November 2008

World in the Satin Bag

Otherism: The Dissection of Humanity and the Human in Science Fiction Film

The title is a mouthful, but represents the core idea behind the research project for which I received a monetary grant from UC Santa Cruz. Given that, I give my the proposal for my research project: What is the human? What does it mean to be human? These are questions that motivate many, if not most, fields in the humanities. I’m applying for the Humanities Undergraduate Research Award (HUGRA) because I wish to address these deep-rooted and enduring questions, albeit using a relatively new medium: science fiction television and film. As a genre, science fiction (SF) lends itself easily to investigations and interpretations of the human-other dichotomy. How does SF grapple with this dualism? How does it challenge our preconceptions of the human and offer new definitions? And does the genre make sociohistorical processes, such as racialization and the vilification of difference, more accessible due to its futuristic and fantastic narratives and settings? These are the questions that motivate my project, “Otherism: The Dissection of Humanity and the Human in Science Fiction Film.” My primary focus is on science fiction film—such as Battlestar Galactica, Space Above and Beyond, Blade Runner, Ghost in the Shell, and others—and how the relation between the human and the other is represented. Drawing from post-colonial discourse, I argue that science fiction negates the existence of a human category, with exception to biology, by blurring the line between human and non-human—the cyborg, android, humanoid alien, non-humanoid alien, robot, etc. This negation is, in my mind, a challenge to our preconceived notions of humanity and a challenge on a fictive level to the foundations of human indifference and intolerance. As an ardent SF fan, I’ve read numerous science fiction novels and short stories. Additionally, I’ve taken courses at UCSC that have allowed me to pursue my passion. These courses include AMST 109B: Science Fiction in Multicultural America; Lit 101: Animal Theory; and an independent study on the writings of Philip K. Dick. Moreover, I’ve found immensely helpful LTWL 115A: Fiction in a Global Context (from the African Continent) and LTEL 160C: Postcolonial Writing. Through further researching colonial/postcolonial discourse I hope to relate the conditions and issues of colonialism to the otherworldly portrayal of human “racism” towards the other, slavery, post-slavery, and cultural merging and its effects. With a HUGRA, I intend to spend Fall Quarter primarily researching at UC Santa Cruz, either viewing materials available to me in McHenry Library or finding materials at other libraries that I find to be of interest. During Winter Quarter I will visit the Science Fiction Foundation Collection at the University of Liverpool and in Spring Quarter I will attend the Eaton Conference at UC Riverside—where John Rieder (author of Colonialism and the Emergence of Science Fiction) will be giving a lecture. Also during Spring Quarter I will spend time in the Eaton Collection and hopefully attend the Science Fiction Research Association’s conference.A HUGRA will enable me to achieve the goals I put forth in this timeline. Ultimately, I intend to produce a research paper and to continue to pursue this question of the human in graduate school—the University of Liverpool’s Science Fiction Studies MA and Brunel University’s Contemporary Literature and Culture MA are programs of significant interest to me. The paper will comprise an important part of my undergraduate dossier. So, any questions?

World in the Satin Bag

Werewolves and Misconceptions About Science Fiction

I was perusing Yahoo! Answers today and saw an interesting inquiry: I know that very technical stories like one of Jules Verne’s are science fiction, but what about stories of werewolves, etc. Does this count as science fiction? Does it count as fantasy fiction? Is fantasy fiction a subgroup of science fiction? I’ve never heard of fantasy as being a subgenre of science fiction, which is why these questions are rather interesting. Since when have science fiction and fantasy been at all synonymous? They’ve always seemed to be rather opposite categories to me, connected only by the fact that they both deal with elements of the nonexistent. Science fiction, in theory, looks at these elements through the lens of the possible, while fantasy looks at them through the lens of the impossible. Spaceships are real, while wizards and dragons are not. Answering the question, however, leads me to a bit of a paradox. I’ve always automatically lumped werewolves in with horror and fantasy, but is it possible that werewolves could be allowed in science? I’m inclined to think so. Perhaps not in the traditional sense that we have seen in the movies, but in a different sense. Werewolves are easily fantastical creatures, yet they could also be scientific creatures. It all depends on how it is done. If the werewolves change because of a curse or “blood” without explanation of why they are genetically the way they are, then it’s clearly fantasy or horror (or both). But if the werewolves are explained to be, say, genetic experiments in a government lab, or genetic anomalies explained by mutations in the cells, then they become part of a science fiction universe. That aside, I was surprised by the response that was chosen as the “best answer” by the questioner (note: I’ve edited it so it’s readable, which will only help to a certain extent): Sci-fi is a HUGE category. From aliens to elves, wizards to talking animals and everything in between. So, I think that werewolves can be counted as fantasy fiction, and horror like someone else said. Sci-fi is interesting, because it can intertwine itself with many other different genres without getting confusing. Of course, there is the basic story plot that is pretty sci-fi, and then it can venture off into different courses. Horror being one of them. So yeah, it can! Actually, no it can’t. You see, here’s the problem with this whole discussion. Science fiction isn’t fantasy. Fantasy is not a part of science fiction, it’s a part of the broader term “speculative fiction.” Speculative fiction encompasses all literatures of the fantastic/nonexistent. Fantasy and science fiction each deal with specific forms of speculative fiction. Aliens and elves are not synonymous with the same thing. Aliens are almost exclusively the realm of science fiction while elves are almost exclusively the realm of fantasy, with little exception. In fact, to make such generalizations is rather ignorant of what the genres actually entail. You can have elves in science fiction, but not Tolkien elves or traditional fantasy elves. The parameters are different for science fiction elves; fantasy elves are not the same as science fiction elves precisely because they follow different rules. Vulcans from Star Trek are science fiction elves and you can clearly see that they aren’t the same as the elves that Tolkien created, where magic and enchanted rings exist. So, while there may be some similarities between the genres, it is important to maintain a separation. The two are, with rare exception, distinct from each other. Without that separation it becomes near impossible to provide appropriate classifications for speculative literatures. If science fiction and fantasy can be anything, then they cease to become categories at all–they cease to be important. Before long, all categories could become unimportant (and trust me when I say this will wreak havoc on book shoppers).

World in the Satin Bag

Leo Does Akira

Leonardo DiCaprio is allegedly producing the live-action remake of 1988’s seminal anime, Akira. This two-movie franchise will be based more on Otomo’s six-book graphic novel series rather than his condensed story which was used for the 1988 film. 28-year old Irish visionary Ruairi Robinson takes the director’s seat and Gary Whitta is the first-time screenwriter tackling the sprawling narrative described as ‘Blade Runner meets City of God’. This news could either be wonderful . . . or terrible. The original film broke new ground in showing that cartoons weren’t just for kids, and pointed out a whole world of fantastic adult animation in Japan. It also saw some of the best 2D animation ever seen, still standing strongly beside modern films. Can DiCaprio’s team capture the hectic punk atmosphere of Neo-Tokyo and the gangland culture of Kaneda and the Clowns. And what form will Akira himself take when they dig up his remains beneath the Olympic stadium? Will he still have that all-consuming destructive energy he had in 1988, will he have lost that spark, or will he have evolved again?

Scroll to Top