Globalhead — Bruce Sterling

Cover of Globalhead


Globalhead
Bruce Sterling
339 pages
published in 1992

Good science fiction doesn’t predict the future; it allows the future to recognise itself in it. Globalhead is drenched in the zeitgeist of Post-Reagan America, yet occasionally there’s a glimpse of the far flung future of 2021 to be recognised. AIDS virus based RNA wonder drugs as the gimmick in its very first story, foreshadowing the very real mRNA Covid-19 vaccine I got just weeks ago. A character called Sayyid Qutb in “We See Things Differently” provides another mild shock. These glimpses of a still to be born future are jarring considering the stories in here are barely if at all science fiction, more slipstream perhaps, a term Sterling popularised at the time these stories were written. The most recognisable sfnal story here is “The Unthinkable”, a Chtuthlu Mythos inspired Cold War riff on Poul Anderson’s Operation Chaos, itself an inspiration for Charlie Stross’ “A Colder War”.

What to make of the Bruce Sterling as seen in this collection? Best known at this time as the second half of “William Gibson andd…”, one of the “fathers of Cyberpunk”. As an editor he had created the anthology that would pin down and solidify the genre, as well as its main propaganda zine. As a writer, his version of cyberpunk took a very different road from the post-Gibson consensus he himself had helped establish. As a non-fiction author, his cyberpunk interests would lead him to write a book — published the same year as this collection — about the early hacker movement(s), the development of the early internet and how the law responded to it. But little is visible of this cyberpunk guru in this collection. No jamming with console cowboys in cyberspace; a bit of low tech phone phreaking for quarters is as cyber as it gets.

Read more

Futurecon — September 17-20

This looks interesting:

William Gibson once said that the future is already here, it’s just not evenly distributed. Geographical location and wealth could indeed limit access to considerable advances in technology. However, imagination is a more subtle power. It does not know borders or languages. From Beijing to Lagos, from Rio de Janeiro to Los Angeles, ideas are flourishing in the form of stories.

An online science fiction convention that has been intended from the start to be an online convention, which takes advantage of the ability of the internet to connect people worldwide. Why did it take a global pandemic for this to happen?

I’m glad it did however, because both the schedule as the invited guests look mighty tasty. According to one of the organisers, Cheryl Morgan, everything will be available on Youtube, in English, for free. It’s unclear whther there will be interactive Discord channels or other ways to participate in the con if you’re not on the panels. UPDATE: looks like there will be.

Futurecon is important because it’s an experiment in how to make science fiction more global. Or rather, how to learn to connect the various strands of global science fiction in a way that does so without needing a centre and its periphery. Traditional Worldcon fandom has always been revolving around American science fiction, with even UK and other English speaking countries being of secondary interest. As its name suggest, it also harbored under the illusion that it was the entirety of world fandom. With Futurecon we have what I think is the first English language attempt to make this boast true. A world fandom in which fans in China can find common interests with fans in South America and Africa, without having to rely on the goodwill of US/UK fandom. Where there’s equal attention paid to writers from Ghana even when they don’t publish in English.

Science fiction makes metaphors literal

And sometimes they’re not even metaphors, but shitty rightwing jokes about trans people, as Isabel Fall managed in her short story I Sexually Identify as an Attack Helicopter:

I sexually identify as an attack helicopter.

I lied. According to US Army Technical Manual 0, The Soldier as a System, “attack helicopter” is a gender identity, not a biological sex. My dog tags and Form 3349 say my body is an XX-karyotope somatic female.

So the original “joke” is that being trans or non-binary is so outrageous that you might as well call yourself an attack helicopter. What Isabel Fall does with it is in the best tradition of science fiction: taking that idea and exploring what it really means to have your gender set to attack helicopter. Not as a metaphor, but literally. Because that’s what science fiction does, making metaphors literal. Creating impossible things for its own merit, rather than as symbols standing in for real world concerns. Even as it’s always rooted in the real world and its contemporary issues, like this story is from its very title.

A shitty joke weaponised by bigots to harass trans people; the title isn’t neutral of course. Anybody who is trans or non-binary or genderqueer, or who like me, a well intentioned cis person, will hesitate on seeing that title, cringe and prepare for the worst kind of rightwing satire. My own concerns about this were lessened because a) I trusted the person who tweeted about the story not to be a transphobe and b) I trusted Clarkesworld were it appeared, not given to outbursts of transphobia as far as I know. After reading the story I knew it couldn’t have worked half as well under another title, but this does not take away the fact that for a lot of people it will make them suspicious or dismiss it out of hand of not worth reading. It explains some of the backlash against what was seemingly intended to tweak the nose of transphobes by making their one obnoxious joke real, by earnestly asking what if your gender was attack helicopter.

What would that mean? How would it express itself?

Now I yield to speed walkers in the hall like I need to avoid fouling my rotors.

Now walking beneath high-tension power lines makes me feel the way that a cis man would feel if he strutted down the street in a miniskirt and heels.

I’m comfortable in open spaces but only if there’s terrain to break it up. I hate conversations I haven’t started; I interrupt shamelessly so that I can make my point and leave.

At the same time this is obviously still a commentary on gender and gender dysphoria as experienced by a trans woman, as the writer has identified herself as, after the internet got hold of the story. You can no longer read this story. It has been taken offline on request of the writer, was scrubbed even from the Internet Archive afterwards. I started writing this review six months ago, in the first flush of enthusiasm after having read it. But then the backlash began as people took the title personal, as critics went on their first impression that this was a rightwing piss take, without checking to see if they were correct.

But how often—really—do you think about the grand strategy of gender? The mess of history and sociology, biology and game theory that gave rise to your pants and your hair and your salary? The casus belli?

Often, you might say. All the time. It haunts me.

There’s sometimes a tendency in queer circles to judge each other more harshly than necessary. You’d better be perfect, know exactly how to display and name your own identity, you’d better not be messy or unsure. A large part of that is a defence mechanism against homophobes and transphobes and other enemies, where any sign of uncertainty or not fitting quite in with the orthodoxy of what the trans|gay|lesbian|etc experience should be can be and has been used to attack the community. For trans people in the UK and US especially, the last few years have been tough, with their rights under renewed attack by the right, aided and abetted by quislings from within the communities, people who say they’re queer but want to kick the “T” out of LGBT. No wonder there’s so much mistrust and Isabel Fall became a victim of it. Alexandra Erin probably put it best in her her thread on why she wouldn’t read this story. I disagree with her, but she makes some good points on why not everybody saw this story as a triumph.

When I was a woman I wanted to be good at woman. I wanted to darken my eyes and strut in heels. I wanted to laugh from my throat when I was pleased, laugh so low that women would shiver in contentment down the block.

And at the same time I resented it all. I wanted to be sharper, stronger, a new-made thing, exquisite and formidable. Did I want that because I was taught to hate being a woman? Or because I hated being taught anything at all?

Now I am jointed inside. Now I am geared and shafted, I am a being of opposing torques. The noise I make is canceled by decibel killers so I am no louder than a woman laughing through two walls.

But the backlash went further than that. It wasn’t just that people got hurt by the story or its title despite the author’s intentions, it was that some people went to great pains to take offence at it and read it in the worst possible way. Where a J. K. Rowling could be openingly transphobic for years until a backlash here it only took hours before it was decided that Isabell Fall was a wrong one. Instead of criticising the story, it quickly devolving into attacking the author as a person, questioning her motivations with even some attempts to dox her. I hesitate to complain about “cancel culture” because usually it’s used to whinge about how people object to some rapist giving a speech at their uni, but this really felt like it. People taking offense and attacking a powerless, no-name trans woman because it would in some way make the world safer for trans women like the one you just raked over the coals. The end result is a deleted story and a writer whose career was snuffed out before it could begin.

And the moment their work reached a usable stage—the moment society was ready to accept plastic gender, and scientists were ready to manipulate it—the military found a new resource. Armed with functional connectome mapping and neural plastics, the military can make gender tactical.

Poor Isabel Fall. All she wanted to do was write a good, solid science fiction story that does what science fiction does best: concretalise metaphors to reflect the world around you. She succeeded, but at what cost to herself?

Welt Am Draht — Sci-Fi Sundaze

Welt Am Draht is basically what you get if you imagine The Matrix done in 1973, directed by a German auteur director more interested in philosophy than action and made as a two part television movie for a West German television channel.



How can you know the impact of a movie like this, fortyseven years after the fact and with its own remake having come out in the same year as The Matrix, itself already twentyone years old? I’m sure you can guess the core idea of this movie just from me having compared it to The Matrix. And yes, this is a movie about reality as a simulation, and yes that is the big reveal at the middle of it. But that television audience which sat down to watch it that October night in 1973, what would they have made of it? Was this intended to have been a surprise, or something that you were expected to have deduced from the hints the movie dropped, long before the protagonist did?

Wehlt am Draht: gorgeous office sets

Another thing difficult to judge: the set dressing. This is a gorgeous office, sumptuous in its “seventies retrofuturism” as the Criterion trailer has it. But would you have seen it that way had you watched it in 1973, when all this would be far more the stuff of everyday life, or was this absurd even for 1973? Certainly the outsized ties our protagonist wears wouldn’t have been that ludicrous in their original context as they seem now. In any case throughout the movie I found myself admiring the sets and cinematography as much as I followed the plot. It is all so incredibly lush, so rich. As such it slots in neatly with the seventies science fiction cinema boom of big budget, big sets movies. But unlike some, it has more going for it than that.

Wehlt am Draht: sterile clutter

The director, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, was one of the giants of West-German cinema; this is his only science fiction movie. It’s interesting how he manages to avoid the pitfalls of science fiction movie making that so many contemporary movies fell into. Set in the present day, present time, it has no outlandish costuming (those flared ties notwithstanding) nor much easily dated sci-fi gadgetry. It doesn’t waste time and credibility explaining how its central conceit works, but rather focuses on working through its implications. If we’re capable of creating a computer simulation that is so realistic that its inhabitants never suspect that they are living in one, who is to say we ourselves are not living in one too?

Wehlt am Draht: mirrored images

Welt Am Draht is a slow, slow movie. As said, it takes its protagonist an hour and a half of the movie to get the realisation that indeed he’s not living in any real world. That’s almost the same running time as The Thirteenth Floor its remake and it still has two hours more to run. But while it is slow, it never feels slow, because it uses its running time to throroughly consider that idea of living in a simulation, what it would mean to discover that you do so. Though it flirts with the traditional idea of that sort of revelation driving you mad, it never quite gets there. It even has a happy ending.

Wehlt am Draht: watching the watchers

Welt Am Draht ends with the protagonist’s escape from his simulacrum to what’s presumably the real world. The problem of the simulacrum remains unsolved, its philosophical questions swapped for a more mundane love affair. With no real catharsis, this is an unsettling movie, much more so than most of the other movies mining the same vein of technopessimism and paranoia that came out at the same time. Because it’s set in a world that’s recognisably our contemporary world, the feeling of alienation brought on by the high modernist clutter in the otherwise sterile office landscape it mostly takes part in, works so well. Because it keeps the futuristic to a minimum, the distortions caused by it hit all the harder when it is introduced.

Wehlt am Draht: glitches in the matrix

The use of mirrors and other reflecting surfaces by Fassbinder to shoot his characters in, the extraordinary stillness of the supporting cast in crowd scenes until called into action by the script, the way the protagonist constantly keeps moving, a discordant note among the rest of the cast, it all adds to this alienation. Especially those opening minutes made me uncomfortable watching, the thought kept nagging that something was wrong with this world, without ever knowing why. The repeated use of cabaret, with all its intonations of queerness, just reinforced this feeling. What it reminded me of was not so much The Matrix, but rather Videodrome, whic is similarly unsettling. It is very much a movie you would need to see if you like the latter.

Rocketship X-M — Sci-Fi Sundaze

Trigger for when the fictional moon landing from the 1950 Rocketship X-M is less sexist than the actual moon landing programme a decade later.



Yes, that’s right. Unlike the real moon programme, he crew of the Rocketship X-M includes a female scientist next to the ex-air force pilots. Granted, she’s partially there for the romance subplot but it still struck me. She’s treated as one of the crew, just as professional as the others in a way that some much later, ‘better’ movies couldn’t do.

Rocketship X-M was made as a cheap cash-in on a more prestigious film on the same subject that also came out in 1950: Destination Moon. This was when you could still film a movie in eighteen days to take advantage that another project had been delayed by a month. It’s one of those movies I’ve read about a long time before I saw it today, back in the day when if your local videostore didn’t have it, you could only read about it in science fiction encyclopedias from the library. I thought I knew what to expect, just some shlocky, badly acted movie only relevant because it was arguably the first movie of the 1950ties sci-fi boom.

It was better than that though. There’s an earnestness to it that’s unexpected in a b-movie. There are no monsters, no things men wasn’t meant to know, but a desire to get the science right. It actually starts with a long infodump disguised as a press conference explaining how the ship will get to the Moon from the Earth and it sort of get things right? They actually use a multistage rocket and talk about using the Earth’s orbital spin to give them enough velocity to get to the Moon in 48 hours. A pity then that once the journey is underway, they run into a meteor storm and hear them whoosing past them with the deep rumbling sound you’d expect from a bunch of rocks travelling in a vacuum. There’s a fair bit of bad or outdated science like that in this movie, but it doesn’t really matter. At least it is trying to get it, if not right, at least plausible.

We can’t have a space movie without something going wrong on the movie so the ship promptly develops engine troubles, which they manage to fix, but unfortunately once it starts to accelerate the crew gets knocked unconscious and they managed to miss the Moon and end up on …. Mars. Not exactly plausible, but bear with it. This is of course a pre-Viking Mars, still twentysix years in this movie’s future, so it has an almost breathable atmosphere where you don’t need a real space suit. And of course it has an ancient, now vanished civilisation, but no Barsoom style planetary adventures here.

No, the reason there is no more ancient Martian civilisation is because it destroyed itself in a nuclear war. Even seventy years later, the scene in which the characters realise that is gripping, even with the obvious matte painting backgrounds and red filter landscape. It gets a bit more hokey once they run into the degraded into barbarity survivors and most of the crew dies at their hands. Those that survive reach the ship and make the trip back to Earth, only to crash at the very end. The movie ends with the main scientist behind the project being asked how he feels now Rocketshipp X-M proved a failure. His answer is that it isn’t and that they’re already working on the X-M 2.

Rocketship X-M then, is more of a science fiction than a sci-fi movie, perhaps the first to take the idea of space travel seriously as more than just a way to get the heroes to the scene of the action. And it only existed because George Pal was a bit behind on his movie…