Time Travel discussion
This topic is about
The End of Eternity
Archive Book Club Discussions
>
THE END OF ETERNITY: General Discussion
okay, we need to buy it???LOL, i thought in group we would be provided for free :D (atleast an e-version).
So, i am gonna buy it first then.
Take care ya'all.
Mod
http://www.betterworldbooks.com/97808...
I have used this world wide service book store to purchase many out of print books. Very reliable in my experience.
My copy came from the library. I love my library. They delivered it right to my door yesterday free but they ask for donations. It was an old hardcover with a photo of Asimov on the back looking much younger than I've ever seen him before.
I haven't read much from the 50's but I love the timeless quality of this book so far. I think it's Asimov's skill writing about the incredibly distant future where tech is too advanced to bother explaining in excessive detail and any contemporary aspects are intentionally nostalgic. I would also say he was just a very intuitive futurist.
Mod
This is a great book. And note the name of the protagonist. There were more than a couple novels of the period, with characters named 'Harlan'. They were all written by friends of Harlan Ellison. (The other one that comes to mind is RESTOREE by Anne McCaffrey.)
Asimov is amazing. He can take these incredibly complex situations and make an engrossing tale out of them. :)
Well I sure hope that Harlan learns a lesson. I'm almost 1/2-way done and the sexism is making me wish I didn't feel compelled to finish it.
Look at the copyright date, in the front. All works are of their time, and authors too. He could not help being sexist, any more than Abraham Lincoln could help dying without benefit of antibiotics. I forget when Asimov was born but he was an old man when I met him, in the early 80s. He aspired to Dirty Old Man status.
Mod
http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
It does look like a short book even though the text is quite condensed on my 190 page copy.
Its true with novels older than a half century that many are unpc. But its understandable to be offended or disliking the unpc undertones despite it being the norm in its time. If we look at old movies, sexism is in abundance, not to mention in more recent decades, James Bond is slapping up the girls in a derogatory manner which makes me cringe watching it now...although when I saw the films as a young boy, I thought nothing of it...morality not quite in check at that stupid age. Same with other forms of prejudice.
But its important to know that many people did not like their culture's ignorance and sympathised with the victims. Isaac Asimov clearly wasnt one of them is the only way I can put it ;)
You have to read these things in the spirit of the historical novel. It's part of the historical accuracy and period, for people to smoke like chimneys and condescending to black people. A good example of this is MAD MEN, if anybody is watching that. One of its pleasures is watching the parents load the kids into the back seat and drive off (no seat belts! no child seats) after a roadside picnic (leave the trash on the grass, sure!).
Brenda wrote: "...I forget when Asimov was born but he was an old man when I met him..."Wow Brenda. You met him? How cool is that! When I was growing up he was one of my favorite authors. His non-fiction science books really turned me on to science. I am not so sure about his attitude toward women. I was thinking as I read this that it was almost a satirical comment on his era? I might be all wet though..I would like to find a biography about him.
Oh I totally get the culture of the time stuff and all. I'm a huge Asimov fan and have been for, gosh, four decades. But this book has some stuff in it that's over the top. The thing is, though, the ending is, actually, redemptive. Dang it - I'm not going to type stuff and then hide it in a spoiler though. I'm too accustomed to open discussion, sorry.
I met him at a Disclave, in the early 80s, when he was Guest of Honor. (My first novel came out in 1984, so it was right around then.) I remember a shapely young lady asked him to autograph her belly button; he was happy to comply. He refused to fly in airplanes, so he only went to conventions where he could take a train from NYC.
Mod
But this book has some stuff in it that's over the top. The thing is, thoug..."
Cheryl please use the spoilers. It may not be common in other groups but its a nice solution that gives us an edge on others that dont use it, so that no one has to stay away from discussions whilst reading the book. We can proud ourselves as a group for that :)
Mod
Its probably time to pose some non spoiler questions at this point.
DISCUSSION QUESTION 1) What Isaac Asimov novels have you read prior to this and did you enjoy his work?
DISCUSSION QUESTION 2) An Eternal's job is to shape the future for the good of mankind. If you had this power as the Technician, how would you shape its future to ensure mankind's longevity and success? You have the power to prevent certain inventions or create rules in society, perhaps in the form of a world govenrment or UN...anything, the world is your oyster.
1) Lots. Mostly his Robot stories & various themed collections, which I love. Not so fond of his mysteries & Dirty Old Man etc. Don't remember details as it's been decades - they're on my 'to re-read' shelf.2) More power to women and non-white non-Christian, in order to attempt to get a variety of points of view in political leadership.
Invent better solar & wind power earlier to avoid so much use of coal and petroleum.
Help Germans of the 1930s not fall under Hitler's spell.
Help tribal peoples not fall under the sway of missionaries & not allow those forced removals to 'educate' the children.
RE Q1: I have read lots of Asimov as well. Pebble in the sky and the I Robot books are ones that stand out for me. Gotta think on Q2 and will post something down the road...
(Finished the book, by the way and really enjoyed it. Lots of confusing stuff hopefully get to talk about soon! Need to gen up a review...)
I am really having a hard time locating this book-none in library, new or used book store. I am going to have to order online, which will take awhile to get. I have a few more used book stores in town to call.
Remember the specific target audience of scifi pulp fiction in the 1950s was the adolescent male science geek (i.e. me). What did I know or even suspect about romance and gender equality? Next to if not exactly nothing. Oh, thank the various deities, I grew up. Still love scifi, though. Special shout out here for James Tiptree, Jr, woman scifi writer who felt compelled to hide her identity behind that alias (please read her short story collection, Crown of Stars, or the fascinating biography of her quite amazing life). As for The End of Eternity, Asimov really cranks up his storyteller skills to make the last 1/3 of this story fly. As I read the first part, the question 'Where are the women, Isaac?' definitely popped into my head. Then he told me a few pages later.
I haven't been able to get as much time to read this as I had hoped, but did pass the half way point and felt there was a lot less sexism so far than I had expected from what's been said here. It could be that I expected the worst but I think, like the technology, Asimov doesn't dwell too much on the details of male/female roles at this point but there's enough left for interpretation that we bring our own opinions and preconceptions about what's presented. Like an ink blot test we read what we want into it, perhaps? I found it interesting (putting this as spoiler to let others make up their own minds when they get to it) (view spoiler)
(1) Of Asimov's work, I've only read Prelude to Foundation prior to this. I really enjoyed it and was frustrated at not being able to get into the actual Foundation books. I just like having a character to follow and the major events of Foundation just lost me without that personal connection. Prelude was also interesting for exploring different futuristic cultures as the main characters had to hide in various divergent societies though out the book.
(2) Without the benefit of dramatically "upwhen" foreknowledge available to this book's Eternals, I think I might find it morally difficult to manipulate history given the chance. Certainly my instinct would be to prevent mass murders and wars in general or encourage more global community and understanding. Don't we learn from our mistakes though? It would take an agency like the one in this book to keep track of all these adjustments to ensure that if one war was prevented here, the variables that led to it wouldn't just crop up again later.
A question I would pose to this group is:
(3) How do you see human views on sex changing in the far future.
(4) How do you see human views on violence/war changing in the far future.
I am reminded of "more evolved sensibility" of humans in Star Trek’s future which surly stemmed from "make love, not war" sentiments in the 60s. I am also frustrated with America’s apparent obsession with violence in entertainment contrasting our prudish (by global standards) view of nudity and sex on TV. I think it's interesting that different cultures approach these subjects differently. It's learned not instinct in some cases, it seems.
I couldn't put the book down last night and loved it to the end. I certainly seem to be the target audience. I feel the ending (view spoiler)
Mod
DISCUSSION QUESTION 1
Somehow, I've never read Asimov despite having 36 of his books in our home library.
DISCUSSION QUESTION 2
*No tolerance for politics, government, or religion that control people through fear-mongering and/or hate for a particular class of people.
*A requisite for fact-checking before anything is allowed to be printed journalistically
*Franchises, mega-stores, and monopolies forbidden (with a stricter definition of monopoly)
*Universal resource conservation and utilization of natural power sources first and foremost such as solar, wind, waste, potential energy sources
*Limitations on inventions that drain our natural resources
*Public rather than private transportation being made the norm
*Enforced population limitations, fairly administered
*Self-sufficient, hard-labor prison systems
DISCUSSION QUESTION 3
Every generation thinks they've discovered sex, don't they? I think how people would view it in the future would depend on whether we were in a period of more conservatism or more liberalism. It would also depend on if society kept on a path of medical development such that related diseases were deemed curable or irradiated. Assuming that we don't undergo some technological and societal fall, I would venture to guess that it would become less and less of a taboo subject and increasingly more casual if people are decreasingly worried about negative repercussions of the act. I would expect that if this is the case, there would be cyclical movements through the generations to make it more sacred and more casual. I also doubt that the concept of a state-sanctioned legal marriage will continue to exist far into the future. I think many people will still want to engage in ceremony to mark their dedication to each other, but the state will no longer be involved.
DISCUSSION QUESTION 4:
Will human nature change in the future? I don't think so. Will our natural resources become more abundant in the future? I don't think so. We want to think that we're becoming more "civilized" as time marches on, but there still seems to be an inner cave man lurking around the corners of our desperations. Assuming that technology continues on its current path our longevity will increase. Thus, we're going to be vying more for land and resources in the future. It would take great leadership and a great change in mindset to prevent great wars over these things. I'm not convinced that we, as a species, are yet capable of peace in the face of fear for our personal well-beings.
About half way through the novel. I think the story pokes fun at male vanity and egotism. (view spoiler) The "It's for the best of everyone"... but we don't need to ask/tell them, reminds me of colonial paternalism and totalitarian governments.
Discussion Question 1: How much Asimov have you read?
When I was younger I read all that I could find, Foundation, Robots, short stories. Then as now I appreciate Asimov's creativity and insight. Then and now I notice 1950s technologies e.g. punched cards.
Discussion Question 2: If you had ultimate power over the fate of humankind what would you change?
First I would eliminate dogs... no, but seriously, the back-tracking algorithm: Find out when humans become extinct; make a small random change; if humans become extinct sooner, undo it.
Discussion Question 3: How might the role of sex change in the far future?
Societies in different times and places have different social roles and sexual practices. Today, I think a clone society (a society with one genome - the goal of egalitarian eugenics) would still practice sex.
Discussion Question 4: Will there be less violence and war in the far future?
Aggressive personal violence and collective violence rise when individuals and populations are insecure. Why don't U.S. citizens feel more secure today than a century ago? Political unity and human nature advance slowly compared to weapons and propaganda. Some profit from insecurity.
Should there be one world government and one world language? Would civil war eventually end if all borders were open? Would there be less war in the end? Would that be worth it if there were social stagnation e.g. ban on new disruptive technological development, non-public communications, political parties?
Centralisation increases when communications and transport links are quick and secure. Distance and insecurity increase localism and independence.
It would be impractical to establish colonies years-travel time from Earth under central control.
The world government will ban space exploration if preventing war is a critical goal. Public technology (and education) must be kept primitive so that no individual or private group could launch a private spacecraft. A technology for secure rapid travel (quantum entanglement allows instantaneous communication) between planets and star systems would allow new colonies under central control.
Different gravity on Mars means that people who live there would find it difficult to immigrate to Earth. Martians could not be first-class citizens in a common government of Earth and Mars, without the power to restrict Earthling immigration.
Discussion Question 5: Is it rational to maximise human survival? Would you make sentient aliens extinct if they threatened Earth?
Discussion Question 1: How much Asimov have you read?
When I was younger I read all that I could find, Foundation, Robots, short stories. Then as now I appreciate Asimov's creativity and insight. Then and now I notice 1950s technologies e.g. punched cards.
Discussion Question 2: If you had ultimate power over the fate of humankind what would you change?
First I would eliminate dogs... no, but seriously, the back-tracking algorithm: Find out when humans become extinct; make a small random change; if humans become extinct sooner, undo it.
Discussion Question 3: How might the role of sex change in the far future?
Societies in different times and places have different social roles and sexual practices. Today, I think a clone society (a society with one genome - the goal of egalitarian eugenics) would still practice sex.
Discussion Question 4: Will there be less violence and war in the far future?
Aggressive personal violence and collective violence rise when individuals and populations are insecure. Why don't U.S. citizens feel more secure today than a century ago? Political unity and human nature advance slowly compared to weapons and propaganda. Some profit from insecurity.
Should there be one world government and one world language? Would civil war eventually end if all borders were open? Would there be less war in the end? Would that be worth it if there were social stagnation e.g. ban on new disruptive technological development, non-public communications, political parties?
Centralisation increases when communications and transport links are quick and secure. Distance and insecurity increase localism and independence.
It would be impractical to establish colonies years-travel time from Earth under central control.
The world government will ban space exploration if preventing war is a critical goal. Public technology (and education) must be kept primitive so that no individual or private group could launch a private spacecraft. A technology for secure rapid travel (quantum entanglement allows instantaneous communication) between planets and star systems would allow new colonies under central control.
Different gravity on Mars means that people who live there would find it difficult to immigrate to Earth. Martians could not be first-class citizens in a common government of Earth and Mars, without the power to restrict Earthling immigration.
Discussion Question 5: Is it rational to maximise human survival? Would you make sentient aliens extinct if they threatened Earth?
Q 5. Probably not. I mean, I don't think we're all that worthy. Now, a species threatening Earth may not be worthy either, so it does depend on their motives & etc.
Mod
Just so everyone knows, Chlorine has sneaked in a new Discussion Question 5 in there and its good'un :)
I am also half way and agree with Chlorines assessment of it so far. I am enjoying the book, I can see what Cheryl had meant about the sexism but that is the character of the protagonist and is essential to the plot! I wouldnt conclude that this is any evidence that Asimov himself is a sexist. The subject of desire exhibits the perceived typical attitude of women in the 50/60's but I really dont find that should be offensive as its a potrayal of one type of woman.
I am enjoying this book so far, it took a while for me to get to grips with the whole concept but it has since excelled from that technobabble exposition.
I've already answered Q1.
Q2 answer: I really like everyone's answers. I agree with A.K's idea of spreading out. Dont put all the eggs in one basket. I am fully pro to space exploration. I follow every major space expedition with interest and excited about the new mission to Jupiter, its moons and others. Also mankind's endeavour to build on space travel technology. I think all of those endeavours needs to be encouraged and supported. If anyone has seen the awesome Stephen Hawkin's Universe series (2011 version), he also believes in A.K's idea that mankind must explore and inhabit other worlds and exhibits some ingenious imagination on methods, its worthy stuff for a Sci fi novel. AK has got quite an influence on Hawkins, ay?
Influencing Technological advances towards safe colonisation of other worlds and medical advances rather than the advances of weaponry would perhaps be a much easier task to manipulate (as an Eternal technician) than the sociological and political progress.
What manipulations must one make to prevent political/religious wars for instance? Let's isolate one war for example, Iraq war. How do we prevent that? Stop the Twin Towers tragedy? Naa, popular opinion is that America and Britain wanted war with Iraq anyway. So what then? Prevent the idea that energy can be obtained from oil? Naa, rid the world of oil and there would be other resources to fight over. That's what mankind is about, survival of the fittest by means of gaining the most useful resources available and establishing superior stature. Thats what most wars are, Many think its hardly about rescuing victims of dictatorship or hunting terrorists as is often disguised as (aside from the odd stupid war over a woman called Troy). So what then, I'm an Eternal, what the hell do I need to manipulate to get a harmonious future for mankind? Well nothing much, just make sure we get everyone spread out amongst different worlds and hope at least one colony evolves with some kind of harmonious rationale.
Asimov's book pitches a nice idea though:
(view spoiler)
Of course mankind can destroy itself in different ways, nuclear, viruses, chemicals. Or be destroyed by natural catastrophes even. So perhaps one approach is to do nothing and let mankind's future roll on, good and bad but only intervene to prevent its destruction...but that leads to Chlorine's...
...discussion Q5) Is it worth maximising human survival...in fact, is it worth trying to save them from self or natural extinction at all? What if a new species derives from mankind's survivors and evolve a more rational way of life? The world has after all, always cycled through many extinctions, without those previous extinctions, mankind would not have evolved ,(according to present day theories for which I do like its logic). So let mankind make its mistakes (or allow natural catastophes) and let the cycle continue? Na, I'm more optimistic than that. We already show signs of rational, fairness and care for others. The challenge is to let that mentality rise above the natural selfish tendencies...but that will be f***ing tough.
Q3) I assume we talking sex as in love making/reproduction, right? I dont think that will change. Its amusing to watch the interpretation of sex in Woody Allen's Sleeper and Demolition Man but unless we devolve back into bacteria, sex will still rule the day in the very far future...unless the world lets itself be dominated by a sex is evil religion but there will always be a rebellion uprising of some kind, well I hope so, what a bloody awful future that would be.
Q4? I'm a slow writer and getting a bit tired now, so I'll cheat. What Chlorine said!
no wait, just thought I add something to that. I watched a British documentary program last week called The Batman Shootings. I dont think I need to expand on what the title refers to. A young journalist who watched The Dark Knight rises premiere in Central London decided to travel to America and investigate feelings and gun ownership laws straight after the tragedy. She finds that despite the shootings, most citizens do not want tighter gun control. Since the shooting, gun sales had gun UP! But she also found that the nation (generally) loves the romanticism of guns going back to the old wild west gunfights etc. She attends a Wild West street parade in Colorado a week after the shootings and they do a re-enactment of a wild west shoot out. Everyone's enjoying it despite the recent tragedy (personally I would enjoy seeing a parade like that too tbh). Its seems guns are part of America's culture, take that away and its not America anymore. She finds that politicians including Obama are avoiding any discussion of tightening gun controls because it would be an electoral suicide, as most people want guns (whether for sport, hunting, defence or as an enthusiast). Documentaries do have an ability to manipulate your opinions in any direction but I found this interesting being from a British reporter perspective, still keeping an open mind of whether America really is in love with guns as the program depicts.
Its the political agenda part that fascinsted me most of all though. So question 4, how do I see human views on violence/war changing in the far future?...well I dont see it changing a great deal from the politics that have been exhibited and largely unchanged as far back as history is recorded. In fact we havent really changed since the dawn of man, we always fought for recources and land. The only things that have changed are the tools. Animals do the same. But I tried to be an optimist in question 5, so I'll try to maintain that optimism, hmm, its just hard to find much to say support it...
Mod
Why would we not want to be the survivors? I can't imagine a scenario when humans would assume that we're not the ones worthy of survival. I'd hope that we could come to some agreement to co-exist because, of course, each race is going to assume that theirs is the one that should survive. Pacifist though I am, I think that I'd have to choose war if there was no rational co-existence agreement to be had. If someone has to win and someone has to lose, then we might as well compete for our own chances to be the survivors.
message 28:
by
John, Moderator in Memory
(last edited Aug 27, 2012 03:01PM)
(new)
-
rated it 3 stars
Mod
The one thing I find so fascinating about this book is (view spoiler)
As for the question of how I would shape the future for the benefit of mankind, I think I will pass. I think I would much rather be a life-plotter than a technician. I'm much more of an analyst.
A.K. wrote: "DISCUSSION QUESTION 1In my early teens, I went on an Asimov frenzy - read just about everything I could find in every library available. All his Foundation stuff, all his robot stuff, the vast ma..."
I was the same way. Then I was very disappointed when he tried to tie the robot and foundation series together. That made me want to stop reading any of his robot books. Still, "I, Robot" is great, and I enjoy rereading the initial three foundation books.
John wrote: "The one thing I find so fascinating about this book is..."Keep reading John, I don't think they're viewed that way exactly (view spoiler)
The book mentions the only major differences between centuries spanning Eternity is whether they are matter or energy based societies. Some combine a bit of both like a bed Harlan uses at one point. Energy inside with a matter skin that gives when you turn but firms up in the perfect body conforming shape when you settle.Discussion Question 6:
What would an energy-oriented society be like?
Is Asimov suggesting that in these pure energy societies only people and the planet are still matter? I'm imagining the whole world to be like a gigantic Holodeck only their aesthetics would not match ours. Traditional eating might be a thing of the past as nutrients would get beamed into you at the appropriate times of day and waste would be beamed out, converted back to energy and converted into nutrients again. I suppose as part of that Holodeck experience you could simulate eating matter.
Finge came from one of these energy based centuries. He had a funny walk to compensate. Did these energy based societies create an anti-gravity field to make walking less of a chore? I'm imagining people gliding from place to place when they weren't being transported via energy stream.
...looking back as some other details of Finge, it seems food in his time remained mater, and all utensils and (I assume) food prep devices were energy oriented to not allow the food to touch unclean matter. It's also said elsewhere that replicator like technology was made non-existent due to the problems associated with replicating humans. Would this rule out all energy to matter conversion technology, including Teleportation?
Does Asimov discuss energy based societies in any other work?
Mod
But thinking about it more, I can see why energy based society maybe attractive on paper. Assuming there is an abundance of energy available, which I imagine would be obtained from some kind of safe fusion process, material resources are obviously more limited hence the need for this pure energy solution. Its hard to see a pure energy world where technology takes away all the physical challenges in life and just get spoon fed the necessary nutrients etc. Its hard to see how such a life can be enjoyed. Extreme technology or science can be a degradation to quality of life if deployed at a massive scale as in this pure energy society. The hybrid centuries of both matter and energy may be a better solution but ideally I prefer a future that focuses on medical advances, life enriching technology but not to the extent of taking away everyone life's fundamental pleasures and physical challenges. Oh and space exploration which bizarrely, the Eternals seem to be oppressing or at least not encouraging, perhaps they know the future enough to know that we never needed it but I dont see how that can be when the world will end as a fact. Only question is how.
A.K. wrote: "As long as we're still in human form, I don't think our relationship with sex and violence will change much at all. I think that kind of stuff is hard-wired into our biology."However unlikely the elimination of all disease may be in our future, if he had full control over our biology (eliminating all unwanted side effects of casual sex), human attitudes towards it would be much less prudish, at least in some circles. Those attitudes are certainly not biological. I think a more evolved perspective would side with the rights of consenting adults as long as no harm was done to anyone but the moral argument there can get fuzzy.
Tej wrote: "Q6: We can only take Asimov's surface imagination for granted here since he doesnt really explain a great deal about it. My first thought is that the whole idea is nonsensical and energy wasting"
Our society today is unreasonably energy wasting already. Everything produces some kind of energy. Our ability to capture, store and use that energy is still primitive. Imagine if health monitoring clothes ran on captured energy put out by our bodies or if our homes were not only built to capture all of the solar, wind, and rain energy it comes in contact with but also used far less energy to do all the things we needed it to do, so it would have plenty of energy left over.
We will find energy to be a much less limited resource when our ability to tap into all the renewable resources becomes much more advanced.
I think the lack of detail in Asimov's descriptions give us more room for our imaginations to wander.
Mod
Anyway, a superb read, vintage Asimov imagination and quite a head spinner.
The ending certainly gave a lot of food for thought which I look forward to everyone's views on whether it was satisfying or not...discussed in spoiler tags, please ;). But first I needed to vent my thoughts in a review which I just posted up:
http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/...
Mod
A co-worker of mine is originally from Sweden and balks about the level of recycling that is required there. You're actually fined if you don't separate everything properly and recycle everything possible. Her point is that it's one thing to volunteer to recycle, but it's another thing altogether for it to be forced upon you and to be fined if you aren't conservative enough in your recycling. I think that an energy-oriented society would meet with similar discontent in the beginning. But children who grew up always maximizing the energy potential of everything would probably do it automatically (just as my toddler has known what goes in the recycling bin from as early as 18 months, while I have difficulty getting anyone else in the house to figure it out). Even in its infancy, I think you'd grow accustomed to it over time. I wonder, though, if it would be ultimately more expensive to harness energy from all available sources or if people would be saving more money as a result. Would you have to pay for the energy-conserving and potential-energy-harvesting services as you would for fuel and electricity in our days?
Amy wrote: "Would you have to pay for the energy-conserving..."Initially it always seems to cost more. A Prius would save me about $50 a month in gas but cost me $100 more a month in car payments. The tech will get cheaper and more efficient, demand will go up and prices will eventually go down but then the next, better thing will be more costly for a while and so on.
Tej wrote: "Well I finally finished the book, ..."
Very thoughtful review! The only opinion I really differ on: I didn't find Harlan unlikeable. Defiantly naive though. I blame the young age at which he was recruited into eternity. I know most of my growing up occurred during my first real romantic relationship and I don't think he ever had that experience so he remained stunted in a way that seems typical of most if not all eternals in this book. ...that's why I like the message I got from the end (see my previous spoiler)
your previous post mentioned the interesting negative opinion eternals have on space travel. I’m certainly interested in what you think of that now, looking back at the book as a whole.
I thought early on now prophetic Asimov was about human tendency to get excited about space programs then get board. That was before the space race and how right he was!
So how about this one…
Discussion Question 7
What would it take for humans to stay interested in space travel?
I don’t think we’re ever going to solve all our problems here on earth and a major upside to the space race was how it got young people excited about science and gave graduates strong in math a place to go other than wall street. They made huge advances in tech during that time. We seem to be only market driven now, nothing for the country to really rally behind for advancement.
I guess the only way to keep it interesting is to keep doing something new, but that's hard. I don't think we're going to find intelligent life in my lifetime. Our reach just seems too short and the Universe too big. Microbial life, or evidence of past life might only be headlines for a day then people will get board again. Small measurable steps for learning more about the universe would be great, like an observation station on the dark side of the moon. Beyond that, I don't know...
Mod
Initially it always seems to cost more. A Prius would save me about $50 a month in gas but cost me $100 more a month in car payments...."
A co-worker of mine just bought a hybrid because it will save her $400 a month on gas ... which is how she's justifying the higher car payment. And once the car's paid off, it will be like money in the bank. It definitely makes more sense for her since she's spending so much on gas already. For me, it wouldn't make nearly as much difference. I think that the price of gas would have to reach tremendous heights for it to be as cost-effective for me since I only have an 8-mile round-trip commute each day. Of course, that's when we'd become an energy-efficient society out of necessity. If gas reached, say, $50 per gallon, we'd all be scrambling to buy hybrid cars and would be looking into other power sources for our transportation. Heck, I'd prefer a Flintstones-style car to $50 per gallon for gasoline!
Mod
Question #8How is everyone else envisioning the early office setting of the novel?
Question #8I know it’s different for each time period as they try to keep with the aesthetics of that century as much as possible, but I found myself imagining the offices from Gattaca for most of the book. …just a futuristic Office Space. The far future office at the beginning of the book entered my brain like Gattaca with funhouse mirrors.
Mod
I know it’s different for each time period as they try to keep with the aesthetics of that century as much as possible, but I found myself imagining the offices from Gattaca for most of..."
Oh, I haven't watched that movie in so long. I might just have to pop it in the good ole VCR to fuel my imagination a bit.
Amy wrote: "...have to pop it in the good ole VCR to fuel my imagination a bit"Ha! I love the movie but I'm not sure how imaginative it is for visual setting. I think it just speaks to the drabness of conformity and control. It's futuristic but also spartan and classic in a timeless kind of way.
If you like "The End of Eternity", check out the movie "The Adjustment Bureau".
Mod
WIll do Dan, thanks. Now on my Lovefilm rental queue.
Question 8:
Scott wrote: "but I found myself imagining the offices from Gattaca for most of the book. …just a futuristic Office Space"
I love that film too, aesthetically, I can fit that imagery too but I imagined those offices to be even more claustrophibic (recall the narrowness of the corridor as Harlan tries unsuccessfully to pass Noys without physical contact) and colourless, something more in the line of THX 1138.
Amy wrote: "...have to pop it in the good ole VCR to fuel my imagination a bit"
Wow, you still have a working VCR, that alone is fuelling my retrospective of a past era :)
Mod
Initially it always seems to cost more. A Prius would save me about $50 a month in gas but cost me $100 more a month in car payments...."
I totally missed this post (despite its length!), sorry. I also realise I havent answered discussion question 7 from it.
Firstly, Scott, yes indeed the book's ending changed all kinds of perspective as all good books with plot twists do. My thoughts of the Eternals aim to suppress space travel was indeed a negative perception , my thoughts have not changed from that though. Eternals is a dictatorship in the most extreme way I can imagine. I was glad the book ended the way it did. Its a choice I would have gladly chosen. (view spoiler) Yes Mankind has potential to destroy itself but it also has potential to warn itself of that fate and make rational precautions to avoid, it is evident that we do just that, whether we do so effectively is another question but we do have a strong survival instinct. Mankind is an internal concoction of destructive, healing, rationalising and ignorant tendencies. Eternals are a bad idea for the very reasons (view spoiler) made. Which leads me to answer Question 7...
I dont think we will ever lose interest in advancing space travel. Public interest may waver for long periods but there will always be some company quietly working on advancing it and now and again a spare faring inspiration will ignite the young generation's imagination. It has been that way for over a century, no reason for that trend not to continue. Sure, no one has landed on a celestial body since the 70s but robotic missions have been a spectacular, successful and essential advance in space exploration. Right now Nasa have numerous space faring projects, some of which I follow very keenly, including the recent Mars Curiousity (I like the way they have Curiousity making "Tweets" which I follow with much amusement!). The Cassini–Huygens probe landing on Titan was one the most breathtaking and exciting missions that has happened in recent decades and surely that would have inspired many young budding scientists to be part of space travel projects. There is the planned, though unfortunately postponed JIMO (Jupiter Icy Moons Orbit) mission that promises to be an exciting endeavour of discovery. And I am sure human will lands on Mars within the next 50 years.
Different governments over time will place different priorities on Space exploration but in the long run it will advance with sufficient speed...I hope. We better do and I hope we colonise other empty worlds (NOT bullyishly conquor already inhabited ones) and spread out because every world faces a percentage risk of natural extinction from various cosmic threats ranging from large meteor impacts to sudden cosmic gamma ray bursts from another star. We had such an gamma ray attack in 2008 from a star several billion light years away that blinded and affected earth instrumentations for a few seconds. We were lucky. It is rumoured that such a gamma ray burst caused one of our Earth's past worldwide extinctions (as they were a few over the 4.5 billion year history of Earth where the dinosaur extinction was a relatively small one compared to previous mass extinctions).
We cant be too complacent and think we have 5 billion years left when the Sund becomes supernova, Earth will die long before that event. In 1.5 billion years in fact, we need to relocate to at least a further planet's moon in our solar system as by then the surface of the Earth will become too hot, lose its atmosphere and water dried up (ie like Mars). Andromeda will collide with our galaxy in 4 billion years so by then we need to be in a solar system that wont be directly affected by the collision. But that is so far away, we surely wont even look like humans by then...if we are survive that long!
I think I got carried away with this space question havent I?
Mod
Mod
Well I received the Blu Ray of this film and watched it. Dan, that was indeed an excellent recommendation for readers of End of Eternity. This film is an excellent cerebral sci fi tale which shares much of the ideas in Asimov's book. The twist however is that this is actually based on a Philip K Dick short story called Adjustment Team published in 1954 (End of Eternity published in 1955). Very enjoyable film too with a central romance that sizzled in chemistry. I echo Dan's recommendation to watch this on your Netflix or Blu ray rental.
Mod
Discussion Question 1) What Isaac Asimov novels have you read prior to this and did you enjoy his work?
Discussion Question 2) An Eternal's job is to shape the future for the good of mankind. If you had this power as the Technician, how would you shape its future to ensure mankind's longevity and success? You have the power to prevent certain inventions or create rules in society, perhaps in the form of a world govenrment or UN...anything, the world is your oyster.
Discussion Question 3) How do you see human views on sex changing in the far future.
Discussion Question 4) How do you see human views on violence/war changing in the far future.
Discussion Question 5) Is it rational to maximise human survival? Would you make sentient aliens extinct if they threatened Earth?
Discussion Question 6) What would an energy-oriented society be like? (see Scott's post #32 for its context)
Discussion Question 7) What would it take for humans to stay interested in space travel?
Discussion Question 8) How is everyone else envisioning the early office setting of the novel?
Mod
Discussion Question 9): What do you think would happen if the people living in regular time found out that they were being manipulated like puppets by the Eternals?
~*~*~*
Another thing I found interesting is the very simplistic way that our hero falls in love. It's like the puppy-dog love-at-first-sight of a child. He barely even knows this woman, but suddenly he's willing to break the most important rules of the Eternals for her - ones that can result in death if they're broken. This seems more like something that you'd do for someone that you've grown to love over time than someone that you just met.
Discussion Question 10):Is the intensity of our hero's love-at-first-sight just a product of the time period in which this book was written or do you think that it's intentional on Asimov's part in order to show just how malleable and simplistic that our hero really is?
9) History would be adjusted to eliminate that knowledge.10) I'd like to think it's intentional and relates to how all Eternals are chosen at such a young age and are only eligible if they will have no significant effect on history. I think it's less Harlan's love at first sight and more the first love of a shy guy. Many introverts here might understand, but I can tell you it's a heightened emotional state. If anything threatens it, you feel like it's the end of the world.
Discussion Question 11):How might Eternal recruiting methods affect the group as a whole?
I suggest it's a shared immaturity (from lack of life experience) and a tendency to always play it safe.
This combined with our hero's skill, resources and interest in the pre-eternity past seem to bring events to a head, helped by a little outside influence.
Mod
VERY P***ED OFF, thats what! Of course the Eternals will indeed eliminate that knowledge as Scott says. However, if one believes in either a religious faith or a natural universal law that no one can ever control time forever and that there will always be a power that will topple it. That power could be something so small such as one normal person's defiance making a crack in the system that collapses the whole thing. I like to believe that, should this scenario ever occurs.
But Dan recommended a film, The Ajdustment Bereau that poses such a situation with interesting results. In that film, a love struck protagonist is aware of The Adjustment Bureau (sort of equivalent to the Eternals) trying to prevent him from being an item with the one he loves and so is compelled to defy them due. Highly entertaining film and so relevant to those of us reading this book and this question!
Q10) The whole love story was a carefully developed plot device to serve the main story, so no, I dont think its simply a product of the time at all. Harlans supressed life and character heightened a vulnerability of sexual temptation. I do not think Harlan was in love at first sight, it was more a sexual lust at the sight of Noys who appeared in apparallel that was more exposing than Harlan was used to. He tried to avoid her but (view spoiler). It all served the main plot as we eventually found out in the end.
Q11) Well Asimov has given us the effects of their recruiting methods already in the book...ie surpressed hidden agendas and breaking rules.
Time Travel
Books mentioned in this topic
2001: A Space Odyssey (other topics)Adjustment Team (other topics)
The End of Eternity (other topics)
GoodReads Blurb ...
Isaac Asimov was a Russian-born American author and professor of biochemistry, a highly successful writer, best known for his works of science fiction and for his popular science books.
Professor Asimov is generally considered the most prolific writer of all time, having written or edited more than 500 books (read more behind the spoiler cut ... not actually a spoiler)(view spoiler)[and an estimated 90,000 letters and postcards, and he has works published in nine of the ten major categories of the Dewey Decimal System (lacking only an entry in the 100s category of Philosophy).
Asimov is widely considered a master of the science-fiction genre and, along with Robert A. Heinlein and Arthur C. Clarke, was considered one of the "Big Three" science-fiction writers during his lifetime. Asimov's most famous work is the Foundation Series; his other major series are the Galactic Empire series and the Robot series, both of which he later tied into the same fictional universe as the Foundation Series to create a unified "future history" for his stories much like those pioneered by Robert A. Heinlein and previously produced by Cordwainer Smith and Poul Anderson. He penned numerous short stories, among them "Nightfall", which in 1964 was voted by the Science Fiction Writers of America the best short science fiction story of all time, a title many still honor. He also wrote mysteries and fantasy, as well as a great amount of nonfiction. Asimov wrote the Lucky Starr series of juvenile science-fiction novels using the pen name Paul French.
Most of Asimov's popularized science books explain scientific concepts in a historical way, going as far back as possible to a time when the science in question was at its simplest stage. He often provides nationalities, birth dates, and death dates for the scientists he mentions, as well as etymologies and pronunciation guides for technical terms. Examples include his Guide to Science, the three volume set Understanding Physics, and Asimov's Chronology of Science and Discovery.
Asimov was a long-time member and Vice President of Mensa International, albeit reluctantly; he described some members of that organization as "brain-proud and aggressive about their IQs" He took more joy in being president of the American Humanist Association. The asteroid 5020 Asimov, the magazine Asimov's Science Fiction, a Brooklyn, NY elementary school, and two different Isaac Asimov Awards are named in his honor. (hide spoiler)]
About the Novel:
GoodReads Blurb ...
Where to Find:
*Free to borrow from your local library
*Cheap, cheap used
*$10.87 paperback from Amazon
*$9.99 Kindle
When to Read:
August 15 - September 15
Spoilers:
Please use spoiler tags when discussing spoilers. To learn how to, please click on the "(some html is okay)" link on the far right above the "comment" box.