IVAN EFREMOV'S THEORY OF SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION Thesisforthebegreeoflh. D. MECMGM STATE UNIVERSITY GEOREE VLADIMIR GREBENWKOV 1972 This is to certify that the thesis entitled IVAN EFREMOV'S THEORY OF SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION presented by GEORGE VLADIMIR GREBENSCHIKOV has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Meme in M mww Major professor Date February 25, 1972 0-7639 '2‘ ' ? acme av “3 HMS rs '- BUUK BINDERY . {9mm BINDERS ‘= u: mCENJRT, Ilnllfll ABSTRACT IVAN EFREMOV'S THEORY OF SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION BY George Vladimir Grebenschikov This study analyzes specific principles of Ivan Efremov's theoretical and artistic writing which contri- buted to the foundation of modern Soviet science fiction, especially its use of scientific and technological material. Efremov's ideas for developing methods of forecasting and for projecting man's psycho-social his- tory into the future are described. His devices for incorporating scientific material in literature are dis- cussed in terms of "scientific license" and are classi- fied as "theoretical," "operational," and "descriptive." Efremov's criticism of the implications of Darwinian and Freudian principles which inspire anti- UtOpian themes in contemporary science fiction are examined and compared with his own principles of "sociological evolution" (Noosphere) and psychology of "impulsive flashes" supported by a “philosophical purport." In the process of creating his characters, Efremov projects the George Vladimir Grebenschikov traits of those contemporary types who most closely approximate the Character models of the future. They are characters who are products of a centuries old Com- munist planetary society and are differentiated by their genetic-psychological qualities. An evaluation of Efremov's creative strategies is undertaken on the following levels: (1) the scientific, probing the methods of forecasting; (2) the philosophic, examining the construction of social and psychologidal models; and (3) the artistic, dealing with the verisimili— tude and psychological complexity of dramatization. Efremov's reintroduction of the utopian novel coincides with the appearance of the concept of Utopia in such expanding fields of creativity as futurology and systems analysis. The probing of all aspects of the utOpian content becomes a natural task for the science fiction genre.‘ The findings in this study show that Efremov was fully aware of the significance of this task and that he proceeded, within the boundaries of Communist ideology, to depict future technology in sociologically and philosophically meaningful terms. Perhaps in order to rectify some of the distortions or oversimplifications for which one might blame even such modern utopists as Efremov, other avenues of scientific thinking, e.g., cybernetics, should be explored to lend new logical rigor, Systems, and psychological models for creative literary George Vladimir Grebenschikov content. Nevertheless, Efremov's insistence on fathoming the future as a whole system is a significant step away from primitive depictions of UtOpia. IVAN EFREMOV'S THEORY OF SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION BY George Vladimir Grebenschikov A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of German and Russian 1972 © Copyr ight by GEORGE VLADIMIR GREBENSCHIKOV 1972 To my parents, and to Svetlana ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his gratitude to Professor Denis Mickiewicz for guidance and valuable suggestions and to Professors William N. Hughes, Munir Sendich, Alexander Dynnik, and to Professor Frank Ingram for graciously advising and aiding at the completion of the program. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . V Chapter I. IVAN EFREMOV AND SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION. . l 1. The Evolution of Soviet Science Fiction . . . . . . . l 2. Efremov' 3 Method of Science Fiction. . 5 3. Extraterrestrials and Humans . . . . 16 II. SCIENCE IN SCIENCE FICTION . . . . . . 21 1. Scientific License . . . . . . 21 2. Science: Theoretical and Applied . . 34 3. Science: From Ethics to Gadgets. . . 38 III. THE SYNTHETIC FUTURE . . . . . . . . 55 l. The Noosphere . . . . . . . . . 55 2. Sociosphere. . . . . . . . . . 62 3. Education . . . . . . . . . . 65 4 0 History 0 O I O O O O O O 71 5. A Synthetic Psychology . . . . . . 74 6. Government . . . . . . . . . . 77 7. Material Achievements . . . . . . 79 IV. FROM PROLETARIAT T0 "SCIENTIST" . . . . 90 1. The Great Ring Man . . . . . . . 90 2. The Met Hands Man. . . . . . . . 106 V. FORECASTING, MODELS, AND FICTION . . . . 127 1. ForecaSting. . o o o o O 0 128 2. Material from the Present . . . . . 132 3. Efremov' 3 Science Fiction . . . . . 137 NOTES 0 O O O O 9 O O O O O O O O O 149 BIBLIOGRAPHY I 0 Q o o o o O o o o o O 1 8 1 iv INTRODUCTION The last third of the twentieth century is about to bring significant changes in everyone's life here on Earth. Just to consider two well-established indicies: with regard to population explosion, for example, a world totally new and different from our existing one will have to be built within the next thirty-five years;1 in terms of scientists, ninety percent of all the scientists who ever lived are living now.2 One cannot avoid being aware of the consequences and the extent to which change occurs almost everywhere. Today the number of professionals engaged in ex- ploring the future is probably as great as that of those exploring the past.3 Forecasters and prophets have always existed, but it is more accurate to trace the pioneers in the contemporary futures research and the technological forecasting institutes to utopian novelists and science fiction writers.4 Science fiction, as this literature has loosely been called, has multiplied in both quantity and quality over the past fifty years. Its repertoire now ranges from science adventure stories to deep philosophical and social novels. It is only since the 1950's, however, that the genre has begun to receive grow- ing attention and recognition as something more than an extravaganza of fantasies written for the young (at heart). The nature of science fiction is quite unique. As the world has become complicated, more mobile, and much more difficult to portray in conventional literature, science fiction has been introduced into the realm of artistic literature by a completely new breed of writers-- astronomers, physicists, bio-chemists, engineers, medical doctors and others, as well as numerous amateurs in these fields. Science has its own language, a language which is not always understandable to the layman who wishes to understand it. Since science fiction is the one medium which introduces and develops new concepts, new symbols, and new ideas, the reader of science fiction begins to use that language and think in those terms. Proof of the effectiveness of science fiction can also be found in the feedback, though somewhat one-sided at this time, between Western and Soviet science fiction. A dialogue on the essentials of science fiction writing exists exclusive of other levels of artistic communication, exclusive of the known efforts of "cultural exchange" be- tween America and the U.S.S.R. With such subjects as international conditions, Space exploration, ecology, man vi and machine, sociology, etc., science fiction gives a point of reference to the pressing world problems common to all humanity. This typifies Ivan Antonovic Efremov, whose first novel gives an alternative to "anti-humanism," to the "monotony of themes about mankind's destruction through annihilating wars [as depicted in Western science fiction]."5 Efremov was motivated by the desire to build instead a "friendly contact between various civilizations." Actually Western science fiction has not done so well with serious utOpian novels since H. G. Well's The Modern Utopia and Men Like Gods. Instead, the antiutopian themes have been much more predominant. The utopian blue— prints, although requiring more imagination to write, do not always appear to be desirable enough for people to try to build one. Rather, Zamjatin, Huxley, Orwell, and Forster picture the ease with which it is possible to fall into a pseudo—utopia, thus rendering the reader more cau~ tious about each step in his enthusiasm to create utopias. Efremov takes up the technological utOpian theme where Western science fiction has stOpped. He combines science fiction with youthful Marxian humanism for the purpose of introducing guidelines for creating flexible utopias and providing a firm foundation for the new genre in order that it might hold a respectable position among vii 6 the "serious" forms of artistic literature. These two in- tentions have forced Efremov into an ambitious undertaking. In the Soviet Union, science fiction is dissemi- nated in thousands of publications a year. According to Soviet library statistics, every fourth person reads science fiction.7 Numerous articles appear in the main Soviet newspaper discussing the problems and theories of writing science fiction. During 1969 and 1970 Litera- turnajaAgazeta reserved pages for such discussions and 8 comments from laymen both inside and outside the country and from a good number of professional science fiction writers and critics.9 My purpose here is to produce an analytical repre- sentation of Efremov's stated creative methods and prac- tices, subjecting them to analysis based on the criteria of contemporary data in the fields that Efremov used to justify his principles for writing Soviet science fiction. In this manner I will endeavor to define Efremov's con- ceptual limitations in terms of known possibilities of the genre. Efremov represents one of the most prolific Soviet science fiction writers, but for thirty years he has exerted a decisive influence in the U.S.S.R., and contrib- uted to the dialogue with Western science fiction.10 A more complete biography of Efremov may be found in an appendix to his collection Velikaja Duga.11 viii _Ivan Efremov was born in 1907. When the civil war broke out, he was in the southern part of the Ukraine finishing the equivalent of the third year of high school. He joined the Sixth Mechanized Army Company with the Red Army and spent some time on the coast of the Azov and Black Seas until he received a concussion. As a result of this accident, he temporarily lost his power of speech. In Leningrad after the civil war, Efremov enrolled in a correspondence course in the naval school and worked part- time as a truck-driver's assistant. He received his degree in 1922. In the same year, influenced by a Pravda article on paleontology written by the eminent scholar P. P. Suskin, Efremov wrote to Suskin and received an invitation to visit the Academy of Sciences. Toward the end of the five-year plan (1933), Efremov returns to continue the late Suskin's work. But prior to this academic position, Efremov travelled as an apprentice seaman in the Far East and on the Caspian Sea. But later he returned to Leningrad to continue his studies, leaving seamanship for the summer season only. Efremov received his diploma from the Leningrad Gornyj Institut in 1930. His degree work discussed the possibility of retrieving culinary roots from the ocean bed rock. The plan was rejected for its impracticality. ix After beginning Professor Su§kin's work, Efremov received the equivalent of an M.Sc. and later a Ph.D. in 1940. In the late 1940's Efremov embarked on numerous paleontological expeditions which took him tens of thous- ands of kilometers into the interior of Siberia, Yakutsk, the Urals, the Far East, the Central Asia and Middle East, Sachalin, Western China, and Mongolia, where he diSCovered "cemeteries of Dinosaurs," pantry gold, ancient mines, and foresaw diamonds. In Tafonomia and The Geological Writing, Efremov developed a new branch of paleontology called ”Tafonomia,” which dealt with the boundary between biology and geology, the science of the condition of buried animal remains. This work was not published until 1951. In 1942, Efremov made his first attempts at writ- ing about scientific explorations: Vstréca nad Tuskaroroj (Meeting Over the Tuscarora), Katti-Sark, Ozero Gornyx Duxov (The Lake of the Mountain Spirits), Putjami staryx gornjakov (The Ways of the Old Miners,) Olgoj-Xorxoj, Golex podlunnyj (Moon Mountain), Ellinskij sekret (The Hellenic Secret). (In 1945 these stories were translated into English.) In 1944 Efremov published another six stories: Belyijog (White Horn), Atoll Fakaofo, Observa- torija Nur-i-Dest (The Nur-i-Dest Observatory), ggxta raduEnyx strgj (The Wave of the Rainbow Foam), Ten] minuvsego (Shadow of the Past), Poslednij marsel' (The Last Marsel), followed later by Almaznaja truba (The Diamond Vane). In 1945 he wrote his first science fiction story (prior to this the stories were known as science ad- venture), 2vezdnye korabli (Stellar Ships) and in 1948 Adskoe plamja (The Hell Flame). All these works reflect Efremov's life as a paleontologist and seafarer for he writes about travelers, scientists, and explorers. Na kraju Ojkumeny (On the Brink of the Inhabited World), his first large work on the history of ancient Greece and Egypt, appeared in 1949 and Putesestvie BaurdEeta (The Travels of BaurdEed), his second such work, in 1952. Efremov began a major science fiction novel in 1955 which was published in 1958 as Tumannost' Andromedy (The Andromeda Nebula). His third science fiction work, Cor Serpentis, was published in 1959 and his last major science fiction work, Cas‘Byka (The Hour of the Bull), in 1970. His experimental novel Lezvye britvy (The Edge of the Razor) appeared in 1964. Efrenov is now retired from his position in the Academy of Sci- ences to which he was elected in 1940. Efremov‘s theory and method for writing science fiction is described in the first chapter of this study. The application of this theory and method is elaborated in terms of Efremov's own science fiction works in the following chapters. Chapter II deals with Efremov's use xi 12 in artistic of scientific and technological material literature. Here I introduced and categorized a concept of ”scientific license" to denote a literary device ex- tensively used in science fiction. Chapter III discusses Efremov's criticism of contemporary anti-utOpian theories and his version of the ethical, sociological, and edu- cational role of science fiction. Chapter IV describes and criticizes Efremov's depiction of the mind, body, and behavior of man's future stages of evolution. Chapter V is my critique of scientific principles by which Efremov constructs his utopias and his future man. The designation of a literary genre as science fiction, controversial as the term might be, is compli- cated by the fact that the Russian term "nauénaja fantas- tika" has a slightly different emphasis than its English counterpart. There is complete agreement that science plays a distinctive role. The difference arises in regard to the second term. In Russian, "fantastika" stresses the phantastic aspect of the literature, that is to say, the possibility of this phantasy becoming a reality some- time in the future. Enciklopediéeskij slovar' defines "fantastika" as "the depiction of objects or phenomena, which are sharply in contrast with existing reality. 'Fantastic' images are created from elements of actual xii ,. 9’ ‘6- b Iv nil :. n.» I... .. "m. a... n‘. O'- reality and often serve to anticipate what in the future will become reality. Examples of 'fantastic' images can be found in folklore. In Russian folklore these include the flying carpet, the "autoaxe' . . . flights through the air, and any means by which one can facilitate his 13 work, etc." H. W. Flowler makes a distinction between the English words fantasy and phantasy. The former term is said to denote caprice, whim, fanciful invention; the 14 The latter to denote an imaginative, visionary notion. latter term emphasizes imagination rather than fantasy; hence it is more concrete and more possible. Phantasy is much closer to the Russian term "fantastika." I will, therefore, use phantasy to emphasize this distinction in the Russian term for science fiction; a phantast is a writer of science fiction; phantastic works are science fiction works. The now highly pOpular genre of science fiction caused a multitude of writings which vary in quality and in the degrees of generality and relevance to the present study. The "selected bibliography" refers primarily to the material cited in this study; it includes all fiction and all known theoretical writings of Efremov on fiction. The listed secondary sources are chosen strictly on the basis of their direct contribution to the discussion at the given level. Similarly, the listed reference works xiii include only those whose models may be used as classical comparisons with Efremov's theoretical systems. The reader should be aware that Efremov, a member of the communist party uses Marxist terminology and, therefore, does not always make a clear distinction be- tween the "scientific method" as such and the phiIOSOphical "scientific method" in reference to dialectical mater- ialism. The problem will be referred in Chapter V, of course, within the stated boundaries of this study, not ideology or politics. I should like to emphasize some other distinctions to be used in this study. Words beginning with capital letters will designate a particular meaning: Communism refers to Efremov's Utopian worlds; Man refers to Efremov‘s Communist man (Utopian man); Earth refers to the planet itself; Space is synonymous with cosmos as distinguished from linear space (i.e., a line between points A and B). CHAPTER I IVAN EFREMOV AND SOVIET SCIENCE FICTION 1. The Evolution of Soviet Science Fiction During the 1950's Soviet science fiction took a new turn in its thematic and stylistic orientation. The rise of this literary genre's popularity and quality was largely due to scientific, technological, and industrial momentum and the relaxation of ideological restraints on the arts. The new writers demonstrated that they had the will to experiment with the techniques of liter- ary genres. I Since World War II, science and technology have led the way in the intellectual and social development of in- dustrialized countries. Breakthroughs such as Norbert Weiner's research in cybernetics, Einstein's theories on special and general relativity, the quantum mechanics, anti-matter, lasers, aeronautics, and various Space probes--all naturally produced possibilities for the formation of new orientations in philosophy of science, sociology, psychology, the arts, and most specifically science fiction. . 7‘11. u, n 'O. I 7‘. I Science fiction discusses, describes, uses, and projects these changing features of behavior. The evolution of the genre reflects the breakthroughs in scientific consciousness Soviet science fiction, therefore, has changed noticeably from the positions it held during its early decades. The main tendency in Soviet science fiction prior to the 1950's was to popularize science.1 The nar- rative tended to be an oversimplified adventure story or a detective plot in which the characters might also repre- sent conflicting ideologies.2 During the late thirties, the forties, and the early fifties, science fiction used the existing or immedi- ately attainable gadgetry of applied science for its scien- tific and technological content. This pragmatic approach never really enabled science fiction to develop its phantastic potentials.3 Literary works of this type were largely oriented towards economic production,4 with a great emphasis on the immediate present.5 It is not sur- prising that this approach inevitably led to the develop- ment of the schematized adventure hero. The main character in such science fiction was the traditional scientist, inventor, professor, engineer, technician, worker, or detective, with such supporting characters as sailors and pilots. These characters had very little psycho— logical substantiality. They merely performed basic functions in an oversimplified plot. When a writer did try to make his characters more realistic by allowing them to display some individual weaknesses, the result was gener- ally far from plausible. This became increasingly obvious when one considered the nature of the scientific experi- ment undertaken by the hero.6 By the second half of the fifties, the change in Soviet science fiction had become quite significant. The turning point was marked by the efforts of the outstand- ing Soviet science fiction writer and paleontologist Ivan Antonovié Efremov. As a theorist he is primarily noted for his attempt to integrate the diverse features of the genre into a unified structure as opposed to the plural- istic and haphazard viewing of that realm, which had gen- erally been the case. His novel The Andromeda Nebula (1958)7 brought forth entirely new perspectives regarding the sc0pe and method of science fiction in the Soviet Union. Efremov has asserted on numerous occasions that science fiction as a genre has become, or is on its way to becoming, equal to the accepted levels of "Grand "8 The two main reasons for this are the exter- Literature. nal formative factors and the internal formative factors in science fiction. Efremov argues that the events of this century and the centuries to follow will be dominated by the advances made in science and technology. If this is so,, if man is aware of the impact of the Industrial Revolution, and if man now begins to feel the enormity of the impact cfi automation, which is a self-feeding and rapidly accel- erating process, then how does he adjust to the total fbrmative control of science and technology? A writer who portrays this process will have to find appropriate means to do so. He will be forced to develop methods that will permit him to predict or forecast the "future-present" Innnan_concepts and behavior and to show how Man will be molded into new life patterns. Efremov understands the complexity of the task. IRE sees that the accumulation of experience and technical Potentialities have contributed to the rise of science to a raew qualitative step. This situation is reflected in the consciousness of man and causes, in turn, greater interest in the genre of science fiction. Efremov notes that during the evolution of Soviet 8czience fiction there were at least three reasons why 3‘3iLence fiction did not fulfill the requirements of serious literature . During the birth of Soviet science fiction, a common Opinion was held that this type of literature serves merely to popularize scientific knowledge or to teach science to children. Both views are incorrect. The opinions are faulty because they grasp only the small— est part of all the possibilities that science fiction can give. . . . Science fiction was also regarded as entertainment and popularization of science. This is no less an archaic opinion. Such an outlook was commonly held during the twenties and thirties, when scientific knowledge had to be prOpagated.10 But how, the science fiction reader asks, does 1: his new knowledge change the dynamics of his world? The l ' 'nnl" ' 1"... ‘.I .n A: ‘ l p U.‘ (I) «I. If rl : Mu U . -c A a Q . 'I' .- mvsv , 0-1-6- A: «av-.vu v . 'II 'Dys on ‘ Q l .u I V‘Q-' .~- 0.1: 5 962. IN" a... i." ‘v (1' fl, reader has a better understanding of science; he begins to believe in it; he finds in it more satisfaction that The reader is more informed; 1 hence, he ever be fore . is more critical. He imposes requirements on science fiction which become much more rigorous as time goes on. The complexities which make up the requirements for writing good science fiction are, of course, enormous. Efremov notes that it must be self-evident that the aspects of foreseeing the future must be as diverse as real life ”The depiction must be just as boundless as Man's 12 itself. apprehension of the world." 2. Efremov's Method of Science Fiction The depiction of the diverse aspects of the "sci- entific future" with its settings and plots requires new °°°rdinates for new systems. These systems have to work and function as well as, if not better than, our "real" Obviously, the old prototypes are no longer physi- system. They ca‘11y and psychologically effective in a new world. do not possess the required character dimensions that would make them plausible in such a world. Since science fiction Se‘ttings and characters force both the writer and the reader to think in several additional dimensions, Efremov suggests that writers of science fiction have a much more difficult 't ask than other fiction writers. He notes that: For us phantasts . . . our "real subject" can be seen only in our imagination; for this future is im- measurably removed from the present day. For this *'?:* Iva ~~U III A p'n nun-v () Ill IT" I!) () x.. n. 5‘ n"‘ b "‘5. a." n - a fii n \" ‘vg. 1 ‘9 D O. Q. i" ‘9 reason, the striving towards a consciousness of this or another world always means to us long and tedious reflection over the basic tendencies of the develOp- ment of specific social structures. To cope with the insurmountable possibilities, a workable method has to be devised. Efremov proposes that there are two possible methods of prediction or structuring the future, or even reconstructing the past. They are the mechanical and the dialectical. The future will be built from the present, a pre- sent not mechanically built, but dialectically con- tinued into the future. Therefore, the notion of a strictly determined structure of the future, as seen by many writers, is sheer metaphysics——a clumsy attempt at repeating biblical prophesies. Only the dialecti— cal extrapolation of the real experience of the history of the Earth, Space, and human societies can lay claim to the scientific foresight of the possible future. 4 ‘At 'this point it is also interesting to note that Efremov oxiii-ants the dialectical approach not merely from the Present into the future but also into the past. This is evident in Efremov's works onhistorical topics such as Efll_;§he Brink of the World, The Travel of Baurdéet, and kllar Ships. The last describes a phantastic event of some 70,000,000 years ago. Although 0n the Brink of the World and The Travels \of Baudiet lack any direct scientific and technological col'l‘ltent and hence cannot be considered as science fiction in the prOper sense, these two historical novels are :- eF'Ili‘esentative of Efremov's use of the dialectical approach t c) tlime in reconstructing the past. In viewing the past, Efremov consistently makes use of today's knowledge of the past and compiles this knowledge according to the principles of dialectical materialism. He emphasizes not so much the character's actions but rather their positive beliefs and motivations. In On the Brink of the World, the main character is described as follows: The young sculptor was slowly becoming a fighter, he was now dreadful, not only as a result of his bravery and strength, not only by his endless persistence, by his desires to preserve his body and soul in the sur- rounding hell. . . . This all became possible because Pandion has com- rades. Comrades! Only he who had to face terrible, superior forces, who had to be alone far away from his homeland, in a foreign land, can understand the whole meaning of this word. Comrade! It also means friendly help and understanding, protection, common thoughts and dreams, good advice, useful reproach, support, conso- lation.1 Efremov sees comaradship as a particular characteristic Which is present in man throughout history. However, this cfilearacter trait will find its full develOpment only in the future world of the Communist society. Only strong souls could foresee the future and feel the inevitable progress and the reorganization of human life. . . . Loneliness was always thought of as being the absence of close ones, relatives, and these close peOple formed [in the past] insignifi- cant little groups often tied only by formal links. But now, when every person is close to you, when there are no borders or conventions to hamper the intercourse with Man in any part of the Planet . . the problem of solipsisim is universally overcome. 16 As a scientist Efremov sees the organic relation— 53111LE; b . . . . f etween animate and 1nan1mate matter as a baSIS or any . . . . prediction. The dialectical process follows a it ’0' CIA a ..' '.Al' . - ufi:‘ ' ".r-d .- -.a- A l I "“ 3".- on It" ..u ' In A." -‘|‘.I l u. I 3' “59: t “v .._ "\ 0.. ‘ed a“ l r... I 06! ‘v. flu v“ distinctly Spiralled path from living matter to the formation of the mind. At the end of the spiralled path where the spiral becomes a narrow corridor: Thought can appear only in a complex organism with highly developed energetics, an organism which is in a sense independent of its environment. Thus, the range of conditions necessary for the appearance of thinking beings is like a narrow corridor stretching through time and Space.17 Efremov writes that continuous growth and develOp- ment of the mind can only be achieved in a social environ- ment. But the social sphere must depend on elemental laws of natural selection.18 Man can develop properly when he and his society are in control of their destiny, for "a society is such as the development of the moral fiber of its members, which depends on the new economy."19 This is possible only under a Communist social system. For then the mind will ultimately change and modify not only nature and its environment, but finally also itself: "The main goal of society is the breeding of the physical and spiritual develOpment of man."20 How does Efremov make his forecasts? What scale of values has to be taken into consideration in order to predict? What is the apprOpriate technical method? Efremov stresses that it is evident that science fiction is not and cannot be prophetic foresight to an inegral picture of the future. In order to draw outlines of the future world, the science fiction writer must: Limit himself by subjecting his work to some one line, idea, or image. Then after choosing from the present-- from the reality surrounding his life--those phenomena which appear to herald the future, he extends those ié‘tic’i‘ifiti‘é‘liniiisw‘iili ”5332:3221 iiifirii‘i‘i’s’iii‘il . ., Let us now analyze such an approach to science fiction writing by segregating these three main principles: i.e., 1. projection of a line, idea, image; 2. choosing herald- ing material from the present; 3. develop it according to dialectical materialist principles. All three points are organically interrelated. First. The "one-track projection" in The Andromeda Nebual is apparent in the image of the future Communist society. He shows that this society, by solving every new problem, rises ad infinitum to new qualitative levels. To sOlve these problems Man requires a creative urge. It is by being creative that Man finds his fulfillment in life. Then striving for creativity caused the members of the future Communist society to expand their talents, abilities, and hopes to interplanetary and interstellar exploration, communication with other worlds,22 23 and the control of plane- tary conditions. The "line" that Efremov extends in the novel is that of a clean noosphere, and progress in the en- vironment and cosmos results in total human happiness and progress. The novel Cor Serpentis continues the same track or line as in The Andromeda Nebula. Here, however, the emphasfls is on a detailed description of the first contact in deep 10 Space between the people of the Earth Communist society and a rational life form from an unknown world. In the preface Efremov explains that he created the novel The Hour of the Bull to explain his objections to con- temporary writers who depict anti-utopian and forewarning 24 The Hour of the Bull is an answer to such science novels. fiction writers, who describe the future in somber colors, in catastrophies and failures and who stress ”unpleasant- 25 On the other hand, Efremov also wishes ness" in general. to diacuss the development of the future Communist society, because he had found too many science fiction works which depicted happy future societies that came into being as if by magic. These writers portray characters in such utOpian societies just as if the characters were their contemporar- ies, transposing them directly into a future setting. These heroes have character deficiencies that are nearly as bad as those of the peOple living today--their imperfect ances- 26 These heroes, Efremov writes, are "unbalanced, im- tors. polite, talkative and plainly ironic . . . bearing greater resemblance to those who did not complete their studies, the poorly brought up loafers of today."27 In The Hour of the Bull Efremov wanted to point out three affirmations made by Lenin: (a) The world of matter is unfathomably complex and it will require great effort to acquire knowledge of it. (b) The Change to a classless Communist society and the reali- zation of the dream of jumping "from the kingdom of \ abod‘ A...‘ l . unio- D ..1,,: up. g .. .11. i he. '\ 11 necessity into the kingdom of freedom" will not be easy and will demand from man the highest discipline and con- scious responsibility for every action he makes. (c) Capitalist economy ravages the natural resources of the planet.28 Second. With respect to selecting material for his creativity, Efremov notes in an interview that the 'process of choosing detail from available phenomena presents distinctions in the quality of imagination, distinctions about which a writer of science fiction must be aware. If a writer who wants to write sits down at the table simple because he decided suddenly to fantasize, assuming that fantasizing is easy since there must be no controls over what he imagines, this type of "writer" will write not phantastic works but will be doing simple fantasizing. It will be leisurely fancy, which is far from being literature.29 Efremov reminds the science fiction writer that science fiction was originally a novel, a novel which was dedicated to the discoveries of the Earth. For Jules Verne, science was a "competent, full-blooded character." Efremov believed that the merit of Jules Verne, or any other phantast, lies not in his creating "Nautilus" but rather, in this case, in his outlining in detail the scientific prerequisites for traveling through the oceans.30 Efremov suggests that science fiction writers should create images of the future based on such knowl- edge of the future as is available. . . ,. n.- .9... 1 5" a IdlioH ’I, 1'" 0—3. .4- n 1" I": n.- 'r‘ I e.g‘. "V o. 5;” "VI. ‘2‘. -.l_ A‘ . ‘A "fi‘ I w... t‘~ ‘ Q a'n ‘l.‘ Scie 12 Efremov criticized contemporary Western science fiction writers for removing from science fiction the very logic which distinguishes this genre from others. He states: To take science out of science fiction means a return to prereligious fantasizing, to the camp-fires of paleontological caves, where former hunters used to tell stories about winged dragons and white uni- corns. It is interesting to see that "pure" science fiction, published in the West, does not differ very much from free fabrications. Its heros fly on dragons, get themselves into unrealistic societies on some . . . planet, turning themselves, in the process, into 31 savages. Logic, causality, dialectics are violated. Efremov stresses that if a writer allows scientific or loqical errors in the construction of his science fiction story the credibility of the story will be ques- tioned. To Efremov, scientific mistakes and inaccuracies are "absolutely intolerable," not only in science fiction 32 For the sake of scientific but in every literature. credibility, Soviet science fiction avoids all sorts of "rubbish--mystics, demons, werewolves, cosmic gangsters, "33 The element which essentially and frightening murders. distinguishes science fiction from other literary genres is perhaps found in the plausible logic of the science- technoloqy structure within the science fiction content. This structure acts directly or indirectly as an agent upon the social and human patterns of behavior, i.e., science fiction has to show how scientific achievements change man and transform nature and society. The process