H.G. Wells: The First Man in the Moon

Science fiction, much like many children growing up in homosexual households, has two fathers.  (One could make the obvious joke that that's why science fiction is so gay, but I find that joke in poor taste and will refrain from using it.)  These two fathers are, of course, Jules Verne and Herbert George Wells, more commonly referred to as H.G. Wells.

Now, we all know science fiction had other writers before these two.  It's generally agreed that the oldest work of science fiction dates back to the 2nd century, with Lucian's True History, though it differs greatly from what we would consider science fiction today.  One can see elements of the genre in Gulliver's Travels by Swift, which is from the 18th century.  One of the earliest manifestations of the genre as we know it today would be Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.  And, of course, let us not forget Mr. Poe's works of science fiction as so many other people tend to do.  But I'm not here to discuss science fiction, so much as one of its fathers.

There always seems to be a bit of a debate as to who was the better science fiction writer: Verne or Wells.  I think a large part of who you choose is determined by which one you grew up on, though I'll not voice my opinion of who is the more superior author.

Now, I remember when I was a lad, I tried to read Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea.  Much like my attempt to read Moby Dick, it failed miserably.  I had no stick-to-it-iveness, I guess.  This somewhat turned me off to Verne.  Maybe it was the translation, but I found the prose too dense for my young brain to comprehend.  In 2009 I read Around the World in Eighty Days, and while I enjoyed it, it felt little more than an adventure novel, a travelogue.  I would like to read more by Verne, but he failed to make my list of books to read this year.  Maybe next year.
Wells, on the other hand, I did not even attempt until I was a bit older.  Not that I thought it'd be too difficult, but he was an author who never really suggested himself to me.  He stood back quietly and awaited my arrival.  I was twenty the first time I read War of the Worlds.  I was in Indiana at the time, which was when I mostly read nothing but C.S. Lewis.  Wells stuck with me though.  It wasn't until 2006 that I began reading other works by him.  There are two used bookstores in my home town.  They're right next to each other so I would always stop at one and then walk down to the other.  Between the two, I found a good selection of books by Wells.  All the well known titles, but also some more obscure ones, such as In the Days of the Comet and The First Men in the Moon, which is my favorite.  I devoured them.  Wells is the only author, saving C.S. Lewis, that I have devoted to reading so wholeheartedly, as I read him without stopping to read anyone else.
I hit a wall though when I began reading When the Sleeper Wakes, republished later as The Sleeper Awakes.  I can't tell you why, but to this day, it's one of the few books I started and never finished.  The story was interesting--a man stays awake for a long period of time and then sleeps for two hundred and three years.  The writing was as good as any other Wells novel.  But, I couldn't find an interest in it.  My love affair with Wells had ended.
This was not too long ago--November of 2007, if I remember correctly--because When the Sleeper Awakes  was a late find for me.  I tried to read it again in the summer of 2008 and had the same difficulty.  Perhaps I should've simply started on a different Wells novel--The Food of the Gods had recently shown up at one of the bookstores--but instead, I moved on to other things.  That was the year I really got into Charles Dickens, and my interests had shifted from science fiction to the more realistic novels of the Victorian period (comparatively more realistic).

Now, I never intended for Wells to fade into the obscurity of authors long past, though I will admit, three years of not reading him might imply that.  Remember my brief mentioning of a reading list for this year--the one Verne failed to make it onto?  Well, while visiting my parents, I took a trip back to one of those bookstores in town and happened upon an old friend.  Not only were these not in the science fiction section, which is where they usually kept Wells, they were books I'd never heard of before: The Croquet Player and Tono-Bungay.  Maybe it was nostalgia or guilt or maybe the fact that neither were science fiction, but I was intrinsically drawn to the two books and quickly snatched them up.  I meant to read them last year, but kept putting them off.  Now, they've been put on my reading list, and I'm itching to get started on The Croquet Player, which is apparently a horror story.

Will this spark another obsession with an author who used to rank with my top favorites?  Well, I've already added six books by Wells to my wishlist.  We'll see though.

Moon and the science fiction genre

I just finished watching the brilliant film Moon, the debut from director Duncan Jones. In case you're unfamiliar with the sci-fi film starring Sam Rockwell and too lazy to click the link, I'll inform you of the basic plot. Sam Rockwell plays Sam Bell, a lone astronaut, who is living on the dark side of the moon in the not-to-distant future. His only companion is a computer named Gerty, voiced by Kevin Spacey. He is in charge of manning the station and harvesting Helium 3, an alternate fuel source used to create nuclear fusion. At the beginning of the film, he is involved in an accident and wakes up in sick-bay. Going out to check on the harvester, he finds another astronaut unconscious in the moon rover, who happens to look exactly like himself. Hijinks ensue.
This is the second time I've watched it, the first being when it was in theaters, and I am still just as impressed. It reminds me of the classic science fiction stories of the fifties, and, to be honest, of the early science fiction novels. Now, granted, I am more of a fan of fantasy and faerie romance than science fiction, so if some sci-fi buff out there disagrees with me, feel free to voice your opinion; but I maintain that the early science fiction was simplistic. Novels such as H.G. Wells' The Time Machine, War of the Worlds, In the Days of the Comet, or The First Men on the Moon were quite simple in their plots.  As well, all of the novels listed above were social commentary. Also, C.S. Lewis' science fiction--his Space Trilogy--are, again, simple stories. Peralandra has a tiny cast of characters and very little action. While That Hideous Strength sports a much larger cast, it as well is a simple story, which one could narrow down to a romance about a dying marriage being saved. Granted, I've not read the science fiction of Edgar Allen Poe yet (mostly because I tried and got bored) and I have only tapped the surface of Verne, but if what I've read about them is any indication, Verne is little more than an adventure novelist and Poe's work is not much different from his horror and detective fiction.
My point being, one of the reasons I consider Moon the best sci-fi film of the passed ten years is that it is adhering to the example of it's predecessors. It succeeds for me the same reason the original The Day the Earth Stood Still succeeded while the remake was terrible. The director and writer had a simple message to convey and they told it simply. We didn't need to see a stadium dissolve for the original to move us. I first watched the original in 2008, shortly after I heard about the remake, and while the remake's special effects were substantially better, the original was far more superior in context.
I know that most people out there are singing the praises of Avatar, and it is the second highest-grossing movie every made; but I've also been reading everywhere that without the special effects it is nothing worth seeing. The official budget of the film is $237 million. You'd think with a budget like that they could've afforded well-written dialogue and an interesting, unpredictable story; but instead we just get flashy special effects. That's all good and well, but I think once those special effect wear off, Avatar will be just another sci-fi flick, while Moon--or even Wall-e(in my opinion, the second best science fiction film of the last ten years)--will still be considered a masterpiece and a classic.