The slides for today outline the shift to “hard” SF over the 1940s, pushed forward in John Campbell’s Astounding Stories. Partisans of hard SF distinguished it from fantasy and “soft” SF, claiming more internally coherent treatments of science. Jennifer Ng, a present-day writer of SF, has condemned Campbell and Astounding for “setting a tone for SF that haunts this genre to the present day—stale, sterile, male, white, exalting the ambitions of imperialists, colonialists, settlers, and industrialists.” Do you see evidence for or against Ng’s claim in Heinlein’s “The Roads Must Roll” or Lester Del Rey’s “Helen O’Loy”? How does one of these stories depict manhood, womanhood, race, nationalism, or the role of corporations in an imagined future? Don’t address all of these categories, but write a paragraph or two that draws on specific language or actions in Heinlein’s or Del Rey’s work.
6 thoughts on “Astounding Stories and “Hard” SF–Group 4”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
As folks have said above, Helen O’Loy does not exactly exemplify the far more progressive, feminist-conscious politics prevalent in modern science fiction. It is clearly a product of its era–and a problematic one at that. My classmates have discussed the archaic allegory’s blatant objectification and male-centered purposing of women. I would say the element that stuck out the most to me in Lester del Rey’s writing, is the implication that everything that makes a woman a woman can be replicated with science. In this world, one can construct a robot that not only fulfills the tangible tasks of a housewife, but fills in the emotional gaps as well. Once Dave shows her around the house and gives her instructions for taking care of it, he introduces her to television and soap operas–something Helen takes to “like a seal to water.” Del Rey is deconstructing his appraisal of women–specifically, their value in a man’s life–into discrete, offensively over-simplified statistics/details, and saying, “Hey, if we just forge all of these things mechanically, we’ll have as good/authentic a woman as any.” Even the “counter-hormones”–though introduced as a cure for a boy’s infatuation–hint at a society wherein organic, human, behavioral systems can be easily “cured” or replicated artificially.
In The Roads Must Roll, the passage I found the most interesting was when–upon being delicately criticized by Blekinsop for America’s dangerous reliance on the modern technology–Gaines replies with, “Every civilization above the peasant and village type is dependent on some key type of machinery. The old South was based on the cotton gin. Imperial England was made possible by the steam engine.” To me, this line speaks for itself. The comparisons Heinleins draws–between his rolling road-rampant America of the future, and both the slave trade of the antebellum south and English imperialism–unintentionally spells out Ng’s exact criticisms for her.
“Helen O’Loy,” though being a rather short story, was full of problematic ideologies and sexist views towards women that Jennifer Ng stated was the problem with the science fiction that was, and still is, being produced. Its rather sad to see these brilliant creative ideas and stories being tarnished with sexist views. Del Rey offers his viewers to contemplate if the future of AI could be considered human, which is a rather recurring narrative in this genre of literature. However, Del Rey went about telling his story in a way that gave little respect to women. Poor Helen (which I fell to sympathize for) suffered the consequences of the sexist views that the only thing a woman would be good for their is looks and abilities to serve men. These two men create this robot woman to perform household duties, but also give her the ability to think and feel which is exactly what she did. However, the run into problems when she thinks and feels to much for them? Del Rey reinforces this patriarchal view that men are superior to women in the fact they kept reiterating that they have the power to end her mechanical life in a matter of seconds. Her “life” is dependent on wether or not these 2 men deem her fit to continue “living” based on their expectations of her duties. The expectations that these men have set for Helen, which Natalie also pointed out, are based on the 1930s views of what womanhood should be ie cooking (which Helen was good at), cleaning, and providing children.
In the slides, the idea of fantasy vs science fiction was discussed, and Campbell, from my understanding only wanted to publish hard science fiction. However, this story that of Helen O’loy seems to fit his definition of fantasy than his definition of SF. They could have just turned her off. That seems like the logical consequence. In the “Cold Equations,” the life of a young girl was still terminated because that was the logical ending for the mission to survive. Rather in “Helen O’loy,” the create a new rule aspect (what Campbell calls fantasy) seems to fit more accurately. They Create a robot that loves to much, so he leaves, but then what? He comes back, and then they live happily together? Is that not a fantasy? Getting everything he wants with the most perfect woman that he created?
Like my group members, I definitely see evidence of Ng’s claim in Lester Del Rey’s “Helen O’Loy”. The whole idea of this story has to do with the servitude of Helen to her creator Dave and the dynamic of their relationship. Helen’s role as a robot in my opinion is a representation of Del Rey’s view of the feminine role in society. He conveys the idea that by Helen’s desire to become Dave’s wife, that a women’s role in society is to please and serve a man. This is accentuated by the fact that Helen is a robot which, furthers the idea that women are no more than objects. This point of view is inherently sexist. Gender roles are further developed through Phil who points out Helen’s inability to provide sons and how that makes her less of a woman. This causes Dave to hesitate in starting a relationship with Helen, because of the shame of her infertility. As Natalie pointed out, the sterile nature that Ng refers to is shown through Dave and Phil’s inability to find real women to be with. I feel as though the author sympathizes with Dave and Phil rather than with Helen, despite their misogynistic tendencies and Helen’s kindness.
Something that I found really interesting about “The Roads Must Roll” was how Heinlein seemed to be self-aware of his problematic portrayals, but didn’t really put in the effort to make them satirical or anything like that (in contrast, Del Rey doesn’t seem to see the issue with his portrayal of women in “Helen O’Loy”). There is a brief exchange between Gaines and his secretary Dolores at the end of the story where Gaines instructs Dolores to cajole his neglected wife, whom he portrays as hysterical. In response, “[Dolores] bit her lip, but her face was impassive” (87). This action gives her, only really having said “Yes, Mr. Gaines,” thus far, some amount of depth; she is irritated with Mr. Gaines’ treatment of his wife, yet she is not in the position where she can say anything. I could very well imagine some satire that aims to point out power imbalances like this using a very similar conversational dynamic. The difference is that Heinlein just barely drops this line in and doesn’t even give it second thought.
I think that Ng’s criticism of ambitious male industrialists is especially relevant in the passage about Gaines’ external vs. internal emotions. Putting on appearance of a “electromechanical integrator,” while suffering a “torturing storm of self-reproach” (68) clearly outlines how authoritarianism is detrimental for everyone, including the powerful. Gaines’ understands everything is his fault, despite also thinking he didn’t do anything wrong, since “authority creates responsibility ” (68). Heinlein, instead of having anyone learn any sort of lesson in his story, decides to wrap everything up full circle. The roads continue to roll, Gaines still holds his position of power and revels in it, despite having just experienced how devastating such power is, and the union is (temporarily) defeated. The author sets up all of the pieces to deliver the right message, yet fails to see it through.
Reading Del Ray’s “Helen O’Roy” was a perfect example of Jennifer Ng’s argument that Science Fiction authors of this time were presenting a “stale, sterile, male, white” platform. The idea that Helen or Lena were mechs designed to imitate beautiful women who were “stuck” with Dave and Phil. I think that this implies these two men’s sterility and that they were unable to find women (humans) to fall in love with and live a life.
Helen’s character is one where she is trying so hard to play the role of a real “woman” and is there to have sex with and please Dave. When Phil and Helen are having a conversation, and he tells her to stop acting this way around Dave, she says: “I know. But I can’t help it. And I’d make him a good wife, really I would, Phil.” Phil responded to this, claiming: “And give him strapping sons to boot, I suppose. A man wants flesh and blood, not rubber and metal.” This implies that the worth of a “real woman” has to do with what her body can offer a man. Helen exclaimed back: “Don’t, please! I can’t think of myself that way; to me, I’m a woman. And you know how perfectly I’m made to imitate a real woman… in all ways. I couldn’t give him sons, but in every other way… I’d try so hard, I know I’d make him a good wife” (Helen O’Loy, 49). These lines represented the depiction of womanhood in the 1930s, where middle to upper-class women were expected to be good wives and take care of the house.
Del Ray is also introducing a complicated analysis of manhood and what it means. He highlights the mental struggle Dave goes through with falling in love with a robot—running away from his problems, drinking, and escaping reality. He shows Dave having a “change of heart,” he returns to take Helen back, but instead of embracing their human-robot relationship, they live a life of secrecy and pretending.
I certainly see evidence for Ng’s claim in “The Roads Must Roll,” mainly in Heinlein’s regard of women and corporations. Beginning with the former, we see a grand total, I believe, of two female characters, both of whom occupy remedial, subservient positions for Gaines as secretaries and dining cart organizers. They don’t occupy positions of power or influence, and don’t contribute to the principal plot points in a significant way. By the standards of the era, I don’t recall there being anything overtly sexist. But we can say now that the inclusion of women (or lack thereof) in the story is inherently sexist. Women play the part in this story that Campbell would have intended them to in the genre collective; they don’t.
I’m interested, too, in Heinlein’s depiction of a worker’s revolution amid a corporate/government framework. On one hand, the corporation effectively serves as the government in the crisis situation. That Gaines supersedes the authority of mayors, governors, and the president to maintain the American economy is an inherently fascist idea. The road corporation is the source of power, and Heinlein portrays a governmental dependence on a singular corporation for national security, well-being, and prosperity, and whoever maintains control over that corporation holds the power to determine quality of life for the entire country. Additionally, Heinlein’s characterization of the revolting workers as villainous and the corporate machine as the hero seemingly aligns with the heavily capitalist and fascist-leaning mindset of 1940s male SF writer.