X Files, and exploring the (potential) existence of extra-terrestrial life through our readings, my fascination with them has grown exponentially. I especially liked the first contact stories we read in class such as Arena and Mars is Heaven. My final paper/original science fiction story also deals with aliens!

B| Because it’s there mentality. For those of you unfamiliar with the quote “Because it’s there”, it was said by mountaineer George Mallory when asked why he wanted to climb Mount Everest. I find this mentality in a lot of the protagonists of the stories we’ve read so far. Why are scientists so desperate to initiate contact with aliens (looking at you, SETI)? Why are we so obsessed with traveling to planets such as Mars (The Martian, Mars is Heaven)? The need to satiate human curiosity has never felt more real.

C| Climate fiction. Thanks to Gregory Benford’s Timescape and works such as Snowpiercer, I am slowly becoming a fan of this sub-genre. Climate change is a controversial issue today, even with all our sophisticated detection and measurement measures that prove its existence incontrovertibly, so I find it interesting that science fiction authors look at the climate to be the reason for our doom, not alien attacks or other more dramatic reasons.

D| Dystopia. Why are so many science fiction stories about an apocalyptic event or its ramifications? From nuclear war in Fermi and Frost, invasion in Mayflower II to meddling monks in The Nine Billion Names of God, I have relished reading the causes and effects of a dystopian future. If you observe the rise of The Hunger Games, Maze Runner, and Divergent, you’d see that I’m not alone in my obsession with a not-so-happy future (I’m not a sadist, I swear!).

E| Eugenics. Another controversial topic, eugenics has both pros and cons. In class, we looked at pros such as improved ability, reconstructive surgeries, extending the life of a dearly beloved dog (thanks to Anya!) etc., and cons such as ‘Playing God mentality’, ethics, and income distribution effects. Eugenics also came up in Octavia Butler’s Dawn, with the trading of genetic material. Is it right or wrong? That’s a tough question.

F| Fermi paradox. The first time I heard of this term was while taking an SAT practice test, in which there was a passage about the Fermi paradox. Since then, I have been reading up on it, but this class gave me a whole new perspective on this paradox through readings such as The Fermi paradox is our business model. I also enjoyed coming up with a specific number of alien civilizations in our galaxy, a process closely modeled on the Drake equation, with our awesome and victorious team, Stellah Dope 🙂

G| Generation starship. This science fiction trope came up during Heinlein’s Universe, and Baxter’s Mayflower II, the latter my favorite reading so far. I like how stories that involve generation starships deal more with human themes such as endurance, a sense of purpose, and (devastating) anthropological effects, than actual science. I,for one, do NOT want to ever live on a generation starship, but the idea is intriguing.

H| Hollywood. I’m a movie nerd, and most of my exposure to science fiction had been through Hollywood films (ET, Contact, Gravity), but I hadn’t really thought much about the treatment of science fiction in this medium. But now, armed with an arsenal of science fiction knowledge, I have become more analytical while judging how good sci-fi movies are, as I mention in my post about The Martian. Hollywood is slowly embracing the hard science fiction genre by relying on actual scientists in the making of films, and I can’t wait to see how this plays out in the latest Star Wars and Star Trek movies.

I| Intersection. Although science fiction is based on extrapolations of science, it also deals with other themes such as religion and ethics, presenting us with a whole arrays of works in which different scientific and social themes intersect in fascinating ways. For example, in Nightfall and The Nine Billion Names of God, science and religion intersect in both conflicting and harmonious ways, offering us different perspectives from both sides of the coin.

J| Jetsons. I just had to put The Jetsons in here. The Jetsons, a popular children’s show, was my first introduction to science fiction, and while a 3 year old me didn’t really care about science fiction as a genre (and couldn’t even spell science fiction!), I was fascinated by domesticated robots (seen in Helen O’Loy) and flying cars. This interest continues even now, and while The Jetsons may seem unsophisticated and childish, it was my first consumption of science fiction, and I’m grateful to it for sparking an early interest in the genre.

K| Klingon. I’ve always been passionate about languages, and how we use it to communicate our thoughts and ideas. Klingon (an alien language in the Star Trek universe), in this blog post, symbolizes a range of alien languages. While initially I was irritated with reading foreign phrases in Dawn, I came to appreciate how authors develop a whole new language to bring authenticity to the extra-terrestrial setting of their works. I also liked how Butler explored Lilith’s experiences with Nikanj’s language. He wasn’t the only alien thing, after all; language itself can become an alien.

L| Literature. Before this class, I didn’t really know much about the heated battle between literature purists and science fiction enthusiasts, but after reading Ursula Le Guin’s critique of Margaret Atwood, and seeing the lack of science fiction works in prestigious awards such as the Man Booker prize, I have become more sympathetic towards the genre. After all, what is literature? The literature purists are not in my good books (my pitiable attempt at joking).

M| Medias res beginnings. Thank you, Sam, for introducing me to this term through one of your posts. (In) Medias res means in the middle of the action, and many science fiction stories begin abruptly, throwing you right in the center of events. It was uncomfortable for me to not know what was going on until after a few pages, but this technique is ingenious; it makes you want to keep reading due to frustration/anticipation. It also removes us from our routine lives, making the radical discontinuity between the real and science fiction worlds even more intense. I first encountered this in Nightfall.

N| Nightfall. The first reading of our class, Nightfall holds a special place in my heart. Much can be said about this story, but for me, the main thing I liked about it was how it introduced me to the world of classic science fiction, as championed by Asimov (Clarke and Heinlein too). By reading Nightfall, I learnt about many science fiction tropes such a low character development, radical discontinuity, and medias res beginnings.

O| Options. This is related to the multiverse theory or the existence of parallel universes. This concept intrigues me because according to this theory, every decision I could make is true in some universe. There are so many options in this world, and as economics major, opportunity cost is one of my favorite terms. But according to the multiverse theory, opportunity cost holds no meaning because I do pick the next best alternatives in some parallel universe.

P| Plausibility. Science fiction has some crazy extrapolations of science, but as long as they are plausible, it’s completely fine. We also talked about the ‘tooth fairy’ concept (a fictitious phenomenon), and one of the qualities of a good science fiction work is sticking to just one tooth fairy (existence of aliens, multiple universes), rather than going overboard and complicating matters. So even if you do come up with a crazy idea, make sure you manipulate existing scientific concepts in such a way that they seem plausible, if not possible (e.g., people believing that The Martian is a true story)

Q| Quantum theory. Here’s where we get really crazy and abstract. Quantum theory and mechanics are wayyyy above my intellectual capacities to understand. In fact, Richard Feynman, a famous theoretical scientist, once said “If you think you understand quantum mechanics, you don’t understand quantum mechanics”. Still, the theory celebrates the randomness in the universe, and I enjoyed reading about Schrodinger’s cat/plague, and the multiverse theory. Einstein wasn’t a huge fan though.

R| Relativity. Another one of the more complex theories in theoretical physics that we read about in class, relativity is a theme often explored in science fiction. I particularly enjoyed reading The Old Equations which dealt with the effects of relativity on the human psyche and relationships. Interstellar is another film we watched for class that gave relativity a hard science fiction treatment.

S| Square –cube law. Honey, I Shrunk the Kids is one of my favorite movies, but I had not heard of the square cube law before. But after reading Surface Tension, giANTs, and watching some (hilarious) clips of Them!, I have come to better appreciate the scientific facts behind it. For example, blowing up an ant to a giant size is not really practical because it’ll collapse under its own weight; water’s viscosity intensifies for microscopic creatures etc.

T| Time travel. When you think of science fiction, time travel is a topic that immediately comes to mind. Time travel is a fascinating concept, but Professor Scherrer disproved it for us in class by using the concepts related to relativity and the speed of light. Still, it makes for an interesting theme that runs in many famous science fiction stories we read, such as The Time Machine, and By His Bootstraps. I also liked how stories such as Bradbury’s Sound of Thunder combined dinosaurs, time travel, and the grandfather paradox in one framework. Bottom line: don’t mess with time!

U| Underdog. As I mentioned before, I did not know about the marginalization of science fiction in literary circles, and how even acclaimed science fiction authors such as Atwood hesitate in fully embracing their works as science fiction. Even at the Oscars, with a few notable exceptions (Avatar for one), science fiction movies are relegated solely to the visual effects category. I hope this trend reverses, and science fiction can be considered ‘proper’ literature. But I guess external validation by a few purists shouldn’t be a goal we should obsess over too much      ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

V| Variety. There is no one true definition of science fiction, and this evolving genre has so many subgenres within it. Thus, science fiction never leaves me feeling satiated or bored. From science fantasy to climate fiction, from dystopia to space opera, science fiction is a vast world for a voracious reader to explore.

W| Women. Many of the stories we’ve read so far have sexist and archaic depictions of women’s roles, often confined to the domestic sphere. I found myself frustrated with the science fiction stereotypes about women, but I guess much of it can be attributed to the societal conventions of the time these stories were written in. However, I see a positive change in this genre, and sci-fi films such as Gravity are doing a great job at showing women in a more flattering light.

X| Xenophobia. The fear of the other and the unknown is a common theme in the genre, particularly in first contact stories. But I also liked how some stories such as The Fermi Paradox is our business model flipped the convention, and showed aliens as slightly xenophobic towards humans. The feeling of fear and apprehension is not one-sided.

Y| Yuck factor. This came up during the week when we discussed genetic engineering. There are many oppositions to fiddling too much with the status quo, as I mentioned before, but sometimes there’s a more abstract, harder to justify reason, as Demosthenes mentioned in one of the blog posts, which is called the yuck factor, or our inherent disgust with certain phenomena. Exchanging genetic material and breeding two different species have many complications as it is, and the general population’s yuck factor mentality isn’t helping scientists.

Z| Zeitgeist. Science fiction often reflects the social issues and anxieties prevalent in the time they are written in. For example, Professor Clayton pointed out that the aliens in Arena, a story written during the Second World War, resembled the Japanese flag. I also briefly looked at how Star Trek echoed the public sentiments in the Cold War era. The negative portrayals of women in many of the stories we read also reflect the accepted gender norms of their age. I’m not exactly sure if zeitgeist, or the spirit of the age, is the right term to lump all these examples in, but Z is hard letter, so forgive me for my laziness.

-dreamer2205/Aditi Thakur

The Martian: A Love Letter To Science

On the first day of class, when we were discussing if any of us had any experience with science fiction before, I naïvely said that I had read a ‘science fiction’ novel, Never Let Me Go, over the summer. The moment I said it, Professor Clayton let out an audible (and disapproving) gasp, and said that Never Let Me Go isn’t science fiction at all. Making a fundamental error like that on the first day of class will definitely not end up on my top 10 moments of the semester (yikes), but it provided me with the opportunity to introspect a little, and investigate what science fiction truly means.

There are so many different definitions and sub-genres of science fiction, but the true hard science fiction, prized by the veritable science fiction nerds/geeks (what’s the correct terminology again?) places an emphasis of the plausible scientific premise of the story. Hard core sci-fi leaves very little room for character development, and as one of the bloggers mentioned, it’s hard to even remember the names of characters in these stories because the fictitious extrapolations of science take center stage instead. In classic science fiction stories (think Nightfall, The Nine Billion Names of God), whose contributions to the science fiction genre have been validated by numerous Hugos and Nebulas, I find that human characters exist only to get the story going. We need scientists or ordinary people to discover something or react to an event, but all that’s just fluff, and not really pivotal to the story. The protagonist of a hard science fiction story isn’t a dashing Kirk or even the genius Spock (I do bring them up on every post, don’t I?), but the scientific concept and its ramifications on society.

Of course, there are many other sub genres of science fiction that do not follow this formula, and do make an effort to move beyond an excessive focus on the scientific premise. Gregory Benford’s Timescape, while giving us various concrete scientific explanations (some of which went way over my head…tachyons, collapsing wave functions and other esoteric scientific concepts), does delve into human relationships and sentimentality. Ok, now I’m going off on a tangent. What I really want to talk about is The Martian.

(Yes, I know it’s been a long time since we’ve discussed the film, but I’ve been patiently waiting since fall break to post this!)

Before I took this class, I treated sci-fi movies as other movies, just with aliens and starships. I wasn’t looking for scientific accuracy, and the last thing I had on my mind was to make a distinction between hard and soft science fiction. I was more concerned about how ‘cool’ the movie was, not about its treatment of science fiction tropes and conventions. But when I went to see The Martian, I had clear expectations of myself as an active and aware consumer of science fiction, and I came up with a few, (and hopefully Roger Ebert-worthy) questions such as:

• Is this movie hard or soft science fiction?
• How far does it stray from classic science fiction works, especially in terms of the focus on the scientific premise and character development?
• Who’s the hero- Hollywood heartthrob, Matt Damon, or science?
• Is the science fiction/speculative fiction plausible?

And boy, was I surprised. As the film’s screenwriter, Drew Goddard said, “it is a love letter to science”.

http://collider.com/the-martian-set-visit-30-things-to-know/

A little bit of background first. The makers of this film actually partnered with NASA to maintain the scientific accuracy of the film as much as possible. Granted, The Martian is not the first film to rely on scientific experts, but actually being directly involved with an organization that is mentioned in nearly every frame of the film leads to fascinating results. Yes, you can argue that Andy Weir made it easier for Ridley Scott because the author was insistent on the scientific realism of his work, a philosophy reflected in the book, but presenting The Martian visually adds a challenging dimension to preserving scientific accuracy. To accomplish this mission, a perfectionist Scott reached out to James Green, Director of NASA’s Planetary Sciences division, and over the course of several months, a team of NASA scientists provided valuable input to the film’s crew about key technologies such as ascent vehicles, rovers, and habitats. Inching closer to actual science than science fiction, The Martian depicts real technologies NASA employs, such as radioisotope thermoelectric generators, ion propulsion, the famous rover, water recovery, oxygen generation, plant farms, and habitats.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nine-real-nasa-technologies-in-the-martian

The Martian is a science fiction film, but it’s set in a familiar time and space. The film seems so realistic that some poor souls actually thought that The Martian was a true story, and that humans had been to Mars. If you wonder why NASA went through all this trouble to help a commercial Hollywood venture, it’s because they want to make the film’s fiction a reality. Dr Charles Elachi, Director of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), said that the film presents “a fairly reasonable representation of what is to come.” It is not far-fetched to think of NASA following Adam Smith’s philosophy of self-interest. The Martian makes NASA’s missions look cool, and much more important, compelling (refer to the BuzzFeed article), and if a sci-fi film can generate curiosity and interest in an organization threatened with dwindling budgets, what’s the harm?

Take this Ridley Scott interview for example:

Interviewer: Do you hope a film like this can make the nation more excited about the process of space travel?

 Scott: Of course. I was in Washington the night before last at National Geographic, where we shared the evening with NASA. There were lots of astronauts there and the whole senior staff of NASA were there. They both did very good presentations prior to the screening justifying why they do this and why it’s important to do this. It’s certainly a good story. If I had the spare cash I’d invest in it.

However, The Martian is not just a science lesson or preview of things to come: it is a big budget Hollywood film. Although Scott endeavors to and succeeds in maintaining the scientific accuracy of the film subject to creative licenses, he doesn’t bore his audience, and instead gives us a gripping tale of human perseverance, and adventure in an unfamiliar land. Yes, science does take center stage, but if Scott hadn’t shown Watney’s vulnerable moments and a natural sense of despondency, I don’t think I would have enjoyed the film as much. Maybe I’m a sticker for emotional stories, but by bringing in a human dimension to the science fiction narrative, and by adroitly developing Watney’s character, Scott triumphs in elevating The Martian from a simple sci-fi flick to one of the most engaging films I have seen in recent times. I haven’t read the book so I can’t comment on Weir’s narrative, but Scott challenges the tropes of the hard science fiction genre by conflating scientific accuracy with character development, especially in the most pivotal moments of the film. The power of Watney’s personality in engaging the audience cannot be overstated. We sympathize with him, explore Mars with him, and above all, root for him. He’s not a mad scientist, but just a human being trying to survive in a hostile environment.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/space/moon-mars/a17470/the-martian-growing-potatoes-mars/

Watney’s humor and wit, qualities I find lacking in even the best science fiction works I have read so far, make me like him so much more. Neil deGrasse Tyson and I seem to agree on many issues, including our favorite line of the movie, “I’m going to have to science the shit out of this.”

Coming back to my original questions:

• Is this movie hard or soft science fiction?

Ans: It’s hard science fiction, but with its emphasis on Watney’s character development, it has elements of soft science fiction as well.

• How far does it stray from classic science fiction works, especially in terms of the focus on the scientific premise and character development?

Ans: Not very far in terms of emphasis on science, but because Watney is such a memorable character, it violates hard science fiction tropes in that regard.

• Who’s the hero- Hollywood heartthrob, Matt Damon, or science?

Both, and that’s commendable.

• Is the science fiction/speculative fiction plausible?

More than plausible! NASA is working on making manned-missions to Mars a reality. Read this:

http://www.space.com/30733-the-martian-nasa-real-mars-mission-plans.html

-dreamer2205/Aditi Thakur

Snowpiercer And The Rise Of Cli-Fi

Note: I know that not everyone has seen Snowpiercer, but if you do get some free time this weekend, catch it on Netflix because it’s a brilliant and intense film (a whole new spin on Netflix and ‘chill’)!  

One of the reasons I’m a science fiction fan is that the genre encompasses so many sub-genres, never leaving me satiated or bored. Of course, the hard core sci-fi fans guard the hallowed gates of the science fiction hall of fame armed with works of Clarke and Heinlein, their derisive and impassioned opinions firmly keeping the pretenders and phonies out, but I’m a bit more altruistic that way. I know not everything can be called true science fiction, but some works certainly do have the potential to challenge the way we look at this genre and its evolving sub-genres. Science fiction has its recognizable tropes that have been championed by Clarke, Heinlein and Asimov: scant character development, impossible yet plausible scientific theories, in medias res beginnings etc. This genre often takes us to unfamiliar places separated from us by both spatial and temporal dimensions, but some of its sub-genres set on Earth and in the near future do rely on the contemporary world to offer important social commentary and further build on its thematic elements.

There are many cult science fiction works that mirror their contemporary times, but deliberately hyperbolize these themes with the inclusion of quintessential aliens, starships and inter-galactic wars to fit the science fiction framework. Take Star Trek for example. Kirk and Spock heroically rally against hostile external and internal threats to protect the Federation. What does protecting the Enterprise and the Federation have to do with the real world? More than you may think. Star Trek: The Original Series (1966), through its science fiction narrative, implicitly touches on many themes such as the tensions emanating from the Cold War, and jingoism; these issues resonated with American public in the socio-political climate of the 1960s. However. Star Trek doesn’t set out to explicitly offer socio-political commentary on its contemporary society. You’re watching Star Trek for sheer fun, not to introspect and reflect on the actions of humankind!

https://www.viewfoo.com/detail/art-entertainment/public/mind-meld-documentary

The critic Robert Scholes, explaining the difference between the real and the science fiction worlds, mentions that science fiction texts “insist on some ‘radical discontinuity‘ between the worlds they present to us and the world of our own experience.” However, there is a whole sub-genre (or as some may argue, an entire genre) of science fiction that seeks to bring the realm of science fiction closer to the world we actually inhabit. This (sub)genre is called climate fiction or cli-fi, and it aims to bridge that gap in a unique way. Yes, cli-fi is fiction, but its essence hits close to home; in our greenhouse-gas filled world, climate change is no longer a distant threat, but in Al Gore’s words, an inconvenient truth. Instead, the fiction, or as I’d rather say, the speculation lies in how humans would adapt to the changing environment. This also presents an opportunity to examine our society through the lens of a dystopian future, and offer fascinating social commentary. That’s exactly what the dystopian cli-fi, Snowpiercer does.

http://consequenceofsound.net/2014/07/how-an-old-jazz-song-pays-homage-to-stanley-kubricks-the-shining/

A quick summary of the film: After a failed experiment in 2014 to prevent global warming, Earth has gone into an ice age, and the surviving few live on an endless train that traverses a snow-covered world. By 2031, the rich have confined themselves to the front section of the train, while the subjugated poor find themselves in a ghetto-like tail section. Of course, a revolt is inevitable, and the rebellion is led by Chris Evans, the leader of the tail section, who aims to uncover the truth behind the mysterious train and its even more mysterious commander, Ed Harris.

I’ll admit it- Snowpiercer is not a hard science fiction film because it doesn’t depend on its fictional yet plausible scientific premise, and it doesn’t detail how the new ice age descended. It also doesn’t care to tell viewers about the perpetual motion of the so-called ‘sacred and eternal engine’ (seriously, a train that runs without any known sources of energy?!). But I’m ok with Snowpiercer not being hard core sci-fi because it’s primarily cli-fi, and we all have a basic understanding of the science behind climate change (the main scientific reason behind this dystopian future), which unfortunately isn’t a ‘fictional’ extrapolation of science.

Although Snowpiercer cannot be celebrated for developing and portraying revolutionary ideas about the way we look at science, it can be applauded for conflating the grimness of environmental disaster with the despondency and desperation of human nature. The film is gruesome to say the least, but if I were in the same position as the people in the tail section, I don’t think I would have acted any differently. It’s very easy for viewers to find comfort in their ivory towers (it’s just a movie), but cannibalism and other survival techniques (the worst protein bars ever) depicted in the film have already been observed in the real world, when people are under severe duress. You gotta do what you gotta do.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/movies/in-snowpiercer-the-train-trip-to-end-all-train-trips.html

While I was watching the film, I could not help but notice the numerous similarities between Baxter’s Mayflower II (probably my favorite class reading so far) and Snowpiercer. Although Snowpiercer isn’t a quintessential sci-fi film, it borrows many elements from classic science fiction writing, particularly to develop its social themes. These elements can be traced back to Heinlein’s classic sci-fi stories, and for a cli-fi film, that’s quite impressive. For example, the train is quite similar to a generation starship, with a self-sustaining ecological system. The train’s engine is also called ‘sacred and eternal’ several times, and like the Mayflower II, it assumes its own unique identity. We also see many of the anthropological changes develop in the train’s inhabitants as we saw in Mayflower II‘s different transients. The separation between the haves and have-nots is one of the focal themes of the film, and the lack of resources leads to desperate measures such as cannibalism and self-amputation.

Just like Mayflower II, the train witnesses many rebellions, though Snowpiercer puts an interesting twist on the reason for these in the climax. Harris is reminiscent of Mayflower II‘s Rusel, and Evans of Hilin. Taking this idea forward, Snowpiercer uses Evans and Harris’ characters to depict the benefits and costs of preordained positions: an eternal social hierarchy preserved by an almost sentient engine of the train. Once Evans challenges this order, things fall apart, and at great personal costs to him. Necessary evils, as they say.

Snowpiercer is an immensely gruesome and disturbing film, and that’s why it leaves such a deep impression on us. Climate change is not a recent phenomenon, but we’ve accelerated it to alarming levels (and no, I’m not a crazy alarmist). It’s disconcerting to see that people are still not ready to accept the realities of global warming. This is where cli-fi comes in. I’m not saying a simple film has the power to motivate us to take immediate and required environmental actions that we’re unwilling/lazy to take, but it definitely opens our eyes to nightmarish possibilities that accompany irreversible ecological damage, especially with respect to human behavior and interactions. The cli-fi genre is on the rise; Godzilla, Interstellar, and even WALL-E are doing great business. Timescape is another salient example (shout-out to Professors Clayton and Scherrer for bringing Gregory Benford to class!) I hope to see many more cli-fi works that challenge us and put us out of our comfort zones, encouraging us to think about the ramifications of our pernicious and irreversible actions on the not-so-distant future.

-dreamer2205/Aditi Thakur

Reinventing The Science Babe

Feminism.

This controversial word, which essentially means that men and women should have equal rights, has so many connotations, and unfortunately most of them are negative. I’m a proud feminist, and even in 2015, it’s disconcerting for me to see so many stereotypical and often farcical portrayals of women.

I love J.J. Abrams and his rendition of Star Trek Into Darkness, but the only way he makes Alice Eve, who plays a brilliant science officer, memorable is through her unwarranted underwear scene, where she tantalizes the womanizing Kirk. In Jurassic World, a well-dressed Bryce Dallas Howard tackles dinosaurs without ditching her 3-inch stilettos. More power to her, right?

http://stylenews.peoplestylewatch.com/2015/06/10/bryce-dallas-howard-jurassic-world-heels/ http://www.accesshollywood.com/star-trek-alice-eve-talks-playing-dr-carol-marcus-in-sequel_article_73848

Throughout our class discussions, we’ve examined how science fiction mirrors societal realities, even if in a slightly exaggerated way. We’re all too familiar with the pusillanimous and over-sexualized female characters in By His Bootstraps, and Helen O’Loy. In her blogpost, Laura mentioned that such a negative portrayal of women pushes us to critically examine our society, and can be an impetus for future change. While some filmmakers clearly haven’t made any effort to empower women through their cinema, Alfonso Cuarón isn’t one of them.

Gravity, his path-breaking and mega successful space-survival movie, is one of the rare films that has a female-centric narrative. Much can be said about Gravity‘s achievements: its spectacular CGI, gripping narrative, and its depiction of a beautiful, yet terrifyingly empty space. But for me, its biggest achievement is giving us (forgive my language) a badass female scientist-heroine on whose shoulders the film rests.

http://rebloggy.com/post/1k-gif-star-trek-chris-pine-star-trek-xi-star-trek-xii-james-t-kirk-star-trek/64384299190

Dr Ryan Stone is not your typical, one-dimensional science fiction heroine. An exceptional NASA bio-medical engineer, she breaks the glass (or should I say, space) ceiling, challenging gender conventions. But she’s not without flaws; she’s fiercely introverted, reserved, and a deep thinker. Well, that should should make her a boring heroine…where’s my playful and charming Kirk?!

Instead, these traits draw viewers to Dr Stone, whose ingenuity and perseverance make her an endearing protagonist. We see space (with all its scary debris) through her eyes. We feel her fears, her claustrophobia, her loneliness. She is vulnerable and above all, she is relatable. That’s what makes her one of the strongest female leads I have seen in recent times.

http://flavorwire.com/418295/alfonso-cuarons-gravity-isnt-just-a-film-its-an-essential-moviegoing-experience

I also like how Cuarón subverts the idea of the quintessential arm candy in Gravity. For once, George Clooney seems superfluous. Yes, he’s charming and great to look at, but he felt unnecessary in Gravity, and I love how Cuarón reduces his primary male character to being a supporting and flirtatious character, only to kill him off in the end. Move aside George, this is Sandra’s film.

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrities/sandra-bullock/news?page=6

For once, the damsel in veritable distress doesn’t have to be rescued by a knight in shining armor. You can argue that George Clooney/ Matt Kowalski’s hallucination/ghost kind of helped, but it really was Dr Stone’s stoicism to overcome the numerous impediments in her return to Earth which saved her.

Cuarón’s representation of female scientists is also commendable. It’s 2015, but STEM fields still dissuade women because of the stereotypes associated with them. We need ambitious, successful, yet relatable women scientists such as Dr Stone, who can serve as role models to millions of young girls who enjoy science, but are hesitant to take it up professionally.

Having a female lead for a $100 million film gave Cuarón troubles with his producers who wanted a male protagonist (no, Clooney is not a protagonist), but the director’s determination and confidence in his self-beliefs made him stick to Sandra Bullock, and it paid off.

Sure, Sandra Bullock does meet society’s expectations of beauty. But that’s NOT the focus of Gravity. It’s her no-makeup, vulnerable, yet quietly determined countenance that captures the attention of the audience and the box office.

-dreamer2205/Aditi Thakur

(Extra blog post!)

The New Equations

Because everyone deserves a happy ending.

(Continued from The Old Equations, by Jake Kerr)

March 1, 2194—LC-E transmission

Kate, your final message inspired me, but it is so hard to sit here and just wait. And wait. And wait. I’ve kept the QE link from Earth open, even though nothing ever comes through. Still, I hope. And wait.

And wait.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

December 1, 2195- LC-E transmission

Sail calibration is normal. Propulsion subsystems are working. Thermal systems are in place. I’m still searching for Genesis 751, but I’ve only advanced a little on the mission trajectory.

I’ve kept the quantum link open, but I really don’t have any hope of my messages of ever reaching Houston.

Kate…..

October 10, 2199-LC-E transmission

I’m still not quite there yet. Even though time is moving faster for me, it still feels like an eternity on this goddamn spaceship. Why the hell did I agree to spend 10 years or rather 41 years away from Kate? We had a future together, and I’ve swindled it away.

June 30, 2205-LC-E transmission

James is still alive! Happy birthday to me.

I’m about 10 hours away from Genesis 751. My mission was to find this Earth like planet because we humans have exploited our planet for our avaricious needs. For what? But don’t you worry, Captain James is here to find a panacea! A whole new planet for us to destroy again!

The hypocrisy of my mission, which made me feel so noble once, now makes me sick.

I wish Kate were here.

February 17, 2206-LC-E transmission

MY GOD! Genesis 751 has trees and water!? And an atmospheric cover similar to Earth’s! I can finally breathe fresh air…

The planet is much more similar to Earth than our estimates could ever hope for. Could we begin a new life here? Could we start afresh? I’m going out to explore its landscape now, and make detailed reports about its biodiversity.

September 23, 2213-LC-E transmission

I have explored Genesis 751, and I can safely say that with a few technological and biological modifications and adjustments, it is a planet fit for human survival. Its star, Centaurus 809, is smaller than the sun, but taking orbital distance and speed of revolution into account, it doesn’t affect planetary features in a detrimental way. Genesis 751 is our potential home.

May 11, 2220-LC-E transmission

My food supplies from Earth have been running low, but Genesis 751’s biodiversity makes it easy to find fruits. The flowers and trees are not quite the same as those on Earth, but there aren’t any fundamental differences in taste or appearance. There aren’t any sentient animals here though. A planet full of trees and flowers, but no birds or bees…

http://www.lightspeedmagazine.com/fiction/the-old-equations/

December 1, 2229-LC-E transmission

I have begun my journey back to Earth, after spending 5 weeks on Genesis 751. (I don’t know how long it’s been in Kate’s years). God, I miss Kate. General Marsden should look after her well. Tony will also take care of her, I hope.

The radioisotope thermoelectric generator gave me a few issues, but nothing my MIT and NASA training couldn’t help me fix.

It’s such a relief to finally set the coordinates to Earth, to Kate.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

On June 26, 2235, 41 years since his takeoff, astronaut James returned safely to Cape Canaveral, Earth, receiving a hero’s welcome. Fortunately for him, the Earth he saw now didn’t look very different from the one he left 10/41 years ago. General Marsden had died of heart problems a few years after James’s departure from Earth. James however, was just 35 years old.

After preliminary biological and decontamination procedures and tests, James was taken to home to Nashville. He was told that Kate was at the Vanderbilt University Medical Center.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

She’s old now, and we don’t have enough time together, thought James, regret and sorrow stabbing at his heart.

Apparently, Kate was the Bioinformatics and Genetics Department. Why? As James waited for the elevator, the curiosity was killing him. I hope she’s ok.

As he entered her room, he prepared himself to see a 70-year-old Kate. I don’t care, he assured himself.

When he walked into the room, he saw a sleeping Kate lying on the hospital bed, but she looked only 30 years old. HOW?!

Kate’s doctor rushed in. The doctor, prepared for debriefing the confused space-drifting James, said:

“I know how hard it must be for you to see Kate right now. Relativity has altered your perception of time, and even though you’ve only experienced 10 years, you were mentally prepared to encounter an Earth 41 years older. However, ever since you’ve left, we’ve made significant gains in the fields of gene modification, enabling us to live longer and look younger for many more years. With the help of newly discovered equations, we’ve successfully reversed the aging process using telomere lengthening.”

https://www.tasciences.com/what-is-a-telomere/

“The enzyme, telomerase, which replenishes telomeres after replication, allows a cell to live longer and combat aging. We give people periodic injections of the telomerase enzyme to reverse aging, and this form of genetic engineering is now used worldwide. I use it on myself too. The Kate you left is nearly the same Kate you see now, in terms of health and apparent age at least.”

As the doctor finished his explanation, Kate woke up. James rushed to take her in his arms. It wasn’t too late. They had a future, a long and loving future ahead.

“I told you I would see you again, didn’t I?”

-dreamer2205/Aditi Thakur

The Stepford Invasion

For all Doctor Who, and The Stepford Wives fans out there.

Rosalie was dizzy when stepped out of the TARDIS (Time And Relative Dimension In Space), but felt much better when she felt the warm Connecticut sunshine on her face. Traveling at warp speed in this time machine, which was disguised as an antique London police box, debilitated her frail body, and unlike the Doctor, she did have a linear perception of time. But all this was a small price to pay for being the Doctor’s new companion, and finally leaving her home in Surrey to travel to new worlds. The Doctor and Rosalie had just travelled to the year 4349 AD, and visited Romulus, a deadly and mysterious planet cursed with perpetual snow and pugnacious cyborgs, but were now back to Earth, although in the year 1963.

http://hdwallpapersfactory.com/flower/rose-tyler-david-tennant-billie-piper-doctor-who-desktop-hd-wallpaper-901022/

“Are you ok, Rosalie?” asked the Doctor.

“I am, but after our Romulan adventure, what are we doing in Connecticut, filled with white picket fences­­­, Doctor?” replied Rosalie, whose spirits had dampened slightly.

“Do you know where in Connecticut we are?” asked the Doctor with a mysterious grin.

“No”, sighed Rosalie.

“We’re in Stepford. I know it seems like a boring, rich suburb, but don’t dismiss it just yet. Let me give you some background. Being a ‘Time Lord’ sounds grand. And it is. But as Uncle Ben said to Peter, with great power, comes great responsibility. Even Time Lords can be fictional superheroes’ fans, I guess.

“As a Time Lord, I have been trusted with maintaining a balance of power across the space-time continuum in the myriad of worlds I call my own. As I had told you before, my old friends, the Daleks, belong to a race of extraterrestrial and genetically modified cyborg mutants, but over time, they have grown ambitious enough to take over Earth, and the universe itself. I have been tracking them with the help of the TARDIS, and I think they’re up to something here. Like me, they too can travel across both spatial and temporal dimensions.”

Hmmm…Daleks, the Doctor’s arch nemesis she had heard so much about. I have always wanted to see them, thought Rose, as her stomach grumbled.

https://grabcad.com/library/doctor-who-tardis

“Are you hungry?” asked the Doctor, while fetching his handy sonic screwdriver, and activating the TARDIS’s ‘chameleon’ circuit to blend it in with the surrounding trees.

A few minutes later, the Doctor and a famished Rosalie were enjoying pancakes at the Stepford Club. A keen observer, Rosalie looked around the busy restaurant, observing the people all around her. Being a Monday in the 1960s (not the proudest moment for feminists), the Stepford men were all away at work, while their wives met up for brunch, sipping iced lemonade while exchanging home décor ideas. But something struck Rosalie as she focused her attention on them, observing their demeanor and mannerisms. The Stepford women seemed far too perfect, beautiful and artificial. The way they talked, they way they moved…something wasn’t right.

On her way to powder her nose, Rosalie bumped into one of them. The very skin of the Stepford wife seemed rubbery­ and surprisingly, ice cold. “I’m sorry, honey!’ apologized the lady. Rosalie got goosebumps. She felt scared.

http://www.gostodeler.com.br/materia/17244/The_Stepford_Wi.html

“Something’s wrong here, Doctor,” said Rosalie, as she returned to the table.

“Ah, my dear Rosalie, I’m afraid your suspicions were right. While you were away, I picked up some unusual signals on my screwdriver that the TARDIS relayed. Let’s a take a walk, shall we?” The Doctor could barely contain his energy. The Daleks were close. Very close.

The club was now nearly empty as they walked down the stairs towards the source of the signals. Rosalie heard a faint buzzing sound in the basement as she hurried to keep up with the intrepid Doctor. The buzzing sound was deafening as they reached a locked door. The Doctor pulled out his handy screwdriver, and broke open the locks. As they walked inside the mysterious room, Rosalie gasped. Oh my god.

The room was illuminated with lights from hundreds of complex circuits and computers. In the center of the room was an operating table with a naked woman sprawled across. Several Daleks were surrounding her, and soldering wires inside her body. But, the woman wasn’t a woman; she was a cyborg. One of the Daleks approached them swiftly.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalek#/media/File:Daleks_appearence.jpg

“Look who’s here, the famous Doctor Who. We’ve been expecting you, but we didn’t know you’d come so quickly”, hissed the Dalek leader, Alpha99, as his subordinates formed a formidable circle around the Doctor and Rosalie.

“Ah, so you’ve been using Stepford to inch one step closer to world domination. Why are you doing experimenting on humans?” asked the Doctor, while observing every nook and cranny of the makeshift Dalek headquarters. Rosalie was petrified with shock.

Alpha99 obliged, “Earth is a planet wasted on humans. There is so much potential in its resources, but human beings are too shortsighted, too incompetent to fully use them. We’ve had our eyes set on Earth for a long time, and after perfecting our bio-cyborg technology, we thought of converting humans to cyborgs, rather than simply killing them. It’s always nice to have a few extra slaves. In fact, the women can be called Daleks now.”

“But why Stepford, of all places?” Rosalie mustered up her courage to ask.

Alpha99 obliged, “We had to start somewhere. 1960s Stepford, with its picture-perfect inhabitants living the American dream, seemed like the ideal place to manufacture cyborgs. Stepford is so far removed that nobody cared that there were Daleks experimenting with Stepford women in the basement of the town club. Nobody suspected a thing in this idyllic little suburb. What could go wrong in pretty little Stepford?” Apart from a Dalek invasion, of course.

“Why did you only experiment on the women?” Rosalie was adamant to find out the truth.

“Foolish girl. We have everyone in Stepford under our control. While the women were easy to transform into cyborgs (we even added physical enhancements for the fun of it), the male testosterone interfered with our technological modifications. So we’ve implanted a computer chip inside the men’s brains to control their minds. Of course, we would have liked complete cyborgs like the women, who are now as close to Dalek structures as humans possibly can be, but we had to make do. But it won’t be long till we convert the men to Daleks too.”

“So that’s the plan? Convert all humans to Daleks and mindless cyborgs, and then take over the Earth, one cyborg at a time?” The disgust in the Doctor’s voice was palpable.

“Oh, don’t you worry Doctor. You may have thwarted the plans of our allies, the Romulans, but we’ve learnt from their mistakes,” Alpha99 said, as the woman on the table rose, her hand morphing into a Dalek-enhanced compact laser deluxe gun.

Before the Doctor could respond, he fainted as the laser struck him, but not before he heard Rosalie scream in the distance. NOOOOOOOOO!

Several hours later…

The Doctor slowly regained consciousness, his head throbbing with acute pain. He was still in the club, but had been relocated to a room upstairs. He noticed he was suspended in a Dalek-induced force field, unable to move or escape. Where’s Rosalie?

He heard the door unlock, and saw Rosalie enter. You’re ok…

“Hello, Doctor.” Rosalie’s voice sounded different. Robotic even.

And then the truth struck the Doctor. Rosalie seemed more beautiful. Too perfect almost. 

“Rosalie, are you a Dalek now?” the Doctor could hardly believe his words.

“I’m Ros-alloy, Dalek no. 980675 now,” replied the erstwhile Rosalie coldly, as she struck the Doctor with her laser gun, making him lose consciousness again.

-dreamer2205/Aditi Thakur