It is clear from the discussion that in science fiction films, aliens and bugs drown down other aspects and stick attention of viewers to ugly aces and unnatural settings. Science fiction has always seen itself as the educator of the public in matters technological, but this education has been indirect, contradictory, and frequently ill-informed, as seems perfectly appropriate to literature. Many science fiction writers who felt somehow justified in their genre by the actuality of the atomic bomb simultaneously felt guilty about their role in its realization. This is also appropriate; as we have seen, the thrust of science fiction has been not only to extrapolate the possibility of atomic power but also to reify the assumptions that scientists and politicians alike followed in its development and use.
Furthermore, and. this is most clearly seen in the reaction of scientists and nonscientists alike after Hiroshima, Armageddon had been made real enough in fiction that few had trouble assimilating it to the postnuclear world. In the midst of a technological revolution, one thing we expect to remain stable is what we call "human nature. " While fiction must deal with species-general experience (that is, it can deal with all situations and conditions possible for a man as a physical being to experience and can present these experiences as causing physiologically appropriate reactions and sensations), it is both culture-dependent and culture-specific.
Although they form no certain theories about human beings, their discussions acutely penetrate the American preoccupation with excreta and the ritual that surrounds their culturally approved disposal, while metaphorically connecting this with the elimination of humanity. Instead of seeing humanity as coming in two hereditary forms, the nurturing model divides man internally.
It assumes that every human has a dual nature: body versus soul or mind versus emotions.
Please type your essay title, choose your document type, enter your email and we send you essay samples