Rite of Passage (SF) - Alexei Panshin ****

It has been so common for science fiction novels to have a female protagonist that it can come as a bit of a surprise when there's a male central character, but back in 1968 when Alexei Panshin wrote this coming-of-age story, it was an unusual feature. We meet Mia aged 12 and follow her next few years on a ship originally designed to transport colonists to new planets, but since the destruction of the Earth acting as interstellar traders in technology to the low-tech colonists.

The focus of the book is the preparation for and experience of the rite of passage that provides the title. Fourteen-year-olds are dropped on a hostile colony world for 30 days. If they survive they become adults on the ship.

It was interesting to re-read the book after recently watching the TV show The Good Place, as these are the only two works of fiction I can think of where ethics and moral philosophy play such a front-and-centre role in a drama. (Interestingly, although literary fiction tends to look down on fantasy or science fiction as lacking depth, both fit into these categories.) It's handled in a lot more summary fashion here, but still plays a part as Mia comes to adopt a radically different viewpoint from her father in the way that the ship people should consider the colonists.

The genocidal ending is quite shocking, and the choice of 14 as the age of adulthood seems more than a little odd, but the book itself manages to be about young adults without really being a young adult title - it's a 'proper' novel for adults. My main criticism is that Panshin can belabour a point sometimes. In one training session for the trial, two teams of teenagers each build a log cabin, and we are told far too much detail on exactly how this is done.

A book that was arguably ahead of its time and that still holds up well today.

Paperback:

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

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 ...

Search This Blog