There’s a major difference between science fiction and fantasy. Both work with the “What if…” hypothesis, but there should be a distinct difference in intent that the reader should recognize. The Sci-Fi writer might say, “What if we could travel to the planets?” Whereas the fantasy writer might say, “What if fairies lived in Central Park?” In the former, the author is suggesting that people might build machines and travel to Mars. He or she is creating a story about something that could happen in our reality. The fantasy writer, on the other hand, wants to tell a fun tale and asks the reader to assume there is another world, it might be like ours or very different, and hopes we will pretend to believe.
Most modern science fiction is a mixture of both kinds of “What if…” stories. For example, “What if people could travel to the stars?” and “What if people could build machines that could travel faster than light?” However, there is a special kind of “What if…” that I want to deal with, and that is “What if people had psychic powers?”
This “What if…” theme is fantasy but I believe that many people want to believe its science. Fantasy for fun is a delightful pastime. Fantasy for believing is being delusional. The difference can be the fun kids have playing first person shooters and going berserk and shooting people.
Years ago I ran across an article in an old science fiction magazine that reported that for decades public libraries banned the Oz books because they felt the books gave children unrealistic expectations about life. Since I was an Oz book fan growing up I was outraged at this idea, but as an adult I can’t help wonder if it wasn’t true.
Looking back I can see there are also a number of power fantasies for adolescents that I wonder about now. The two that I want to deal with the most are Stranger in a Strange Land by Robert A. Heinlein and the Star Wars films by George Lucas. Both stories mix science fiction and mysticism and advocate the existence of mind powers. Heinlein even mixed traditional religion of God and Angels with super-evolved Martians in an effort to legitimize old ideas with exciting new SF ones.
I’ve read and reread Stranger in a Strange Land many times since 1965. It was the perfect power fantasy for a thirteen-year-old because it promised the power to think your enemies out of existence and have sex with lots of eager women. Now that I’m closer to Heinlein’s age when he wrote Stranger I realize it was also the perfect power fantasy for a horny old man. Stranger in a Strange Land was breakout radical for science fiction at the time. Now I see it as a pathetic fantasy about wife-swapping, wishing for life after to death, and the desire to either talk your enemies to death or blink them out of existence with a thought. It’s both a great novel and a sick fantasy.
Star Wars is actually a horse of a different color. On one hand it’s an old fashion adventure serial like Buck Rogers or Flash Gordon. Like Stranger it wants to mix in some mysticism but in a neutral non-religious way. Good versus Evil has always been part of fiction but George Lucas lucked out by inventing “The Force.” It’s such a nice packaging of an old concept that I can easily imagine that a religion being built around it in the future. It’s sort of a distilled essence of all mysticism. And that brings up the problem I have: is there any reality to mystic theories?
There are many kinds of mysticism but basically it suggests that humans can tune into a higher power. In some forms this is just communing with God and in other forms it means acquiring super powers to use on Earth. The problem with mysticism is it requires making a decision about reality and it’s a very fundamental philosophical decision. Even traditional theology has problems with mysticism. Mysticism opens up a can of worms for both theists and atheists.
The question becomes how powerful can a person be? In Star Wars and Stranger in a Strange Land people can become very powerful indeed. Even popular books like The Secret suggest people can tune into success via mental effort alone. Heinlein might have promoted the belief that there is no such thing as a free lunch but his belief in mysticism suggested otherwise. That’s the problem with mysticism with its money for nothing and chicks for free attitude. Mysticism allows the universe to be anything. It’s a funny thing to believe in when most people do not have the mental discipline to lose weight. I also think it’s obvious that mental powers don’t exist; otherwise the stories of history would be very different.
In both real life and fiction life the reader needs to make a decision about the reality of this world and the fictional world. If you believe that magic works in books but not life then you’re probably sane, but if you believe that magic works in both places then you might be in trouble. There is a third alternative with a spooky physics of quantum mechanics solution and that suggests the universe is whatever the observer wants it to be, so in your universe mysticism works, but in mine I keep things orderly with the laws of science.
Einstein never could accept the spooky world of quantum physics that he discovered. He insisted that there is an objective reality that exists outside our minds. Back in the sixties and seventies when I was exploring altered states of consciousness and New Age philosophies I eventually came to the same conclusion. I decided that mystical thinking was indistinguishable from madness. And that is why at 56 I find stories like Stranger in a Strange Land and Star Wars repugnant. They are psi-fi phantasies.
“May the Force be with you,” is a wonderful sentiment for an adolescent fantasy but it’s a dangerous idea to live by. There are forces of nature, like gravity, electro-magnetism, etc. And there are forces we may not understand, but the belief that our minds can achieve godlike powers is a dangerous concept. In Stranger in a Strange Land everyone was God, but what about all those people Mike winked out? Weren’t they God too?
I don’t believe in Good and Evil, but I do think there are two forces in nature that those concepts can be compared to. Entropy is the obvious force resulting from the Big Bang but the harder to understand one is the force that assembles complexity out of chaos. That force took billions of years to arrange for us to exist. We aren’t here because of a blink of a thought. In our part of reality we are the crown of complexity, able to be self-aware of the reality around us and the history of the universe.
To deny this position in reality, to shut our eyes and dream of magic is a tragedy of epic proportions. “What if there was a world of tiny creatures that woke up in an immense reality of infinite possibilities and they chose to close their eyes and ignore it?”
Jim