Skip to main content

Mission to the Heart Stars (SF) - James Blish ***

It's interesting, going as I have from reading this 1965 science fiction novel to a modern one. The good news is the modern ones are better written and less sexist. The bad news is that the modern one is far too long (at least three times the length), weighs four times as much (it's bigger format too) and is, inevitably, book one of a series, where most 60s novels were standalone.

That last comparison is a little unfortunate as Mission to the Heart Stars is the second of James Blish's 'Heart Stars' novels - but still there were a lot more individual novels back then. It's only by going back to my old books that I can find a novel I can read in a couple of days, and that's something that can be very satisfying. I blame Dune and the successors in Herbert's series for giving us the doorstop SF book. I loved Dune back in the day (though I find it a bit heavy-handed now), but it still has a lot to answer for.

One advantage of the short SF novel is that the author could use it to explore a specific topic - and that's what Blish does in a tradition that goes back to the likes of Erewhon and Gulliver's Travels. (In fact, Blish actually references Butler's book), by exploring the implications of different ways for civilisations to exist. The future Earth describes itself as 'post-civilisation' which is an interesting choice of terminology. It is contrasted with both that of the dolphins (now recognised as sentient) and various alien worlds briefly visited on the journey to the titular Heart Stars near the centre of the galaxy.

Blish's 'post-civilisation' is a reflection of how the Earth might end up if, as was forecast by some observers back in the 60s, we would end up with energy too cheap to meter. This is a world of abundance where no one need work - but to keep the place stable, only those who do work can vote or breed. The suggestion is that although this approach has its totalitarian aspects, it's the only way to have a stable society in a world without energy limits. Whether or not you agree with Blish, it's an analysis that makes the reader think - although dressed up as a neo-classical expedition story (the ship is called the Argo), the book is really a vehicle for ideas.

There are two aspects here that put this novel firmly in period. One is its gender imbalance. There is only one female character, a reporter - but the three central characters are all male. The other is a collection of flops in the imagination of future technology. Blish is often the exemplar of this in one of his early books, where he states you couldn't have electronics in Jupiter's atmosphere as the pressure would cause the vacuum tubes to implode. Here we have solid state electronics, 3D TV and lasers and computers. But the slide rule still exists, computers output their results on paper tape and photography requires a darkroom. It's interesting to ponder what the modern equivalents would be (though I still don't understand why the idea of a pocket computer/calculator didn't occur to SF writers sooner - they just loved their slide rules).

All in all, then, not a great novel, but an interesting one both for its ideas and as a peek into mid-60s thinking. One last thing you wouldn't see today - Blish ends a useful foreword, where he berates Aldous Huxley for apparently being unaware of most science fiction written since the 1920s, with what appears to be his home address, a rather pleasant looking New York apartment block.

Out of print in paperback (secondhand available) - but available in Kindle thanks to Gollancz's excellent Gateway series. The cover shown is of my 1965 edition.

Paperback:  

Kindle:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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 ...
Post a Comment
Read more