Skip to main content

All the Wonder that Would Be – Stephen Webb ****

Between the ages of 14 and 26 (circa 1972 to 1984, if you must know) I read a lot of science fiction. Being quite naïve in those days, I assumed that the shared vision of the near-future common to many of those stories was the way things really would turn out. Now, several decades later, I find myself living in that future – and, for the most part, it’s not what I expected. I’m endlessly fascinated by the way SF got a few things right and a lot of things wrong – and so, it seems, is Stephen Webb. That’s what this book is all about; in his own words, its aim is ‘to compare the default future of old-time science fiction with how things are turning out’.

Webb’s background is similar to my own (reading between the lines, he must have got his PhD from Manchester University a year or two after I got mine from the same place), and like me he discovered SF when its centre-of-gravity was still firmly in the written domain. In consequence, the science-fictional focus of his book is very much on novels and short stories – mainly from the period 1940-1985 – rather than on the big movie and TV franchises that younger generations might expect. Webb’s knowledge of his subject is prodigious, and in the course of 10 thematic chapters – ranging from antigravity, space travel and invisibility to robots, transportation and immortality – he discusses how those old SF visions of 21st century technology compare and contrast with reality.

An occupational hazard with writing about SF is that your readers are likely to be geeks, and geeks are prone to quibble over details. Personally, I was disappointed to see so few references to some of my favourite writers – Robert Silverberg, A. E. van Vogt and John Brunner, for example – and no mention at all of Ron Goulart. Yes, Goulart was a lazy writer as far as scientific background was concerned, but that’s the whole point. Because he was lazy, he borrowed heavily from the established consensus about what the 21st century would look like – from robot servants and aircars to synthetic food and throwaway consumerism – and would have made an excellent case study for a book like this.

If I have a more grown-up criticism, it’s that Webb strays too often from his really fascinating core theme. Not all the SF technologies he talks about were meant to be taken as serious predictions of the future. Time machines and faster-than-light spaceships, for example, are usually just convenient story-enablers, while other topics – such as antigravity, invisibility or immortality – crop up more in the context of “what if this happened?” rather than “this is likely to happen”. Personally, I was more interested in Webb’s treatment of those background technologies that the SF community genuinely believed the future held in store – such as domestic robots, moving roadways and moonbases.

Nevertheless, it’s an excellent book, with two really important messages. The first is that we don’t live in the future that SF writers envisaged for us. The second is that our technology really is a big advance on theirs, but in ways they rarely touched on. An iPhone, for example, has capabilities that would have seemed unbelievably far-fetched in the 1940s, and probably even the 1970s. And while I’ve never had a vacation on the Moon, I make use of space technology – in the form of satellite TV and GPS navigation – almost every day.
Paperback:   
Kindle 
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:
Review by Andrew May - See all our reviews and more or subscribe to a weekly email free here

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Antigravity Enigma - Andrew May ****

Antigravity - the ability to overcome the pull of gravity - has been a fantasy for thousands of years and subject to more scientific (if impractical) fictional representation since H. G. Wells came up with cavorite in The First Men in the Moon . But is it plausible scientifically?  Andrew May does a good job of pulling together three ways of looking at our love affair with antigravity (and the related concept of cancelling inertia) - in science fiction, in physics and in pseudoscience and crankery. As May points out, science fiction is an important starting point as the concept was deployed there well before we had a good enough understanding of gravity to make any sensible scientific stabs at the idea (even though, for instance, Michael Faraday did unsuccessfully experiment with a possible interaction between gravity and electromagnetism). We then get onto the science itself, noting the potential impact on any ideas of antigravity that come from the move from a Newtonian view of a...

The World as We Know It - Peter Dear ***

History professor Peter Dear gives us a detailed and reasoned coverage of the development of science as a concept from its origins as natural philosophy, covering the years from the eighteenth to the twentieth century. inclusive If that sounds a little dry, frankly, it is. But if you don't mind a very academic approach, it is certainly interesting. Obviously a major theme running through is the move from largely gentleman natural philosophers (with both implications of that word 'gentleman') to professional academic scientists. What started with clubs for relatively well off men with an interest, when universities did not stray far beyond what was included in mathematics (astronomy, for instance), would become a very different beast. The main scientific subjects that Dear covers are physics and biology - we get, for instance, a lot on the gradual move away from a purely mechanical views of physics - the reason Newton's 'action at a distance' gravity caused such ...

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...