Detective Fiction: From Victorian Sleuths to the Present

During my holiday absence, I slowed my typical consumption of academic materials. Even though the postings in my little blog are not, by their very nature, a job (despite the laborious effort), I needed a short break! To paraphrase the old adage, however, the brain wants what the brain wants. I found myself slipping away from my preoccupation with remaining unoccupied: Listening to lectures on my mp3 player while others at family gatherings sat around espousing the worst kind of tripe about the American government, the United Nations, the Pope, etc.

I tried to pick a lecture series that seemed to be more entertaining fare than my typical consumption. Thus, with very little forethought, I began The Modern Scholar course Detective Fiction: From Victorian Sleuths to the Present.  Like Scholar lecture series I have completed before, Detective Fiction is divided into 14 lectures each with a length of approximately 30 minutes. The lecture series contains the following lectures: Lecture 1 Mysterious Origins, Lecture 2 Arthur Conan Doyle, Sherlock Holmes, and the Victorian Era, Lecture 3 The Queen of Crime: Agatha Christie and the Golden Age, Lecture 4 Gifted Amateurs: Academics to Zoologists, Lecture 5 Private Investigators and Hard-boiled Heroes, Lecture 6 Cops, Capers, and Police Procedurals, Lecture 7 Spies Among Us: Espionage and Techno-thrillers, Lecture 8 In the Teeth of the Evidence: Lawyers and Legal Eagles, Lecture 9 Medicine for Murder: The Medical Mystery, Lecture 10 Probing the Past: Historical Detective Fiction, Lecture 11 Women of Mystery: Beyond Female Intuition, Lecture 12 International Intrigue: Detective Fiction Goes Global, Lecture 13 Investigating Identity: Ethnic Sleuths, and Lecture 14 Regional Sleuths and Future Trends in Detective Fiction.

The presenter for the course was M. Lee Alexander, Ph D., a visiting assistant professor of English at the College of William and Mary. Her CV indicated that she teaches detective fiction, creative writing, and “Tolkien and His Circle,” a course about the group of authors called “the Inklings.” Professor Alexander also teaches English as a second language (ESL) courses for graduate students. She has authored many scholarly articles and poems, and a chapbook of poetry called Observatory (2007). Dr. Alexander has presented scholarly papers concerning detective fiction, emphasizing the links between modern popular culture and the classic tradition at international conferences, including “Mr. Monk Meets Sherlock Holmes: Disability and the Consulting Detective” at Arthur Conan Doyle and Sherlock Holmes: Their Cultural Afterlives Conference at the University of Hull, England (2009), and “To Make a House a Holmes: Sherlockian Subtext of House, MD” at Sherlock Holmes: The Man and His Worlds Conference, Bennington College, Vermont (2010).

Detective fiction, as we know it, has its beginnings in American literature. Some of the first instances are Edgar Allan Poe’s “Murders in the Rue Morgue,” “Mystery of Marie Rogêt,” and “The Purloined Letter” in Collected Tales and Poems of Edgar Allan Poe. However, William Godwin, an English journalist, political philosopher, and writer, is considered by many to have written the first detective novel, Caleb Williams in 1794. It describes the story of a wealthy squire named Ferdinando Falkland. Falkland tries to ruin the life of his secretary Caleb Williams after he discovers a secret about his employer’s past.

The big name in detective fiction, is, of course, Sherlock Holmes—the iconic character created by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. The Holmes stories were written in the Victorian era. Holmes defining characteristic as a detective was observation and deduction. The character was always the smartest man in the room. Other interesting facets of Holmes’ character were his eccentricities. Modern psychology might consider him to have Asperger's syndrome with a healthy dose of narcissism bordering on personality disorder. While these characteristics might have been debilitating in “real life” they often serve as catalysts for Holmes’ amazing abilities. Holmes often self-medicates, particularly with opium.

The rest of the course looks at how diverse detective fiction has grown since the time of Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes. There are numerous subgenres of detective fiction—some for animal lovers, some for would-be lawyers, international sleuths—you name it, there is probably a book out there incorporating whatever interest, hobby, or disability possible into the work of professional, private, and amateur detectives. The field shows no sign of slowing its expansion.

As a side note, I was surprised to find that many detective fiction authors have created works that are considered genuine literature. I found it surprising because it is more often thought of as “pulp” or cheap fiction. Overall, I found this to be a fun and inspiring course. I am even considering writing a detective fiction novel myself. I think it would be quite interesting work, as I loved being a professional investigator when I worked for a governmental agency. I think most avid readers would find this series of lectures to be interesting and enriching.

Oh, and happy learning!!!

A History of Ancient Israel: From the Patriarchs to the Romans

I recently completed George Washington University Professor Eric H. Cline’s course, A History ofAncient Israel, part of The Modern Scholar Series. Professor Cline is the chair of the Department of Classical and Semitic Languages and Literature at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. Professor Cline holds a joint appointment serving both as an

associate professor in the Classics/Semitics Department in addition to the Anthropology Department. As a prolific researcher, Dr. Cline has authored or edited seven books and more than seventy articles and book reviews. I found his presentation style to be adequate. His voice is not unpleasant and he speaks smoothly with focus and clarity.

Israel has been and continues to be one of the most important nations of people in history. Any conflict in the volatile region of the Middle East is typically interpreted in the United States in terms of the effects on the security of Israel. This may be due to the significance of Israel to three of the most prominent monotheistic religions around the globe: Judaism, Islam, and Christianity. As Professor Cline indicated in the introduction to the course, “Israel is steeped in history and conflict, much of which is known through the tales of biblical figures such as Moses, David, Solomon, and, of course, Jesus Christ.”

I admit some trepidation when I began the course. How, I wondered, can such a complex history and geopolitical situation be encapsulated in a 14-lecture course? One of the ways in which Professor Cline accomplished this is through a streamlined organization that didn’t spend a lot of time fixating on favorite topics but instead ushered the learner onto the next important topic and how it relates to the larger picture for which the course constantly strives.

The basic organization of the material is chronological. The professor began with the quasi-mythological beginnings of the Hebrew people: Abraham and the patriarchs—the familiar “Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph” lineage from scripture. He asserted that, while the Hebrew scripture sometimes seems to be a history, it is inappropriate to understand it in this way, but rather, a mythological origin story with possible roots in real historical events.

After spending some time discussing the importance and the difficulty of Abraham as a literary and/or historical figure and following his lineage for a few generations, Professor Cline discussed the controversial topic of the Exodus. The Exodus, described in Scripture by the book of the same name, indicates that the people of Israel were held in some form of slavery by the Egyptians—having initially been well-treated due to the prominence of Joseph among Egyptians. However, a new pharaoh took over rule of the Egyptian empire and did not hold the Israelites in the same regard. At this point the controversial figure of Moses emerges in scripture. The legend is that Moses was given up by his mother, a Hebrew woman, and floated down the Nile in a basket where he was taken in by a princess of Egypt.

Moses had some stature among Egyptians—many contemporary believers hold that he was considered a “Prince of Egypt.” However, this is unlikely as there is no historical record of Moses and the Egyptians of this period were very good record keepers. The familiar tale is that Moses sided with the Hebrews against their Egyptian oppressors, performing miracles, delivering warnings and plagues to pharaoh who eventually let the Hebrews leave. Their destination was a land called Canaan, a land already inhabited and that must therefore be taken by force. Professor Cline discussed the possible circuitous route taken by the Hebrews as well as the probable exaggeration of their numbers. The legend holds that the Hebrews wandered in the desert for 40 years and Moses died before ever seeing Canaan, the Promised Land.

Even among the Hebrews there was some degree of strife. For example, Jacob, who was renamed Israel in scripture, was born twelve sons. Each of these sons was the progenitor of a “tribe of Israel.” Thus, there were 12 tribes of Israel, each named after one of the sons. This would later become important as some tribes consolidated or were lost to the mythology. By the time of the first monarch, Saul, the tribes had split into 2 kingdoms: Judah and Israel. 

Thus, the Hebrews did eventually reach and conquer Canaan where they set up a civilization that eventually became a monarchy. The most prominent of their monarchs was David who created a strong unified kingdom of both Judah and Israel. He was introduced with the familiar story of “David versus Goliath” in which he killed a taunting Philistine warrior who stood around 9 feet tall when he was just a teenager. David was anointed future king of Israel by the prophets, which did not make the sitting king, Saul, very happy. Saul sought to kill David but to no avail and David did become king. David was considered a great king but there were obvious failings of character, temptations, and overall he was demonstrated in scripture to be a flawed but sincere leader. Professor Cline indicated that there have been some indications in archaeological findings that David was a real person.

David’s son Solomon was considered a wise man in scripture. His great accomplishment was the building of a great temple where the Hebrews could worship God. This was built where the modern day holy site of Islam called “The Dome of the Rock” currently stands in Israel. Solomon was also shown to be a man that was prone to human frailty—following after the false gods of many of his numerous wives and concubines. However, Solomon did also keep a strong unified kingdom among the Israelites and increasing the wealth of the kingdom.

Professor Cline also devoted an entire lecture to the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark has fascinated believer and non-believer, adventurer and scientist for centuries. Does it still exist? Did it ever really exist? What was it? What was the source of its power? None of these questions have answers—only hypotheses. However, it is reasonable to assume that the quest for knowledge about the Ark will continue for the foreseeable future.

After Solomon’s death, his kingdom split into Israel in the north above Jerusalem and Judah in the south, including Jerusalem. They existed like this for approximately 200 years but both kingdoms felt continued threats from the rise of powerful empires such as the neo-Assyrians. Around the 7^th Century BCE, the kingdom of Israel fell to the Neo-Assyrians and Jerusalem was attacked but Judah stood and prospered for a while longer. It was the Neo-Babylonians and Nebuchadnezzar to whom Judah would eventually fall. This led to what is commonly referred to as the Babylonian exile. Later the Persians and Greeks would threaten the area, until finally the Romans extended their empire to encompass the area.

This is necessarily a brief survey of a survey course. However, I think any student who has a Judeo-Christian background would find the material very interesting. There is a focus on historicity but not to the exclusion of the importance of religion and myth—just the way I like a study of a culture to be undertaken. How else could we hope to learn anything about a people without knowing what was important to them? What did they live for? What did they die for? These are rather dramatic notions but I think that Professor Cline answers them quite cleverly. I felt as though the course provided twice as much material as any other series of 14 comparable lectures—but not in such a way that my brain felt overloaded!

Of course, I love to learn, so I am easily pleased. Give me a lecture on a distant people from a distant land. Give me enough detail and they start to come to life in my mind. This is the joy of learning. This is why I love lectures, books, TED talks, documentaries. Hopefully, you do as well. If you get a chance, check this course out. And, as always, happy learning!!!

Evolutionary Psychology I

I recently completed The Modern Scholar © series Evolutionary Psychology I by Professor Allen D. MacNeill of Cornell University. MacNeill completed a B.S. in biology and an Master’s degree in science education at Cornell University in 1977. He currently teaches the support course for introductory biology at Cornell University where he has lectured since 1976 and is currently a senior lecturer in the Learning Strategies Center. Professor MacNeill also teaches evolution for the Cornell Summer Session and the introductory evolution course for non-science majors. He is also involved in drama as an off-Broadway actor.

Evolutionary Psychology I is very strong right out of the gate. The first five lectures are a revelation. The material in these lectures is a unique blend of biology and psychology with a strong history of science component weaved throughout the lectures. Unfortunately, the “wow” factor (excuse the terminology, I accidentally spent a few minutes on TMZ.com earlier this evening) tends to wane in the later lectures.

Like all Modern Scholar series, Evolutionary Psychology I is a 14 lecture series, with each lecture lasting approximately 30 minutes. The recording and production quality is excellent. Professor MacNeill is one of the best “public” speakers I’ve heard in recorded lectures—perhaps this ability is enhanced by his background in the dramatic arts. The pacing of the course is well done and material very well organized. It is the level of detail presented in this introductory course in the last half of the lecture series that seems to make the course “bog down” under its own weight.

Most of the lectures cover the evolution of the brain among various animals leading up to human beings and the corresponding capacity for complex behaviors that, according to evolutionary psychologists can tell us a lot about human nature. One of the more interesting facts is that these scientists use study of animals as well as humans to understand and try to explain human behavior under a variety of circumstances.

MacNeill explains that the field of evolutionary psychology, “the scientific study of how human nature has evolved” is a relatively new discipline. The early material sketches a brief historical study of the characteristics of both traditional human psychology and the more specialized and newer field of evolutionary psychology. The instructor also introduces and elaborates on the basic analytical methods and theoretical frameworks evolutionary psychologists use in their research.

From this beginning, Professor MacNeill follows the continued historical development of the field, from its nascent emergence to contemporary applications in fields such as genetic engineering and neuroscience. Evolutionary psychology has its roots in particular fields such as cognitive psychology and evolutionary biology and attempts to combine the methods and theories from these fields to understand human behavior and its purposes. As a brief aside, there is an interesting discussion of the early American preference for behavioral psychology over the cognitive model which positioned American study behind Europe. Evolutionary psychologists assert, as their name suggests, that the human brain is an organ similar to any other but with the unique emergent property we call “the mind.” The brain, they believe, evolved in relation to the environmental challenges human beings have faced throughout their history as a species.

Thus, the bulk of Evolutionary Psychology I examines the history of the field, its primary theories, and the unique research methods used in the field. These perspectives are applied to human behavior at the level of the individual, the family, and other groups. Professor MacNeill then explains how evolutionary psychology applies to the essentials of human life: food, shelter, clothing, and safety (or health). He discusses the ways in which groups of social animals, such as primates, are organized. Importantly, MacNeill examines the role of natural selection in social organization.

The latter part of the lecture series concerns the theoretical foundation for the evolution of cooperation among humans as well as their complex sexual behaviors. A considerable amount of time is spent evaluating the concepts of monogamy and polygamy. (A small warning here, as the professor pronounces these words “mono-gammy” and “polly-gammy” which sounds very unnatural to me). MacNeill also reconfigures the definition of monogamy and polygamy. According to him, any person who has sexual relations (or “mates”) with more than one partner at any time during the course of his or her life—whether by divorce, death of significant other, or any other reason, they are polygamous. Thus, according to this revised definition, Professor MacNeill declares that humans are largely polygamous. I must admit, I had a bit of a problem with the way in which he reached this conclusion. Finally, the course considers the implications of evolutionary psychology and its theories for child rearing and mate selection.

Overall, I think that the course material is interesting and exotic enough to recommend it for at least a cursory review. I studied psychology in quite a few courses for my initial undergraduate degree but most of this material was new to me. Likewise, my career in counseling and social service work exposed me to even more developments and subfields of psychology but I must admit that much of the material discussed in this course was foreign to me—one of the reasons that I found at least the first half of the course refreshing and fascinating. There is another 14-lecture course by The Modern Scholar Company appropriately titled Evolutionary Psychology II. I will more than likely listen to, read, and review its materials at some later date as well.

Until the next time, happy learning! By the way, if you have completed an interesting course, lecture series, TED talk, seminar, training, book, or any other learning experience and would like to share it, please e-mail me or leave a comment in the comments section. Criticisms and responses are always welcome to this and other postings as well.

S.I.P.

Political Theory: The Classic Texts and Their Continuing Relevance

I recently completed the course offered by the Modern Scholar on Political Theory. Like all offerings by Recorded Books, this course comprised seven CDs each with two approximately 30-minute lectures for a total of 7 hours of lecture time. Despite being a bit more formulaic than its rival The Great Courses, selections from the Modern Scholar bookshelf are always dense with information and efficient in its delivery. This course on political theory was no exception.

The instructor was Professor Joshua Kaplan, who earned his master’s in the subject at the University of Chicago and his doctorate at UC-Santa Cruz. He has taught political theory to students at the University of Notre Dame since 1987. Professor Kaplan is well spoken with an even diction and articulates in the way only an expert in the field could possibly be.

Dr. Kaplan describes political theory as “slow food in a fast food world.” We crave simple, easy answers but often analysis is highly complex. In general, political theory does not dictate a set of actions or behaviors that lead to statistically probable outcomes. Instead, it gives us perspective, helps us think about the issues, and gives us the ability “to act with purpose and vision.”

To enlighten the student with a survey of thought across the nations, kingdoms, and states and the times in which they held sway, the professor surveys a number of essential classical texts. The first text he recommends, highly recommends I might add, is an essay by George Orwell titled, “Politics and the English Language.” While he does refer to this text, I regrettably did not complete this reading during the course due to constraints imposed by other obligations. I am so fond of Orwell that after I do read the piece I might post an entry examining it by itself, or in retrospect to the completed course. Another recommendation, which I have previously read several times, is Oedipus the King by the Greek tragedian Sophocles.

An important early point that Dr. Kaplan makes is that “The first thing to understand about political theory is that it is not a collection of doctrines or assertions about politics, but rather a way of understanding the significance of political events.” This is important to keep in mind during the seven hour lecture series. There are as many ways of looking at politics as there are politicians—or at least it seems that way often times.

I found this course somewhat nostalgic as the bulk of texts and material was contained within my wide-ranging and near useless (only joking, folks!) undergraduate education in the liberal arts. After a brief recounting of how horrible was poor Oedipus’s life the professor moves on to less morbid Greeks. (Yes, according to my doctoral education that is the correct way to render the possessive of a singular proper noun ending in the letter “s.” I do believe it is a sad comment on the English language, myself, but pick up a copy of The Elements of Style by Strunk and White and please prove me wrong. I’ll enjoy it!)

Plato begins the discussion proper—and doesn’t he always? I must admit, I was very glad that I paid attention during my Introduction to Philosophy course way back in 1995. Those Greek gentlemen, particularly Plato and Aristotle, have oriented me time and again. You know, an annoying party trick just might be to wait until the discussion turns political (or philosophical, or scientific, artistic, etc.—just wait until you are in need of a refill) and then with a surreptitious interjection, and in your most refined voice proclaim, “Well you know, it all goes back to Plato’s Republic…” Coincidentally, that is the path of the course in Lectures 2 and 3; let us remember the lesson of that great text—that justice is within ourselves. Then, we move on—still in ancient Greece, however, we now consider the historian Thucydides who chronicled the Peloponnesian War. Rather than review the tangled web of that conflict, let us simply say that Thucydides considered himself a realist, espousing something along the lines of, “might makes right.”

Next, Dr. Kaplan reviews Aristotle’s Politics, which (I think rather naively) holds that the citizen is in partnership with all other citizens—kind of like a team—in which the good of the polis is superior to what’s good for any individual. Next, the course considers Machiavelli’s The Prince which essentially asserts that it is often beneficial to the ruler and the state to behave like Richard Nixon when necessary and when power is at stake. (For a good crash course in Machiavellian politics taken to the extreme for drama’s sake, check out the thrilling Netflix show House of Cards which is based on a British TV show of the same name but it suffers from the absence of Kevin Spacey and Robin Wright.

Now, we move on to the idea of a social contract theory, first espoused in Leviathan by essentially the father of modern political science, Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes’s thinking was foundational in what we now know as Western political thought. He introduced such revolutionary and dangerous ideas such as the “equality of all men” (apologies to the better half of the species, as we now know that all men are created equal and all are equally inferior to women), and representative government.

Another seminal social contract theorist was Jean-Jacques Rousseau who had a pretty rough up-bringing. Rousseau was a truly revolutionary thinker whose concepts about the right to private property and the nature of human beings had a bit of influence in starting the French Revolution. He was also somehow influential on Cambodian madman Pol Pot, a genocidal maniac who surely must have severely misread some of Rousseau.

From social contract theory, Dr. Kaplan considers the revolutionary ideas espoused anonymously in The Federalist Papers. This is another area in which my undergraduate education provided a bit of background as I did my senior thesis on “The Political Philosophy of James Madison.” I won’t digress much at present but there is both an elitist as well as a careful protectiveness of the nascent republic throughout Madison’s thought. It might do many Americans much good to undertake a quick review of at least some of Madison’s careful thought.

Two of the most fascinating lectures in the entire series are given on the penultimate disc. Both concern Alexis de Tocqueville and his work Democracy in America. Despite its concern with American democracy, de Tocqueville’s audience was in France. His book was very generous toward the US and thus it became popular and made him something of a celebrity. Essentially, de Tocqueville described America in usually glowing terms in an attempt to reassure the French that a fading aristocracy and societal equality would not threaten utter ruin: Just look at the United States!

Next, Professor Kaplan turned his discussion to the always-controversial Karl Marx. Yet, he prefaced his lecture with one of the most brilliant caveats I have ever heard given regarding Marx. Kaplan said, “Karl Marx is one of the most difficult political theorists for us to read and

understand. One problem is that we feel compelled to take sides when we read Marx, to reject him or to convert to Marxist. We don’t run into this problem when we read Aristotle, for example, but it is hard for us to accept the idea that we can simply learn from Marx without signing up or rejecting him out of hand.” I could not agree more—and it makes me feel much better about the months-long experience of reading all 140 lbs of Das Kapital when I was studying macroeconomic theory for pre-dissertation research several years ago. (Don’t worry, I was a Keynesian from the start! But I still had to wade through the entirety of Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations as well as John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty. Well, back to Marx, while communism was a stark over-reach, Marx’s criticisms of exploitation by the owners of the means of production against laborers were spot-on.

Dr. Kaplan closes the lecture series with a discussion of game theory, the predominant mode of political analysis during the 20^th century. Classic examples of non-cooperation such as the “Problem of the Commons” or the “Prisoner’s dilemma” gave mathematic-minded analysts insight into rational choice behavior. It also might have contributed to the absurd levels of the nuclear arms race. However, all in all, game theory proved to be a very useful tool for providing insight into human decision making.

I would definitely recommend this course to anyone who has the opportunity to listen. It seems more like a history course than a theory course but that is primarily due to the survey nature. It does help if you, like me, have some familiarity with most of the theorists and their works prior to the discussion. I think you would enjoy it just as much if you lacked such knowledge but you would find yourself checking Wikipedia quite often to deepen your understanding of certain theoretical perspectives, timeframes, and personalities. A very enjoyable course from a knowledgeable professor! Happy learning!

Sci Fi Literature and Academic Lectures

In at least one previous posting I have mentioned my love for professionally recorded college lectures such as those provided by The Teaching Company. Another great source of professional quality audio and video lectures is from Recorded Books’ The Modern Scholar audio book series. I have listened to numerous courses from each company and find that almost without exception each course yields a profound intellectual experience. Although with this posting I intend to review the latest course I’ve completed, just for the fun of it I thought I would list those courses I’ve at least listened to, sometimes delving deeper into the accompanying bibliographies and suggested readings. Incidentally, I do not own most of these discs but held a state library card and was able to obtain many titles from there or other loans.

The Teaching Company list is the longer of the two, comprising 29 lecture series. In some instances I have given the brief title. I have placed an asterisk beside titles that I have found particularly interesting. America’s Religious History, The Old Testament, The New Testament, The Great Ideas of Philosophy, Your Deceptive Mind: A Scientific Guide to Critical Thinking*, A Skeptic’s Guide to American History, Christian Religion and Fundamentalism, History of the Bible, Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, Great Leaders: Winston Churchill, Historical Jesus, American Civil War, Machiavelli in Context, The Self Under Siege* (by Prof. Rick Roderick an awesome scholar who is now unfortunately deceased), Philosophy and Human Values, Nietzsche and the Postmodern* (also by Prof. Roderick), Skepticism 101 (by Michael Schermer from Scientific American), Philosophy of Mind, No Excuses: Existentialism and the Meaning of Life*, Elements of Jazz*, Doctors: History of Scientific Medicine, Early Christianity, Hitler’s Empire*, Perspectives of Abnormal Psychology, Biology and Human Behavior*, The Story of Human Language, Understanding the Fundamentals of Music, Will to Power: Nietzsche, and The Art of War.

The Teaching Company titles can vary in length and depth. For example, if memory serves correctly, The Self Under Siege (my favorite lectures of all time), consists of eight lectures each approximately 45 minutes. The American Civil War, on the other hand, has sixty thirty-minute lectures in the series. The Modern Scholar list has 20 titles. Each title has two one-hour lectures on each of seven compact discs, making these offerings far more standardized in format and presentation. Another difference is that Teaching Company lectures are presented to a live studio audience while Modern Scholar lectures are not. As an aside to the above comments, I have tried to listen to The Self Under Siege at least once per year since I first bought it on cassette tape in 1998.

The Modern Scholar lectures I have completed, with asterisks by the favorites, are as follows: Understanding Movies*, Astronomy I*, Anthropology of Religion, Crime Scene Investigation I, The Philosophy of Thomas Aquinas, Philosophy of Religion, The American Presidency, Big Picture MBA, The Cold War, The Dead Sea Scrolls, Ethics (by Prof. Peter Kreeft), Genetics*, Jazz*, Literary Journalism*, Rock and Roll History I, Native America, Principles of Economics, Rethinking our Past (by Prof. James Loewen, author of Lies My Teacher Told Me—an excellent book you should definitely read), World War I, and From Here to Infinity: An Exploration of Science Fiction Literature.

It is this last title, Science Fiction Literature that I most recently completed and would like to explore somewhat in depth in the current posting. I am always trying to expand my intellectual palate when possible, so obtaining these lectures was not necessarily a priority for me as I have never been a frequent sci-fi reader. This was more about learning what makes others sci-fi fanatics. The course is written and presented by Professor Michael D.C. Drout of Wheaton College.

Science Fiction has a focus on realism even when describing such seemingly impossible technologies such as interstellar travel. The roots of the genre go as far back as Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. But Jules Verne was the first true, great science fiction writer, imagining technology that has been realized but only dreamt when Verne wrote. H.G. Wells was another early sci-fi writer who used 19^th century technology to project future science and society and the relationship between people and animals (such as The Island of Dr.Moreau).

The 1930s saw the rise of science fiction magazines that gave rise to a new crop of writers in the genre. Amazing Stories and great sci-fi editor John Campbell’s Astounding Stories. The 1930s also introduced H.P. Lovecraft who explored occult, horror and shock within the science fiction framework. Lovecraft created a mythos by linking disparate stories to create a larger meta-narrative.

The 1940s sci-fi, argues Drout, was significantly influenced by World War Two. He looks at Isaac Asimov’s The Big and the Little and I, Robot; John W. Campbell’s Who Goes There? and (as editor) The First Astounding Science Fiction Anthology; Lester del Rey’s Nerves; and Theodore Sturgeon’s Killdozer! Characters in these stories have a militaristic orientation and there is an emphasis on scientific wonders being treated as mundane. One of the lasting implications from Asimov’s writings are the famous three laws of robotics: 1.A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2.A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

In the late 1940s and the 1950s science fiction was dominated by what Drout labels as the “Big Three”: Robert A. Heinlein, Isaac Asimov, and Arthur C. Clarke. Each of these writers created masterpieces that shaped sci-fi literature for decades. Heinlein, however, eventually crossed over into mainstream literature and was influential not only in areas like the space program and science and engineering, as well as “children’s literature and the counterculture of the 1960s.” In 1974 the Science Fiction Writers of America gave their first Grand Master award for lifetime achievement to Heinlein. His works include The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress, The Past Through Tomorrow: Future History Stories, The Rolling Stones, Starship Troopers, and Stranger in a Strange Land.

Probably my favorite lecture in the series is on 1960s and 1970s science fiction because this covers my favorite sci-fi author: Philip K. Dick. Drout refers to this era as the “New Wave” period of sci-fi. A key New Wave element concerns the increase of entropy which leads inevitably to the “heat death of the universe.” This actual abandon perspective of cosmology held that the universe is kind of “winding down” since the Big Bang, because entropy always increases. Therefore, everything will eventually “be reduced to a uniform soup of cold, dark matter.” This pessimism informs most sci-fi of the period. Philip K. Dick was somewhat influential on William Gibson who wrote the seminal cyberpunk novel of the 1980s Neuromancer which is probably my favorite sci-fi novel. Many of Dick’s novels and short stories have been adapted for the screen, most notably his story Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? as the cult-classic Blade Runner. Dick’s story is more nuanced with subplots which Drout does an excellent job bringing out in the lecture.

Overall, the lecture series was very well-presented. Drout has a captivating cadence and a masterful command of the material. I was disappointed that he did not really address William S. Burroughs’ place in science fiction. Although not primarily a science fiction writer, Burroughs’ satire of science fiction motifs far pre-dates those of someone like Douglas Adams, whom Drout does discuss. Of course, don’t get me wrong, I love Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, except for any film adaptation of it. Of course, I understand how it is difficult to discuss Burroughs’ work in polite discourse on sci-fi lit. It’s pretty hard to discuss Burroughs’ work with any other human being without feeling like you need to go to confession afterwards. If you don’t know what I’m talking about, maybe you should check out Naked Lunch. Just don’t tell anyone I told you to. Sorry for the excessively long post. Anyway, happy learning!