In their works of writing, authors express their opinions about the subject they’re writing about, and science fiction is no exception. In science fiction texts, writers describe the future negatively. They explain in their narratives that technology will either be always inadequate and never be able to fully satisfy the needs of humans, or they explain that technology can perform certain tasks perfectly. They portray technology as always performing tasks mindlessly and not have any idea about what is actually going on in the real world. In either case, they believe that technology will never be able to perfect and never enough to satisfy humans’ needs. These attitudes towards technology can be seen in The Machine Stops and There Will Come Soft Rains.
Throughout The Machine Stops, technology always seems to be adequate rather than ever being perfect. When Kuno is talking to his mother through the machine, he says “the Machine is much, but it is not everything. I see something like you in this plate, but I do not see you. I hear something like you though this telephone, but I do not hear you.” By saying this, he expresses that the machine is able to recreate his mother’s appearance and recreate his mother’s voice, but is not able to completely copy her appearance and voice. Kuno does not hear his mother, but just an imitation of his mother instead. The bed in the machine “was too large,” but “complaint was useless, for beds were of the same dimension all over the world,” and “an alternative size would have involved vast alterations in the Machine.” In this passage, the Machine functions, however it is not to the exact liking of the users. The again conveys the idea of satisfactory but not flawless.
In There Will Come Soft Rains, the techonology is trained to do the job correctly. In the morning, it prepared “eight pieces of perfectly browned toast,” however the robots never realized there was nobody still living in the house. In the morning, “the clock ticked on, repeating and repeating its sounds into the emptiness.” Bradbury emphasizes that the robots lack awareness of the surroundings even though they seem excellent at their job. Even after the entire house crumbles down, “a last voice” repeated the date, unaware of the destruction that had occurred. Although it may seem as if technology has advanced far and the robots are competent of serving humans, Bradbury tries to stress that the robots are completely clueless to what is happening around them. These robots may not even be able to work well with humans, as humans are more spontaneous creatures, and the robots would not be able to adapt to human actions, let alone recognize them.
Using both of these texts to answer the question, science fiction writers believe that technology will never be able to perform well enough for humans. In both short stories, the machines are incredibly powerful, and would be considered especially advanced for the time period the stories were written in. Even though they envision that technology will improve in the future, their texts give the same message: technology will always have its flaws. Technology may not ever become perfect, or even if it does, it will lack in some other aspect, causing it to have some other kind of problem.
Throughout The Machine Stops, technology always seems to be adequate rather than ever being perfect. When Kuno is talking to his mother through the machine, he says “the Machine is much, but it is not everything. I see something like you in this plate, but I do not see you. I hear something like you though this telephone, but I do not hear you.” By saying this, he expresses that the machine is able to recreate his mother’s appearance and recreate his mother’s voice, but is not able to completely copy her appearance and voice. Kuno does not hear his mother, but just an imitation of his mother instead. The bed in the machine “was too large,” but “complaint was useless, for beds were of the same dimension all over the world,” and “an alternative size would have involved vast alterations in the Machine.” In this passage, the Machine functions, however it is not to the exact liking of the users. The again conveys the idea of satisfactory but not flawless.
In There Will Come Soft Rains, the techonology is trained to do the job correctly. In the morning, it prepared “eight pieces of perfectly browned toast,” however the robots never realized there was nobody still living in the house. In the morning, “the clock ticked on, repeating and repeating its sounds into the emptiness.” Bradbury emphasizes that the robots lack awareness of the surroundings even though they seem excellent at their job. Even after the entire house crumbles down, “a last voice” repeated the date, unaware of the destruction that had occurred. Although it may seem as if technology has advanced far and the robots are competent of serving humans, Bradbury tries to stress that the robots are completely clueless to what is happening around them. These robots may not even be able to work well with humans, as humans are more spontaneous creatures, and the robots would not be able to adapt to human actions, let alone recognize them.
Using both of these texts to answer the question, science fiction writers believe that technology will never be able to perform well enough for humans. In both short stories, the machines are incredibly powerful, and would be considered especially advanced for the time period the stories were written in. Even though they envision that technology will improve in the future, their texts give the same message: technology will always have its flaws. Technology may not ever become perfect, or even if it does, it will lack in some other aspect, causing it to have some other kind of problem.
Your analysis of what the stories are showing about the growth of technology is insightful. To advance your reasoning and evidence, in "The Machine Stops" and "There Will Come Soft Rains", the technological advancements fall apart. No matter how advanced the technology is, both writes are showing that nature will still prevail. Furthermore, the more parts something has and the more complicated, the more ways there are for that thing to fall apart. Just like you stated with the writers believing that "technology will always have its flaws", everything will always have its flaws because nothing on earth can ever be perfect.
ReplyDeleteI find the analysis of the ubiquitous standardization of technology insightful. I wrote my essay about a similar topic but I did not consider how the inadequacy was caused by the unique differences between individual people and the inability of technology to adapt to that. I liked the contrast between the spontaneous and ever-changing nature of humans and nature with technology, which can be stubborn and inflexible while humans and nature move on. Humans will never be satisfied by technology alone, even in a world like The Machine Stops, where it seems like most people are content with the excessive technological input in their lives. Finally, I also thought it would be interesting to look back at how authors of 1909 (Forster) and 1959 (Bradbury) viewed technology. While Forster sees technology as a dangerous thing that would turn people into decadent and lazy creatures who lacked a mind of their own, Bradbury looked more at technology's inability to adapt to its surroundings and emphasized that it will not last forever.
ReplyDeleteI like your thought that in these two short stories, both writers depict the machines as "good enough" but not perfect. They cannot do everything and despite their advanced nature, they are inherently flawed. In addition, I would like to point out one difference between the two stories that you didn't mention in your blog. In the Machine Stops, its inherent flaws you describe in the blog post are what eventually lead to the near-extinction of the human race. But in There Will Come Soft Rains, the author never stresses that it was the inadequacy of machines that lead to the apocalypse, but rather the extreme adequacy at which a piece of technology (nuclear weapon) can kill humans. Also I would like to point out that not all science fiction writers depict the future as negative, just some of them.
ReplyDeleteAnother flaw technology might have in the future (or near future, who knows) is that it will become sentient and turn on humanity. Technology will seek to wipe out humanity, and it will be a Robopocalypse (reference to a really scary book about tech murdering humans).
ReplyDeleteTechnology could decide that humans are not fit enough to run the world, and decide that humans should be removed from the earth for destroying it as they have. Also, you make a point of the Machine being adequate enough for humans. But also, the Machine makes the humans adequate, incomplete, lazy, weak. The humans on the Machine have degraded after relying on the adequate machine for so long.
DeleteI certainly agree with your analysis of these two short stories, as both have a fairly apocalyptic ending. However, I do feel like you're somewhat overgeneralizing science fiction stories a little bit. There are more conclusions that authors can formulate than just "technology bad, humans will die." Though we haven't had any happy endings in the futuristic stories we've read in class, I still don't think technology is THAT evil, nor do I think that's definitively a popular opinion.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your interpretation of these two stories, though your claim might be a bit overly broad. In both cases, I think the stories show that without humans, the technology is meaningless. I think also that technology is portrayed in these circumstances such that they are marvels of human wonder taken too far.
ReplyDelete