Tag Archives: Jack Williamson

Advice to would-be sf writers, from sf writers

The sf writer cannot avoid man’s problems; by the very nature of his craft, he must meet them head on. That is sf’s challenge, and it is as big as the future of mankind.

Title: The Craft of Science Fiction: A Symposium on Writing Science Fiction and Science Fantasy
Editor: Reginald Bretnor
Year: 1976
Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

Here’s one of those “advice on how to write from the writers themselves” books, which I picked up not because I have any goals of writing myself but simply because I like reading what sf writers have to say about their field. This is one of several such volumes helmed by the same editor back in the 1970’s, and is a fairly interesting collection of essays for any sf fan who also likes reading works about sf. Strange fellow though, this Bretnor. His introduction provides some insightful thoughts on sf, but things get a little weird when he starts professing his belief that clairvoyance, dowsing, and other assorted woo is “proven.” Uhhh, yeah, whatever. Anyway, who cares what the editor has to say? What’s important is what the writers themselves have to share. Here’s a rundown of their contributions and a few comments on each:

Poul Anderson, “Star-flights and Fantasies: Sagas Still to Come.” This one’s rather dry, with not much of importance to say.

Hal Clement, “Hard Sciences and Tough Technologies.” A decent article on the use of science in sf and the importance of internal consistency.

Norman Spinrad, “Rubber Sciences.” One of the best essays in the book; it covers some of the same ground as Clement, but from a different perspective. Spinrad says what’s important in sf is plausibility, and not necessarily a rigid deference to scientific fact. He sums up by saying science fiction writers are….

… the poets of the future, the seers of human destiny. Hard science, soft science, or rubber are tools of the trade, means to the end of visionary insight and artistic creation. They should never be mistaken for the end itself.

Alan E. Nourse, “Extrapolations and Quantum Jumps.” Focuses largely on that all-important fictional element, the premise, as well as other fiction basics. Solid article.

Theodore Sturgeon, “Future Writers in a Future World.” This was a pure joy to read. Sturgeon does a better job than anyone else in this volume of getting across the sheer sense of wonder of science fiction, and his essay is full of enthusiastic inspiration for future writers and valuable advice on where to find story ideas. He also stresses the importance of connecting your ideas to real human concerns:

And whatever your idea or statement, gimmick, gadget or message, you will (to be read) encase it in love, and pain, and greed, and laughter, and hope, and above all loneliness.

Jerry Pournelle, “The Construction of Believable Societies.” A good look at the need for social depth — what we often call “world building” — in sf.

Frank Herbert, “Men on Other Planets.” Herbert makes some great points about sf’s ability to escape our society’s unexamined assumptions and play around with them. He also quite correctly warns the potential writer that there’s more to writing sf than thinking up an idea — the development of that idea is the crucial thing.

Katherine MacLean, “Alien Minds and Nonhuman Intelligences.” MacLean chose an intriguing topic, but her thoughts on the matter were scattered and unfocused and, to be honest, boring.

James Gunn, “Heroes, Heroines, Villains: the Characters in Science Fiction.” Pretty self-explanatory. Solid article on the importance of characterization.

Larry Niven, “The Words in Science Fiction.” On how to add some linguistic depth to your fiction. Interesting.

Jack Williamson, “Short Stories and Novelettes.” A few words on the particular strengths and weaknesses of the shorter fictional forms.

John Brunner, “The Science Fiction Novel.” And here’s Brunner on the other end of the spectrum.

Harlan Ellison, “With the Eyes of a Demon: Seeing the Fantastic as a Video Image.” A long and involved article on writing screenplays for television and film. I didn’t find it that interesting myself, but I’m sure it would be helpful to anyone looking to do that kind of work.

Frederik Pohl, “The Science Fiction Professional.” A rather tedious essay on the business aspects of being a writer — all about agents, publicity, contracts, and such.

Basically it’s a few boring articles, mixed with a few really pleasurable ones, with a lot more falling somewhere in between. I’d recommend this book to would-be writers; for anyone else, it just depends on how much interest you have in this sort of thing.

Wild adventure and sociopolitical insight come together in Star Bridge

Creation…..
It is its own nemesis. Success is temporary, and idolization will not make the ephemeral permanent. Decay is implicit in the birth of any organism.
An empire is an organism.

Title: Star Bridge
Authors: Jack Williamson and James E. Gunn
Year: 1955
Rating: 3/5 stars

starbridgeA while back I was looking for more Gunn to read, and this was one of the books I picked up, although I hadn’t previously been aware of it. I’m glad it came to my attention, however, since it’s quite an enjoyable read. This is a spirited adventure story with plenty of fast-paced action, but also with a lot of deeper commentary about the nature of empires, freedom, and the forces that shape the affairs of humanity.

The golden-skinned Masters of Eron rule the many worlds of the human galaxy, by virtue of their monopoly on the technology of the Tubes. These star bridges are what make interstellar commerce and travel possible (unless you want to take a really long voyage by ship), and all the Tubes converge on Eron, the center of absolute power and control. Of course, not everyone is happy with the status quo, and Eron is accustomed to putting down rebellions. This, of course, only inspires more rebellions — an inherent problem for an empire whose primary management tool is force. Against this setting we follow Horn, who grew up in the Cluster, home of one of those failed rebellions. Drafted into the Eron military, Horn deserted and became a roaming adventurer, a gun for hire. Only now, he’s been hired for what seems a suicide mission: to assassinate one of Eron’s Masters!

At first impression, this is a straightforward adventure story, guilty of some of the pulp sensibilities of the age in which it was written. The hero is a Manly Man of uncommon strength and intelligence, who wondrously manages to get out of every jam he gets into, and over whom the women swoon, of course. However, the novel is not nearly that simplistic. The protagonist Horn is supremely capable and skillful, yes, but not so much so that he’s beyond the reach of self-doubt. In fact, he spends a great deal of time wrestling with himself, wondering whether his actions and decisions have been the right ones, or if he even could have chosen differently. His attitude is sometimes forthrightly optimistic, as he declares his belief in the power of a single man to shape his own destiny. At other times his outlook is much more bleak, and he is haunted by the specter of determinism:

But there wasn’t any choice. A quarry has but one function: to run. When he stops, he is finished; the game is over. Horn sat in the darkness staring at eight floating choices and reflected how inevitability had channeled his actions since he had left the Cluster. Since he had accepted the money from the voice in the darkness, there had been only one step to take, and he had taken it; one path to follow, and he had followed it. Beyond, it had seemed, there would be choice; never now.

It seems probable this book was at least partly inspired by Asmiov’s Foundation series. Common to both is a concern with empires and their decay, and with the possibility of large-scale social prediction. Maybe all these authors were just kicking around the same kinds of ideas at the same time. But passages like this one bring to mind Asimov’s psychohistory:

Atoms and men….
They are moved by certain general forces in accordance with certain general laws, and their movements can be predicted in certain broad generalizations.
Physical forces, historical forces — if a man knew the laws of of one as well as he knew the laws of the other, he could predict the reactions of a culture as accurately as the reactions of a rocket ship.

The action portions of the book have a sort of Alfred Bester quality; it’s Horn getting into one crazy unexpected situation after another, and getting out again just as wildly. At times these situations comes across as almost too frivolous or whimsical, but it never becomes too much to bear since they are balanced against the book’s more serious passages. I’ll end this with one more of those, in which Gunn and Williamson offer a grand cyclical view of history and freedom:

“The love of freedom dies as the memory of its alternative fades. Oh, it’s not a sudden thing. It takes generations, centuries. But gradually it slips away. And it’s more than that. There is a time for freedom, just as there is a time for empire. [...] When its job is done, empire disappears, and it is freedom’s turn to revive the human spirit by the challenge of the infinite horizon. And then, when men begin to grow too far apart, empire will return to unite them again.”

Classic authors speak on the value of science fiction

Here’s a short video clip of some of the big names in science fiction saying a few words about the genre. These are outtakes from a series of interviews recorded by James Gunn between 1968 and 1978 as part of his Literature of Science Fiction Lecture Series. You can actually purchase a 2-DVD set of all the interviews from The Center for the Study of Science Fiction (University of Kansas), although if you ask me it’s a bit pricey.

Anyway, this clip is only about 9 minutes long, and most of the comments are of the sort you’ve probably heard or read before. But sometimes it’s nice to get it from the horse’s mouth, and see the faces and hear the voices of some of these famous writers of a past age; it gives a sense of connection, I think. This clip includes: Poul Anderson, Jack Williamson, John Brunner, Harlan Ellison, Clifford Simak, Frederik Pohl, Gordon Dickson, Damon Knight, and Isaac Asimov. (Wow, what a distinctive voice Brunner has!)