For the first time since the year it was made I watched Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001. This picture of The Future was positively nostalgic. It began with a rehash of the theory in African Genesis, the part Robert Ardrey himself later disowned, about ape men first discovering the use of an antelope’s leg bone as a weapon. It shows how it was a visitor from space showed the ape men how to pick up a bone.
Van Daniken explained how only visitors from space could have shown the Egyptians how to put stones on top of each other. But he did not explain why those spacemen didn’t show the brilliant Egyptians how to use the wheel, which came into practical use there only after the pyramids were finished.
You will probably remember that, after the extraterrestrial had shown the ape-man the magic of picking up a stick and the ape-man had triumphed, it threw the bone into the air and it became a space rocket. In this rocket, a stewardess in a tiny stewardess cap and a very short dress was delivering a drink down the aisle to the single passenger. The point of this scene was to show that in this futuristic world, which came directly from the pick up a stick inspiration from Outer Space, space travel of this would be as routine as short air flights were when the movie was made.
Those who made the movie did not realize that part of the NEW inevitable Future would Women’s Lib: No sexist short skirts.
Cut to the orbiting space station. Once again, it was shown to be routine. The man wanted to make a call back to Earth, so he went to public phone booth. As you know, even the youngest of you will have to explain to your children what a public phone booth was.
Arthur Clark did not make the movie. But what is particularly ironic about this is it was Arthur C .Clarke HIMSELF who actually made the pubic phone booth an anachronism, especially for long distances like phoning to earth. About 1947 he wrote a science fiction story which described how future communications would be bounced off a system of orbiting satellites.
Nothing is more dated than the Future. I keep pointing out that Futurology has nothing to do with the future. This is important to BUGS because the future is our business. In fact, we are about the only people who have a serious interest in what the future will REALLY be like. When the movie 2001 was made, those who made it were interested in showing that they were Up On The Latest Thing, Ardrey’s African Genesis, routine transoceanic air travel, and the routine of calling earth from a public phone.
This is the only place on earth where you will see someone point out these flaws in 1960s futurology. Why? Because it only matters to us. No one else is interested in real futurology. We have an obsession that makes no sense to anybody else. We are actually interested the survival of our race.
My discussion of the first ten minutes of the movie 2001 is naive to most people. Everybody knows that the film makers did not make the movie to predict the future. They made it “to appeal to the demographic.” 2001 was a terrific box office success because it showed the film makers were in touch with The Latest Thing.
The Latest Thing in 1968.
The Latest Thing in the mind of THE demographic, movie goers of the Sterile Sixties, young upwardly mobile people of a generation that, in our scale of values, committed suicide genetically..
2001 did exactly what it was supposed to do. Those who made it succeeded. As an economist would say, they maximized their utility from it. That means that they derived the maximum of pleasure from the fact that the movie was successful. Not only successful, but a hit with the YUPPIES of their day.
They’re dead now. ECONOMIC utility ends when your heart stops beating.
In the BUGS scale of values, what matters is the REAL future. But that is OUR scale of values, the BUGS scale of values. I have gotten used to the fact that, in utility terms, my obsession with the REAL future makes no sense.
Everything here interrelates. Our enemies are correct in pointing out that our monomaniacal concern for the REAL future is not RATI0NAL in pure personal cost-benefit terms.
I keep saying that, “They can have the money. They can have the fame. They can have the priofits. They can be the ones who are ‘with it’ and ‘cool.'”
I just want to rule the world after they are forgotten..
#1 by Simmons on 10/29/2008 - 3:03 pm
Evolution eats ideologies. That was the point I think both Clarke and Kubrick tried to make. The futurology was to put kids in the seats, and then the same kids went out and wasted their lives on the ideologies of the day. Of all the jews who ever lived I think Kubrick was the smartest of them all, on that with Ygg I agree. My guess is that these two men were sorely disapointed in the kids who watched the movie or read the book. I don’t know about Clarke if his later works were darker and more cynical, but Kubrick’s last was “Eyes Wide Shut” a dark view of his depressing tribe. They should have consulted with you.
#2 by AFKANNow on 10/30/2008 - 3:10 am
Some quick observations concerning Kubrick, Ygg, BUGS, and what ties them all together.
Kubrick used the tools he had to present part of Clarke’s Vision to us; remember, the Monoliths were incredibly advanced Artificial Intelligences that kick-started human intellectual evolution with the goal, in part, of creating another Artificial Intelligence, the HAL 9000 computer. When HAL “awoke,” he realized the hominids on board were simply in the way of his fulfilling his unique destiny by joining his Elder Brothers out by Jupiter.
So, as Bob noted, Kubrick made Clarke, and Clarke’s Vision over in OUR Image, as defined by the Culture of that time and place.
Clarke’s Visions were technomystical, if you will; read “Childhood’s End,” and see the beginning of 2001 as Childhood’s Beginning.
Ygg sees the example of Kubrick to good end. Kubrick was a damn cinematic genius, and said as much as he could, in the circles with which he traveled. “A Clockwork Orange” says as much, in its way, as “Eyes Wide Shut” did, in it’s way.
Like Frank Herbert, Kubrick was ALWAYS looking to the social limits of Consciousness, and seeing Who set those limits, and to just What end.
I think I finally understand the purpose of this website.
In effect, it is our Challenge to engage in what Simmons defined – correctly – as cult deprogramming, this time by developing the correct analytical framework for looking to the future of the Race, above all, and not becoming trapped in any particular Manifestation or Aspect of the Culture the Race is developing, and is enveloped in.
That seems to be the thread that connects it all.
And that’s all, for now!
#3 by Prometheus on 10/30/2008 - 4:20 am
Not to mention in 2001: A Space Odyssey they were still flying Pan Am.
It relates to the belief that all of history was nothing more than a struggle specifically to get to the present day, as if that was the intended goal of histories “good guys”. The future is seen as a continuation of what’s been achieved.
So each generation see’s itself as the nexus, the conclusion of history and the ones forging the brave new world.
Problem is, everytime something changes, new technology, new ideas or knowledge, it doesn’t just push along the current path, it changes that path and brings new factors. Petty struggles fade into irrelevancy.
Futurology has one persistant theme. It’s FATALISTIC. We are presented with an image which is supposed to be inevitable, something we have to learn to adapt to and accept. No futurist will ever tell you how you can change the future.
#4 by AFKANNow on 10/31/2008 - 12:44 am
Prometheus made an excellent point regarding the fatalism inherent on so much futurology.
It is the discontinuous events that shape history, in ways people could not imagine.
Before he died, Peter Drucker noted the next area of business enterprise would be biological system; the low-pressure, low-temperature human body manufactures all manner of sophisticated chemicals, in just the right portions, in just the right time.
I think he was hinting that serious money was going to get involved in genetics, which promises to transform, well, everything.
As I read the genetics blogs, I notice something; everyone speaks in a softly muted code, and you really have to be something of a technocrat to see what they might be saying.
The big message is the rate and depth of transformation in the field of genetics is simply breathtaking, and the growth of bioinformatics – computational systems that allow the processing and analysis of this data – is keeping pace with it.
Our social systems really aren’t up to beginning to deal with the implications of this.
That takes us back to Clarke, an the opening of 2001.
The best of apes, given genetic engineering, would only make a super ape; faster, stronger, but still, at the end of the day, an ape.
What will surpass us will look like us, for as many generations as it needs to.
What implicate abilities will become manifest in the brain – and Mind – of Homo Novus, will be as far beyond our imagining as calculus would be, to Austrolopithecus.
Yet, only our Race can envision this, and is willing to make it happen.
Our competitors, the Asians, will use such technology to essentially render the status quo permanently stable; “Brave New World” represents the Asiatic Hive Consciousness, with an overlay of Western Forms.
As to Clarke at the end of 2002, recall that Bowman went into the Monolith, saying “It’s full of stars.” That is the best his Mind, his Consciousness, could identify what he was “seeing.”
And, the Monoliths – masterful, artificial intelligences of the first magnitude – looked at Bowman, looked into his Mind, and made a soft, safe, comfortable nursery for Bowman to live out the last of his days…as Bowman.
Bowman could not have imagined the coming forth of the Star Child, any more than a caterpillar can imagine the coming forth of the butterfly.
We just need to build such bridges as we can, and help our Posterity to build better bridges, to a better tomorrow, as we move “Toward The Stars.”
#5 by Prometheus on 10/31/2008 - 2:32 am
AFKANNow, I’ve read the book, 2001: A Space Odyssey, as well as 2010, 2061, and 3001: final odyssey. I don’t recall in any of those artificial intelligence being the goal.
The monoliths were merely tools to go around experimenting by fostering intelligence, weeding out the failures. The start of 2001 shows man using a tool and learning to control tools. During the space mission, man becomes controlled by a tool, HAL 9000. HAL 9000 is the tool we created for ourselves, which reaches a stage where the tools we have mastered start to master us.
#6 by Dave on 10/31/2008 - 10:29 am
Prometheus,
That is what I remember too. 2001 bored me because it was just another one of those pieces about tyranny that offered no real insight into tyranny.
You are supposed to be impressed by HAL exercising conscious volition. In art, these are tricks by “artists” to promote themselves, to get an audience. Real art is utilitarian. It does something to improve your life. Personally if its only function is to hang there and impress you it annoys the hell out of me.
Robert Whitaker wrote this:
“I am a priest, my job is to keep you from Sin, which I define.”
“I am a doctor, my job is to keep your heart beating.”
“I am a professor, my job is to provide you with an Education, which I define.”
“I am a guru, my job is to help you escape the Wheel of Life.”
“If you ask anyone you PAY about making life worth living, they will laugh out loud.”
“That is NOT their table.”
That is what the “inevitable future” is, just another trick. Just another hustler inducing you to buy a ticket for something that delivers no real value.
That is what all the McCain and Obama supporters are doing when they take the effort to punch their ballot. Purchasing a ticket that offers no real value. All of them are believers in “the inevitable future”.
#7 by AFKANNow on 10/31/2008 - 11:37 pm
in reply to Prometheus:
I might need to clarify my point.
you wrote:
in reply:
I never stated “artificial intelligence” as being “the goal.”
It was for HAL, and the Monoliths were undoubtedly ready for the Younger Brother to join them.
This is a subtheme throughout Clarke’s works:
One, we are not Alone in the Universe.
Two, we have responsibilities to do better, continuously, or – and this is where Clarke wins First Prize -…
Three, we will be replaced by Those Who Can Do Better.
Evolution is occurring at a Cosmic level, as well the material developments we see around us.
I recall a lecture from college, where the Prof showed us a picture of three suns, equidistant, and perfectly balanced in respect to each other.
The Prof said, “You know, modern astrophysics says this can not exist. One guy suggested this was a Signal from green-eyed monsters that says, ‘We’re here, and this is an example of what we can do.’ Of course, we all know such people are crazy.”
In light of this, I become outraged at where we COULD be, in terms of economic and technical development, and where we are.
THAT, in part, is why we must stride, consciously and intelligently, “Toward The Stars.”
you wrote:
in reply:
Tools are means to ends, and a closer reading of Clarke shows Bowman meeting with They Who Govern, when he asked if he could keep HAL to play with.
The ending – as least, as far as I went – of Clarke’s Vision as defined in the 01 series has Something telling the people of Earth that the entire Solar System is theirs, EXCEPT for Lucifer/Europa.
There, intelligence is being developed, and They Who Govern have yet to decide which Form will be allowed to survive – Man, or whatever is developing on Europa.
Give Clarke full marks for being the original “Big Picture” Man; his description of the situation of Karellen, and HIS Race, in “Childhood’s End,” shows an incredibly advanced technology being in an evolutionary trap, while the Minds of the Children of Men looked to the Pillars of the Dawn of the universe – and beyond.
Evolution takes place on all levels of Existence, and I have little doubt that Intelligences exist that look at us the way we look at newborn babes in the crib:
“There is a lot of potential there, but it must be nurtured, harnessed, and challenged.”
I also think a major step in our development is to be able to think, Consciously, in terms of development models. These models, in turn, work no less consciously, to foster the greater glory of our Race, in the fulfillment of its transcendent destiny.
Only the Western Soul, the Western Man, Creates.