As we
discussed in class last week many of Chiang’s stories establish an alternate
understanding of the world such as in Tower of Babylon and 72 letters. These
stories use world views and scientific understandings that differ from our own.
While not correct by our knowledge, Chiang follows the rules of the worlds he
creates. In 72 letters especially we see this in his use of 19th
century understandings of the reproductive process.
I think
Chiang has demonstrated an interesting (though I doubt uncommon) method for
crafting settings for stories. All the various former world views and
understandings of natural processes harbor enormous potential. Often times I
would venture to say that this practice is done in a fantastical or
supernatural manner by employing gods, demons, etc; however, Chiang explorers
old scientific concepts creating a different form of science fiction.
Are there
any disproven scientific theories or even common beliefs you would like to see
explored in a scientific manner? Personally I would be fascinated by an
exploration of Nordic Mythology through scientific means. For example: suppose
the world is indeed held up by a giant ash tree; the protagonists could venture
to discover what is supporting the tree.
A final question I have is whether or not it is okay to break the rules of the world you have established? To be more specific I will give an example of something I am trying to resolve in my own writing: The ability to use magic is a genetic mutation. Those with the ability to use magic are sterile and cannot reproduce. Despite this, character A is the daughter of someone who could use magic.
If explained properly, is a contradiction to established norms acceptable? Or does this simply constitute that the 'rule' is actually just a belief held by characters and not an actual guiding principle for maintaining narrative cohesion?
I love the idea of Nordic mythology supported through science! I am always a big fan of stories that use mythology to interpret them in new and interesting ways, and I think the idea of the ash tree would be a really cool world to explore.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your last question, I do think that a contradiction is fine. So long as it is explained adequately, I think it would not pose a big leap of the reader's imagination for the protagonist to be seen as a "special case." In fact, I think it is the trend, more often than not, for a main character to be an exception to the rule. Otherwise, where would the story conflict come from? What would drive their motives?
(Your writing sounds really interesting by the way!)
In a fictional world, as in our non-fictional world, an apparent contradiction to known physical law is either a) no real contradiction at all, once it's more fully understood; or b) evidence that our knowledge of physical law needs revising. If your protagonist is a catalyst for a revision of her world's science, then you have rich opportunities for conflict and plot development, as well as a fun intellectual exercise for author and readers.
ReplyDelete