Foreword
A Glimpse of the Future
Sheila Williams
There is a superficial contention that all arguments in philosophy are just a continuation of a divide between the thinking of Plato and Aristotle. In this debate, the split between rationalism and empiricism is traced back to Plato’s concept of an a priori knowledge and Aristotle’s theory of the mind as a tabula rasa. For Plato truth is unchanging and eternal and can be determined through reasoning, while Aristotle seems to hold that we learn about the world through sensory experience. It has always seemed to me that people who make this observation about Plato and Aristotle are claiming that all further developments in Western philosophy are simply an extension of a difference of opinion between these two great thinkers.
Similar claims have been made about two of the earliest science fiction authors—H.G. Wells and Jules Verne. People have argued that they represent all sorts of splits in fantastic literature and that these splits are the two most fundamental branches of field. Some claim the split is between the physical sciences and the social sciences. Others counter with the claim that the divide is between the pure adventurism of Jules Verne and the serious science of Wells.
Wells himself thought that Verne’s fiction embodied the essence of science fiction, while his own work seemed to be fantasies. In his preface to Seven Famous Novels, the omnibus collection of many of his science fiction books, he wrote:
“[Verne’s] work dealt almost always with actual possibilities of invention and discovery, and he made some remarkable forecasts. The interest he invoked was a practical one; he wrote and believed and told that this or that thing could be done, which was not at the time done. He helped his reader to imagine it done and to realize what fun, excitement or mischief would ensue. Many of his inventions have ‘come true.’ But these stories of mine … do not pretend to deal with possible things. … They are fantasies; they do not aim to project a serious possibility; they aim indeed only at the same amount of conviction as a good gripping dream. They have to hold the reader to the end of art and illusion and not to proof and argument, and the moment he closes the cover and reflects he wakes up to their impossibility.”
Yet, many in the science fiction field do not agree with Wells’s own interpretation of his fiction. Science fiction author and critic Paul Di Filippo says of his influence on fantastic fiction: “It’s amazing how many SF templates were first codified by H.G. Wells. Alien invasion, time travel, bioengineering, future warfare, post-apocalyptic ruination. He really pioneered much of the territory that the rest of us would dwell in.” (Asimov’s, July/August 2020)
So it’s possible to hold that just as all developments in western philosophy are an extension of the work of Plato and Aristotle, all modern science fiction is a continuation of the work of Verne and Wells, or even Wells alone. From The Time Machine to The Island of Doctor Moreau, one area he certainly pioneered was the application of social commentary to science fiction and fantasy. Authors like Ursula K. Le Guin, George Orwell, and Suzanne Collins have continued this rich tradition.
Eventually Wells gave up writing fantastic fiction and focused exclusively on social novels. His own favorite was the well-regarded and highly successful Kipps: The Story of a Simple Soul. I’m sure you will enjoy it, too.