Science Fiction as Mythology
Author(s): Thomas C. Sutton and Marilyn Sutton
Source: Western Folklore, Vol. 28, No. 4 (Oct., 1969), pp. 230-237
Published by: Western States Folklore Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1499217 .
Accessed: 10/08/2013 10:20
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Western States Folklore Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Western
Folklore.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ScienceFiction
as Mythology
THOMAS C. and MARILYN SUTTON
SCIENCE FICTION, ithas recently beenprophesied, willpresently be
shownto have contrived a "mythology forour times."' In factscience
fictionhas becomeso fullyacceptedas a modeofmodernmyth-making
thatthe 1968 convention oftheModernLanguageAssociationdevoted
an afternoon forum,H. BruceFranklinpresiding, to "ScienceFiction:
The New Mythology."Despitethisrecognition, however,thereremain
a numberofquestionsconcerning therelativerolesofmythand science
incontemporary culture.
We have surelycomea longway fromthepersistent idea, firstput
forthby Fontenellein The Originof theFables (1724), thatmythis
a primitive
essentially science,theimperfect resultofa conscioussearch
forcausesofobservable events.2A century later,despitetheirprogressive
contributionsin otherareasofmythstudy,bothE. B. TylorandAndrew
Lang subscribed to theconception ofmythas savagescience.In his Ori-
gins of Culture (1871), Tylor states that"savageshavebeenforuntold
ages,and stillare,livingin themyth-making stageofthehumanmind."
He continues to arguethat"it was throughsheerignorance and neglect
of thisdirectknowledgehow and by what mannerof menmythsare
reallymade,thattheirsimplephilosophy has cometo be buriedunder
massesofcommentators' rubbish."3Thirty-five yearslater,Lang noted
thatthefollowers ofTylorseemedunawarethattheywereonly"repeat-
ing the notionsof the nephewof Corneille."4Yet, indicativeof how
firmly entrenched the notionofmythas primitive scienceis, Lang too
discussesthe role of mythin primitive societiesas man's "firstfaint
impulsesofthescientific spirit"attempting a solutiontotheriddleofthe
world.5
'AlbertB. Friedman,"The BestTurnipson theCreek,"N. Y. Rev. ofBooks,March28, 1968,
p. 37.
2 See RichardChase, The QuestforMyth(BatonRouge,1949),pp. 8-9.
3 (Reprint;New York,1958),p. 283.
4 Myth, Ritual, and Religion (London, 1906), II, 339.
1II,49.
[230]
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SCIENCE FICTION AS MYTHOLOGY 231
Today ifwe can no longercharacterize mythas prescience, we must
ask what preciselyis its relationship to science?Can we acceptthe
sophisticatedtheoryofLUvi-Strauss thatmythis a modeparallelto sci-
ence,similarin mannerbut differing in object?Levi-Strausssuggests
thatbothmythand sciencebe consideredas modesof structuring the
in he
universe; fact, goes so faras to posit a mathematical logic in the
structuralformation ofmyth."His insistence thatmythand sciencebe
consideredas autonomousand mutuallyexclusiveis a limitingfeature
evenin hiscontemporary thesis.Sincewe are treating sciencefiction as
themythofmoderntechnology, we are thereby to
committed rejecting
LUvi-Strauss' limitationof parallel autonomyand to posita definite
intersectionofthemythopoeic and scientific modes.
of
Not all sciencefiction, course,demonstrates suchan intersection.
We mustrecognizethatsciencefiction in itscurrent stateencompasses a
vast spectrumof worksfromthe cartoonsof Captain Video, Buck
Rogers,and Flash Gordon,to the apocalypticvisionsglimpsedby
ArthurC. Clarkein 2001: A Space Odyssey, thefull-length novelelabo-
ratedfromthefilmofthesametitlewhichClarkehad previously written
in collaboration withStanleyKubrick,and by C. S. Lewis in hisPere-
landratrilogy,a classicofsciencefiction.
Sincebothmythand sciencereflect man'sirrepressible curiosityabout
his originsand hisdestiny, they each can be seen as a particular human
means of structuring the universe.Paul Tillich in an essayon "The
ReligiousSymbol"suggeststhatwherever theobjectiveworldis recog-
nizedin its relatedness to the unconditioned transcendent, theunityof
religionwiththedesireto understand theworldis restored in themythi-
cal symbol.7In thiswaysciencebecomesmythdespiteitsrationalauton-
omy.Scientists themselves recognize thefactthatsciencehas movedfrom
theimmediate of
perception empiricalrealitytoa stagewheretheobject
ofresearchis no longernaturein itselfbutrathernatureas it is exposed
to man'squestioning.8 In otherwords,contemporary scienceis conscious
ofitsownsymbolization.
Myth and science emphasize different aspects of the universe-
structuresthey erect. is
Early myth typically concerned withthestudy
of originswhereassciencegenerallyfocuseson the studyofdestiny.It
6
"The StructuralStudy of Myth," in Myth: A Symposium,ed. Thomas A. Sebeok
1965),p. 106.
(Bloomington,
7In Symbolismin Religion and Literature,ed. Rollo May (New York, 1960), pp. 87-88.
8Werner Heisenberg, "The Representations ofNaturein Contemporary Physics,"in Symbolism
in Religion and Literature, pp. 230-231.
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
232 WESTERN FOLKLORE
is preciselybecause of the fundamentalism of primitive myththatC.
Kerenyi isolates for study the archetype of the divine child, "the
first-born of primevaltimes,in whomthe originfirstwas."9 In his
studyKerenyinotesthatthe essentialdifference betweenthe modeof
thephilosopher andthatofthemyth-teller is thatthephilosopher triesto
piercethrough the world ofappearances in order to say "what reallyis"
whilethe myth-teller stepsback intoprimordiality in orderto tell us
"what originally was." Underlying thisconcernwithoriginsin myth
seemsto be an assumption thatiftribalmancan tracehis beginnings
a
through narrative, he will simultaneously discoverhis raisond'etre
and thusbe able to formulate a suitablemodeofexistence.In termsof
culturalexperience, a bodyofmythincorporates theessentialbeliefsofa
tribewhileritualexpressesthemyth-embodied abstractions in concrete
form.Throughtheperformance ofa particular ritual, a tribalmanfeels
himself in harmony withthespiritpervading hisbodyofmyth.Science
on the otherhand tendsto deny or at least ignorethe issue of a
supranatural purposeforexistence and to employthestudyoforiginsas
oneofnumerous meanstodetermine theformoffuture existence.
Bothmythand scienceattempt to providean overview ofexistence by
bridging inner reality and outer reality.Here again the direction ofthe
processdiffers: mythattempts to projectinnerreality(consciousdesires,
archetypal patterns) in themetaphor ofouterreality, whilescienceaims
to illuminate innerrealitythrough thestudyofouter,empiricalforms. A
of
body myth forms an autonomous universe which stands in metaphoric
relationtotheactualworld.Scientific hypotheses also forma universe, a
universewhichis notidenticalto objectiverealitybut representative of
man's understanding ofit. Thus thequestionofvalidationordisproof is
to
irrelevant mythsincetherelationofmythto realityis analogical,but
it is paramountforsciencebecausetheworthofa scientific hypothesis is
entirely dependent on the accuracy ofits to
relationship objective reality.
Beforetheadventofthescientific mode,theonlymeansbywhichman
could relateto his universewas throughthe mythopoeic mode. His
acceptance of the narratives of gods and heroes as the meaningof his
worldservedas an affirmation ofintimacy withthemostbasicand there-
foresacralstructures ofspace,oftime,ofnaturaloccurrence, and ofhis-
toricalevent.'oPrescientific man viewedeverything outsidehimselfas
"other"and to a largedegreeunknowable.For himmythservedas the
9Essaysona ScienceofMythology
(New York,1963),pp. 8-9.
10LangdonGilkey,"ModernMyth-Making ofTwentieth-Century
and thePossibilities Theolo-
gy," TheologyofRenewal(Montreal,1968),I, 286.
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SCIENCE FICTION AS MYTHOLOGY 233
vehicleforhisrelationship withthe"other."As thescientific ortechno-
logicalmodedeveloped,man's orientation movedaway fromuniversal
concepts to a more specialized focus on the individualempiricaldata.
Historically this shiftresulted in the sharp distinction betweenthetwo
modesofthought, withthescientific recognized as themeansto knowl-
edge and the mythopoeic disenfranchised and relegatedto the role of
plaything forpoets.
Perhapswe are now in a positionto movebeyondthisconvenient
dissectionofthought, fornow thatwe can viewthemythopoeic and the
modesin theirmaturedstateswe can seethesharpdistinctions
scientific
disintegrating. In thefieldofcontemporary theology, we havetheexam-
ple ofRudolphBultmann,who attempts to applyscientific logicto the
of
myth Christianity and ends by"re-mythologizing" Christianity in the
of
language contemporary science rather than de-mythologizing Anit."
example of the reverse processis providedby science fictionin whichthe
modeofthought
scientific is intentionally mythologized.
In thewordsofFred Saberhagen,a sciencefiction authorand critic,
"sciencefictiongivesa chanceto imposedifferent coordinatesystems
uponthehumancondition and to tryto see whatwillchangeand what
will remainthe same."'12A Britishscientist and poet,PeterRedgrave,
provides in his short story"Mr. Waterman""': an exampleofconscious
imposition of a set ofhypothetical time and spacecoordinates in orderto
mythologize science.Redgrave'sstorymythologizes evolution toproduce
a delightfully ironicnarrative. It takestheformofa patient'sreporting
to his analystthestrangemannerin whichthecreaturesin his garden
pool emergeduringdewyevenings. The starfish coupleon theornamen-
tal stonestepsand thebarnaclesbrazenlyaffixthemselves tothestemsof
rosetrees.Eventually onesuchaquaticcreature becomesso fullyadapted
to terrestrial existence thathe takesup residence in theman'shomeand
attempts to seduce his host'swife. At this pointtheanalystsendsthe
patientoffwitha bitofroutineadviceand turnsto his nextclient,who
reports troubles witha "married,air-breathing woman."
We can see a relationship analogous to the myth-science dichotomy in
thetensionbetweentheterms"natural"and "artificial."All thatpre-
existedhumanactivityis generallyconsideredto be natural.As man
progressed, he developedbothin self-awareness and tool-making ability.
At theearlystagesofhumandevelopment thecontrastbetweennatural
'' Kerygmaand Myth,ed. Hans W. Bartsch(New York,1961),pp. 43-44.
2Quotedin The Year'sBestS-F, ed.JudithMerril(New York,1964),p. 34.
13Paris Review,XXIX (1963), 162-165.
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
234 WESTERN FOLKLORE
objectand humanartifactwas marked,largelybecause ofthe difficulty of
bringingan artifactinto Modern
existence. technology has the
facilitated
productionofartifactsto such a degreethat the distinctionsbetweenthe
two categoriesare now being erased. Now that man can, in one sense,
make man throughthe "artificial" creationofa unitof "natural" lifein
a DNA molecule,the terms"natural" and "artificial" have ceased to be
antonyms.14
The mythopoeicmode flourishedpriorto the adventof empiricalsci-
ence. When man's entiresurroundingswere unknowableto him empiri-
cally, they elicited a response of awe and wonder. The meaning of
existencewas expressed for primitiveman throughthe fashioningof a
totempole, the recountingof a myth,or even the ritual preparationof
food.With the adventof empiricalscience,however,man came to learn
objectivefacts about his universe. The fact that he could know some
aspect of his world removedhis sense of reverentialawe and replaced it
witha confidencethat the "other" was in factknowable. It is onlyto be
expectedthenthat in the contemporaryempiricalcontext,a mythto be
relevant must reflecthuman achievementsand capacities ratherthan
wonder in the face of a fore-ordainedcosmic structure.Once man has
become conscious of his position in the historicalprocess, his attention
shiftsfromthe contemplationof the eternalstructureto the action ofthe
presentmoment.
The psychologicalinterpretationof these observationsis fullydis-
cussed byJung in his fascinatingbook Flying Saucers: A Modern Myth
of ThingsSeen in theSkies. Afterconsideringmanycontradictory pieces
of evidenceconcerningthe material existenceof UFOs, Jung suggests,
"with all due reserve,"thatUFOs
are real materialphenomenaofan unknownnature,presumably comingfrom
outerspace,whichperhapshave longbeenvisibleto mankind,butotherwise
have no recognizableconnection In recent
withthe earthor its inhabitants.
times,however,and just at themomentwhentheeyesofmankindare turned
towardstheheavens,partlyon accountoftheirfantasies aboutpossiblespace-
ships,and partlyin a figurativesense because theirearthlyexistencefeels
threatened,unconsciouscontentshaveprojectedthemselveson theseinexplica-
bleheavenly phenomena theyin nowaydeserve.'5
and giventhema significance
14Jacques Ellul, The Technological Society (New York, 1965), p. xix. In his treatmentof tech-
nology Ellul includes techniques under the categoryof the "natural," which he seems to defineas
"any environmentable to satisfyman's material needs, if it leaves him freeto use it as a means to
achieve his individual internallygeneratedends."
'5(London, 1959), p. 151.
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SCIENCE FICTION AS MYTHOLOGY 235
The possiblefuturediscovery of unknownphysicalphenomenaas the
outwardcauseofflying saucerswoulddetractnothing fromthemythfor,
typicalofall myth,it doesnotoperateas a scientific butas a
hypothesis
particularinstanceoftheintersection ofmythand sciencethatwe have
positedat theoutsetofthisessay.
Modern mythcannotbe simplya representation of contemporary
reality;it mustresonateon multiplelevels.Jungconsidersthe "living
myth"offlying saucersas a goldenopportunitytosee howin a
timeforhumanity
darkanddifficult a miraculous upofanattempted
talegrows
intervention
by extra-terrestrial
"heavenly"powers-andat thisverytime
whenhumanfantasy is seriouslyconsidering ofspacetraveland
thepossibility
ofvisiting
oreveninvading otherplanets.16
The presentsituationmustbe viewedin relationtoa transcendent order
ofsomedescription. For earlymythopoeic man,thistranscendent order
was the cosmoswithits gods,heroes,planets,and otherinexplicable
phenomena.In thearea ofscientific myth, thetranscendent referent can
no longerbe the cosmos,sincescientific researchhas shownthatit is
empiricallyknowableand as a consequenceit is no longerentirely tran-
scendent.As a referent,modernmyth, especially science fiction,replaces
thecosmoswiththeconceptofspace.Jungclaimsthatit is thebeliefin
thisworldand thepowerofmanthatis thrusting itselfforward in the
formof symbolicrumorand activatingan archetypethathas always
expressed"order,deliverance, salvation,and wholeness."The visionsof
unidentifiedroundshiningobjectsare impressive manifestations oftotal-
ity,theirsimple round form the
portraying archetype ofselfwhich has
been shownto play the chiefrole in unitingapparentlyirreconcilable
oppositesand is thereforebestsuitedtocompensate thesplit-mindedness
ofour age." This archetype, so vitalto humanity, has beenexpressed
throughout human historyin various forms,but it is characteristicofour
timethatit shouldtaketheformofa technological construction in order
toavoidtheanachronistic odiousnessofa mythological personification.18
Space represents forsciencefictionan infinite, unknownextension
whichlendsa grandeurto whatever actionsare undertaken in it.Unlike
a scientific
hypothesis,a sciencefiction storyis notformulated primarily
to advancetechnological knowledge;ratherit operateson a visionary,
'6 P. 14.
"7P. 21.
s' P. 22.
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
236 WESTERN FOLKLORE
mythopoeic level.We mightsay thatspace providesforsciencefiction
thecontextofin illo tempore, theusuallocationofmyth;spatialdistanc-
ing replacestemporaldistancing.It is characteristic of sciencefiction
thatit is neversetin thepresenttimeunlessmorethanone timedimen-
sion is operative.This temporaldistortion helpsto securea thematic
universality, but there is a difference between thisstrategy and that
in
employed earlymyth. For in earlymyth the tellerplaced hisnarration
in the realmof "once longago" to set theactionoutsidetherealmof
actual possibility, but withsciencefictionthe writerbelievesthathis
unusualtimedimensions maybe scientifically possible.
Both sciencefictionand mythdeal primarily withbeingsofgreater
than ordinarypower. Early mythpresentssemidivinebeings who
exhibitthe qualityof mana in theiractions.Their sourceofpoweris
something beyondthehuman.Sincesciencefiction is beingconsidered as
themythoftechnology, it is notsurprising to findthatmanassumesthe
roleofprotagonist. His power,ratherthanbeinga suprahumanmana,
is generally associatedwithsuperiorknowledge, forknowledge is recog-
nized as the motiveforcebehindtechnological progress. The robot,a
commonmotifin sciencefiction, beinga thinking machinerepresents the
ultimaterefinement oftechnology, and manysciencefictionmythsdeal
with the varietyof relationshipspossible betweenthe human and
machinethinkers. But eventhisconcernwiththerobotcan be seenas
humanistic inasmuchas therobotis simplyan extension ofman'sscien-
tificallymostsophisticated quality,his powerto reasonand remember.
Isaac Asimov,the fatherof "robotics"in sciencefiction, eagerlyenvi-
sionsthedaywhenscientists willdesigna computer capableofformulat-
ingthedesignofa computer morecomplexthanitself.This moment will
markthebeginning ofa diverging seriesin which"not onlyman-made
man is possible,but man-madesuperman."'9This notionis notat all
repulsive toAsimov;on thecontrary, it is thefulfillment ofan evolution-
arypatternlongago projected in Greekmythology withtheoverthrow of
thegodOuranosbyCronos.
Sciencefictionis a self-conscious formof mythin whichmaninten-
tionallymythologizes scientific narrative. It is not infrequent to find
themesfromearliermythologies servingas subplotsforsciencefiction
stories.Examplesare readilyafforded byFrankHerbert,whoweavesa
of
knowledge ecology with allusions to Old Testamentmyths in hisnovel
Dune (1965), andJamesBlish,who blendscreationtheology withech-
19"AndIt Will ServeUs Right,"Psychology
Today,II (1969), 64.
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
SCIENCE FICTION AS MYTHOLOGY 237
oes of demonismin his work A Case of Conscience (1958) to produce a
mythin which a priest-scientist confrontsan alien world of complete
perfectionand, aware that it is a theological impossibility,is forcedto
acknowledgeit as a demoniccreation.
Another excellent example of this technique is Arthur C. Clarke's
short story"The Star"20 in which mythicmaterial fromChristianity
furnishesthe subplot. Clarke givesthe mythologysurroundingthe starof
Bethlehem and the birth of Christ a scientificexplanation, proposing
thatthe star was the resultof the destructionofa completelyidyllicrace
in a star systemwhose sun flaredas a supernova at its death. Scientifi-
cally it is plausible that the star of Bethlehem,if there was one, was a
supernova, but Clarke remythologizesextravagantlyon this scientific
basis. He suggeststhat God intentionallydestroyedan entirepeople on
the exploded star forHis greaterhonorand glory.The underlyingirony
is made explicitby settingthe narrativein Jesuitsurroundingsand play-
ing on theJesuitmottoAd maioremDei gloriam.In thisparticular
myth,Clarkeexplodesa fictionconcerning thestarwithscientificfact,
and thengoeson to minglereligion,psychology, and sciencetodevelopa
mythopoeic vision.As myth,sucha storyis certainlymuchmorecon-
sciousand literary thanearlymyth,
butit is notmeantto be themythof
a tribe,ratherit is themythology
concocted forthedelightoftechnologi-
cal man.
Claremont
GraduateSchool
20
inA Century
Reprinted ofScienceFiction,ed. Damon Knight(New York,1962).
This content downloaded from 152.3.102.242 on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 10:20:21 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
