Conjunctions

In a previous post I volunteered the opinion that it is irrelevant whether climate change is caused by humans or not.  I’ve been getting some comments and criticism for that statement, and it is clear to me that I did not express myself very well.  Actually, it is more like I have some half-baked notion that might still develop into an idea if I nurture it properly, maybe.  So let me try again.

The question as to the causes of climate change is a scientific question that will and must be answered through the application of the scientific method.  I am no scientist, merely a concerned citizen.  My understanding and knowledge of climate change will necessarily be limited.  What is important is that I have sufficient understanding to be able to accept and deal with facts resulting from climate change.  From that perspective, it is irrelevant whether climate change is wholly or partially caused by humans and what the exact model or mechanism for that influence is, the facts and future problems resulting from climate change (rising sea levels, famine) are such that we need to act on them anyway.  Let the scientists further debate the details, we cannot postpone taking action. I think part of the problem here is that while people are arguing about climate change, a specific phenomenon, I live in a world where environmental disaster have become a serious threat, whether caused by climate change, pollution, resource depletion or whatever.  The issue should be broader than only climate change, but rather overall environmental degradation. 

Note that while I accept there can be discussion about the extent of human influence, I implicitly reject any notion that humans have no effect on the environment.  That really seems so illogical it borders on lunacy (and I’m sorry, there are religious nuts who hold this opinion).  I know conventional wisdom should not be trusted, but in this case I challenge the deniers to prove conventional wisdom incorrect.  Everything I know tells me that actions have consequences.

It is only from this perspective that I find the question to what extent humans caused climate change irrelevant.  Perhaps I should rather call it a diversion.  Maybe it is not so much the argument that is irrelevant, but rather the people arguing that are themselves irrelevant -  the same people obstructing environmental reform, from opposition to Cap and Trade to the dumping of chemical waste, over-fishing, deforestation …  The list of problems goes on and on, and every moment something more is lost. 

So, this is rather a plea to politicians to stop arguing and to get relevant.

One notable characteristic of serious Science Fiction readers (as opposed to viewers), is a sense of being slighted by the Mainstream Literature’s refusal to acknowledge that our favorite genre often exceeds it’s boundaries and contain works of great imagination and artistry.  Science Fiction even has it’s own special term for that surprising combination of illumination and confusion one experiences on completion of a truly great novel: we call it ‘sense of wonder’.   For me, the sense of wonder is then often strengthened by a sense of affirmation, making me want to shout out ‘See!  Isn’t SF just great?’

And so, having just completed Iain M. Banks’ Excession, it is time for me to get up on the pulpit and shout it out again: “See!  Isn't SF just great!”.

The having-just-read-a-great-novel feeling can be likened to having your consciousness extended,  but with your system not yet recalibrated to use the new extensions,  as if you have some new knowledge but lack the understanding of that knowledge for now.   I am really looking forward to the next few weeks when that understanding will hopefully reveal itself.  It is at times like this that I think the ideal job would be staff at an Eng. Lit. department researching SF.  It would be satisfying to spend some quality time digging into this work.

My immediate reaction?  Banks’ use of language and skill with style and voice is masterful.  And above all: supremely witty. The dialog between the Minds was some of the best writing I’ve ever encountered.  The plot seems slow but has an inevitability that turns it into high drama.

But most of all, Excession made me ponder the Culture, and it’s implications.  One of the reasons why SF is so great, for me, is that it illuminates society and history.  To some extend a social historian can use SF as a locus from where different aspects of study can be incorporated and tied together, with the added benefit that art can offer an understanding beyond reason.

Banks’ Culture novels form an excellent prism through which to focus back on their times – the 90;s Clinton/New Labour era.  Thinking back to the period, I remember being filled with a possible certainty things have improved and will continue to improve, a feeling that was common among young progressives.  Technology and Dance was about to liberate us all (yeah!).  To some extent we in the West came to think ourselves as close to a post-scarcity, hedonistic, benevolent, sophisticated and good society as possible, given you know the usual post-modern caveat that there really is no ‘good’ as such … 

And I can’t help being embarrassed in retrospect by the moral dilemmas we had to face at the time.  This passage, shortly after the start of the war with the Affront, reminds me of a discussion  in the cafeteria as the Bosnian War enfolded:

The girl was indignant with a kind of ferocity probably only somebody from the Peace faction could muster in such a situation.  “But we’re the Peace faction,’ she protested for the fifth or sixth time.  ‘We’re … we’re like the true Culture, the way it used to be …’ …

‘But everybody knows we won’t have anything to do with war. It’s just so unfair!’  She flicked her short black hair and stared into the drug bowl she held.  It was fuming too. ‘Fucking war!’  She sounded close to tears. (p.291)

Brilliant!  Encapsulates some of the wistfulness of that decade of optimism, and more the pity that the decade following it turned out to be such an Affront.