Re: Why Space Empires?
- From: Tux Wonder-Dog <wes.parish@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 00:14:08 +1300
CharlesRCaplan@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Why is the "Space Empire" so popular in SF? It seems that the vast
majority of all "far future" SF (which I suppose most of which is
Space Opera) have some sort of Monarchy and/or Feudalistic system of
government. Is it just a literary crutch or is it more a reasoned
response to the problem of ruling a large geographically
(astrographically) separated polity? Is it just some sort of
(misplaced?) nostalgia for the forms and protocols that attach to such
a system?
I'll leave out stories that require a character have a direct loyal
fealty to the "Galactic Ruler." (For example a recent Webber novel _In
Fury Born_ where the protagonist must have a direct loyalty and fealty
to the emperor to explain some of her motivations and actions.) I will
grant that the needs of the story, to explain character motivations,
trumps just about anything else.
But why so many monarchies when there are so many other government
types to choose from? (I'll not list all of them, you can try (http://
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_forms_of_government) for a nice list.)
There must be some romanticism that I'm missing.
Ruritania Rulez! Nostaglia Noticez! And, Half-wits Hold-out and Die-hard!
Seriously, people just don't think hard enough. One of the more
credible "space empires" out there - Cordwainer Smith's Instrumentality of
Mankind cycle - doesn't have an "empire" as such - his subworld is held
together by the Instrumentality, a vast and extremely powerful "mandarin"
class. Heredity is banished in several places, and merit is the only thing
that keeps the Instrumentality going. Policing its own internal corruption
keeps it together. Oh, and instant messages cost a fortune - quite
literally - so Cordwainer Smith did take seriously that side of economic
life; ditto for instant journeying.
A book I've recently read on Islam, Karen Armstrong's "Islam" gives as the
major reason why the various Islamic (and other agrarian) empires collapsed
because they outran their economic and thus social base. So how would that
analysis translate to an "empire" that spanned Earth, planets around Alpha
Centauri, Tau Ceti, etc? What would be the unifying features? How would
those unifying features work? What would work to divide such an society?
Etc.
These are the sort of question most SF writers who use the "empire" tripe,
tend not to think about. Isaac Asimov being the prize donkey of an example
in this case - he has a Galactic Empire, but all his action takes place
within a few square yards within the local galactic New York suburb. It
can be painful to read at times.
(I've made various attempts to use that "empire" theme myself, but distance
always defeats it. What means it that the Four Planets - two dual planets
within an F1's Habitable Zone - make up an "empire" or federation? Only
that they talk when they must, and don't go to war against each other - at
mean orbital speed? The very idea is daft! -, and permit each other's
citizens the same rights they have for their own citizens. It's in the
cracks in that set-up that all the hairy action takes place. ;)
Wesley Parish
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Why Space Empires?
- From: James Nicoll
- Re: Why Space Empires?
- References:
- Why Space Empires?
- From: CharlesRCaplan
- Why Space Empires?
- Prev by Date: IRC channel set up
- Next by Date: Re: Why Space Empires?
- Previous by thread: Re: Why Space Empires?
- Next by thread: Re: Why Space Empires?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
