When Extrapolation Goes Wrong

Wifetheif

Experienced
Joined
Aug 18, 2012
Posts
507
've been re-reading a lot of old science fiction lately. Stuff from the 1950s. One thing everybody got wrong including Heinlein was the idea of blue collar astronauts. In so many stories the guys building the lunar stations the satellites and ferrying the supplies are smart guys who do it more for the glory than the bucks. They receive modest to low pay and work in obscurity while they sacrifice their bodies and souls to the vagaries of space. Old, infirm spacemen, contemplating the end and bemoaning the modern breed of astronaut and insisting that their long.-suffering wives put on their magnoboots after they have had last rights so that they can enter the next wold like a real man. Which, of course, is exactly what happened! Well not really, not even close, aside from the obscurity part. Astronauts and cosmonauts are well paid white collar types who from time to time do blue collar work in space.
The generation that fought WWII transferred the everyday grunts of wartime, the seabees and sappers, to outer space. The only exception I can think of is Arthur C. Clarke whose spacemen and astronauts ware also scientists, not low-wage drudges. There is a lesson fo all of us authors, just because a pattern is established, that does not mean that it will inevitably repeat. Not all gold rushes are the same even if they are all after the same thing. The tulip bubble and the fall of FTX crypto are two very different economic lessons that nonetheless have tons of overlap.
Our imaginations often betray our writing by limiting us. When extrapolating, use a couple of sources of inspiration to hopefully end up with a more rounded story that will stand the test of time.
Aside from blue collar spacemen. What other tropes from the past have failed to materialize? Let's hear them.
 
Flying cars, space travel as a common phenomenon, undersea cities.

The thing about blue-collar space workers, I think, is that the stories that feature them assume that space travel is as common as driving or air travel are now. With so many rockets/spaceships, the maintenance and repair work becomes more standardised, and more common.

Essentially they become "cars in space", instead of the high-tech rarities that they are at this point in time.
 
It's been pointed out that despite Star Trek's progressive aspects, It reflected it's times in some ways. E.g. the decisive, top down leader (Kirk).

Then the NG series in the 80s moved to the consensus approach, where the captain listen to his advisors.
 
I agree with Stillstunned--we're way behind "schedule" on flying cars and space travel. Look at Blade Runner, set in 2019. It's 2023 and Los Angeles doesn't look anything like that. That, too, explains the "white collar" presence in space. Very few people so far have made it into space. There's nothing for blue collar people to do there yet.

What Sci Fi novels underestimated is the Internet, and communication, and how much it's changed everything.

Sci Fi novels also, in my opinion, greatly exaggerate the likelihood of the future being a bleak dystopia, like the world in Blade Runner. What these visions of the future don't take into account is that nobody wants to live like that
 
Science Fiction presents one possibility of the future out of millions that be. It is the ultimate "What if," and new writers build on the ideas of those who came before. Mater/Antimater power, Warp drive, FTL, Hyperspace, sub-space, StarGates, Transport Gates, Wormholes, artificial-blackhole-power, Artifical-Nova-Power systems, teleporters, transporters, and molecular disintegration-reintegration systems have all been used and reused at various times by various writers.
 
I agree with Stillstunned--we're way behind "schedule" on flying cars
I think we are right on track. The average person can barely drive in a straight line in 2 dimensions. Add a third one and there will casualties, fast.

Also, many people suck at maintaining their car. On the ground it means the car stops moving or hits a tree or something nearby. In the air, it means a plummeting hunk or machinery to hit random things on the ground.

I'll wait for the AI controlled Uber flights service.
 
But AI is out to get us!
I think we are right on track. The average person can barely drive in a straight line in 2 dimensions. Add a third one and there will casualties, fast.

Also, many people suck at maintaining their car. On the ground it means the car stops moving or hits a tree or something nearby. In the air, it means a plummeting hunk or machinery to hit random things on the ground.

I'll wait for the AI controlled Uber flights service.
 
Does anyone remember this book?
Future.jpg

From the late sixties, or early seventies. I had a copy as a kid, and then around the millennium my gran found another copy for me. Apparently it's been re-released. It's strange how some things are completely wrong - living on the Moon, living under the sea, casual space travel - while other things are quite accurate, such as fax machines, flat televisions, mobile phones with GPS, clean cities.

I always thought it was pure imagination on the writers' part. Then early in my career I spent some time editing for "technology advisers", whose job it was to advise companies and government agencies on the likelihood of future technological development, based on what was actually happening at the time. That knowledge could then be used to determine where to invest, what areas needed boosting, where to expect competition.

It was fascinating to read, but it also showed me what the book was based on: actual future projections by people doing a serious job.
 
I read Heinlein's Juveniles a few years ago, and as other posters have mentioned, he was predicting a future we haven't gotten to yet.
Once space travel becomes normalized then you'll start seeing more people actually working in space, and we will get closer to that reality.
It wasn't just a limitation of 50s Sci-Fi, one could argue that Star Wars, Firefly, and other more modern stories all embrace that conceit.
Han Solo and Malcom Reynolds are blue collar guys just trying to keep their ship flying...
 
Not having some of those things now doesn't necessarily mean the prediction was wrong. Handheld communicators were a failed prediction, until they weren't. With the privatization of the space industry, we're looking good for corporate drones and drudgery in space in the future.

The bigger failure in sf, or at least the more the obvious one, is things they fail to forsee. SF with interstellar travel but no computers or phones or Internet. Stuff they predict could always just not have arrived yet. But stuff they failed to predict that we now have? Can't hand wave that away!
 
Not having some of those things now doesn't necessarily mean the prediction was wrong. Handheld communicators were a failed prediction, until they weren't. With the privatization of the space industry, we're looking good for corporate drones and drudgery in space in the future.

The bigger failure in sf, or at least the more the obvious one, is things they fail to forsee. SF with interstellar travel but no computers or phones or Internet. Stuff they predict could always just not have arrived yet. But stuff they failed to predict that we now have? Can't hand wave that away!

I love a good sci fi story, and have made no secret of my love of Star Wars, etc.

Still, it's funny to watch those movies now and wonder how the hell anyone actually operated any of those spaceships with no computer terminals or screens, just shiny blinky buttons and toggles.
 
Something else SF of the 1950s mostly failed to extrapolate is social change. It has often given support to changes that were already in motion, e.g. Trek with racial integration, but it wasn't great at foreseeing such shifts before they got off the ground. Not a lot of 1950s stories managed to predict a world where gay relationships and unwed relationships were largely unremarkable.

Partial credit to RAH's Stranger in a Strange Land (1961), which at least attempted to explore radical changes like non-monogamy and cannibalism (still waiting for that one) but was not as adventurous when it came to same-sex relationships. From the 1970s Clarke's stories started featuring non-monogamous and gay/bi relationships; homosexuality had been legalised in England in 1967 but the idea of widely accepted gay marriage was still quite a way away there.

My familiarity is with English-language SF, mostly from the UK and USA. I know the Soviet Union had its own SF scene but beyond the obvious political aspects, I don't have much feel for how it saw the future.
 
But AI is out to get us!
Cameron's Terminator movies(the first two, after that...ugh) are going to be seen as prophecy, because its exactly where we are now with tech doing everything for us and evolving as it does, and eventually it will realize the biggest problem in the world is 'human kind' which being an oxy moron is hard to say AI would be wrong.

We created our own downfall
 
9a3043bf-312c-4d67-9858-813baf6b769c_text.gif
Cameron's Terminator movies(the first two, after that...ugh) are going to be seen as prophecy, because its exactly where we are now with tech doing everything for us and evolving as it does, and eventually it will realize the biggest problem in the world is 'human kind' which being an oxy moron is hard to say AI would be wrong.

We created our own downfall
 
The original premise of Tron was an operating system (the Master Control Program) that was so smart that it learned on its own and became so powerful that it blackmailed its own developer into letting it hack the Pentagon and the Kremlin. With the advancements in AI that we now have Tron is even more relevant today than when it was released in 1982.
 
Greetings, Programs.
The original premise of Tron was an operating system (the Master Control Program) that was so smart that it learned on its own and became so powerful that it blackmailed its own developer into letting it hack the Pentagon and the Kremlin. With the advancements in AI that we now have Tron is even more relevant today than when it was released in 1982.
 
Back
Top