THE ROBOTISTIC WORKS OF ISAAC ASIMOV: A STUDY

Chapter-I

SCIENCE FICTION: AN INTRODUCTION

With the shift of emphasis in many of the Departments of English

globally from 'mere' literary studies to "Cultural Studies", it has been possible

to include "popular culture" in their ambit. As a result, the area of Science

fiction too has opened up for literaiy research. The genre Science fiction

(hereinafter abbreviated as SF also) does not so much concern itself with

scientific and technological progress, as with attempts to find solutions to the

social, physiological, psychological, ethical and moral questions raised by

such advancement.

Thus, although the discovery of the telescope by Galileo made it

possible for SF writers to imaginatively depict space travel, the genre's origin

may be traced to the impact of the industrial revolution. Mary Shelley's

Frankenstein (1818) marks the beginning of a new style of writing with its

primarily negative attitude to new creations.' Hence, a number of works were

written opposing machine culture. In contrast, at the beginning of the

twentieth century the positive aspects of scientific achievements were

highlighted by magazine editors Hugo Gemsback and John W. Campbell.

Later on, Asimov and others attempted to heal the mental devastation caused

by the two world wars through a portrayal of the benefits of scientific

advancement for humanity in their SF works.

As SF has grown enormously in recent years, many critics even opine

that the genre cannot be defined at all. Even so, an attempt has been made in

the following pages to understand the basic concepts of the genre through a

few definitions, through distinguishing it from mainstream fiction and listing

its major themes. The importance of Asimov as the major author in the genre

is brought out tlirough a survey of his works and existing criticism, making up

a case for this study. The plan of this dissertation which studies Asimovian

Robotics and assays interpretation of the same from various angles is next

outlined in the first section of the introductory chapter. The second section

moves on to sketch robotistic works written prior to Asimov's advent.

I

Originally, the credit for coining the word 'Science fiction' should have

gone to British essayist William Wilson as he uses the same in his A Little

Efajrnest Book upon A Great Old Subject (1851).^ However, Hugo

Gernsback's coinage of the word 'Scientifiction' followed by his attempt to

define the genre in the beginning of the twentieth century has been rightly

acknowledged by critics.'' Primarily, the term is meant to describe a charming

romance intermingled with scientific fact and prophetic vision.

The Compact Oxford English Dictionary (Microscopic) defines SF as

"imaginative fiction based on postulated scientific discoveries or spectacular

environmental changes, frequently set in the fliture or on other planets and

involving space or time travel."

J.O. Bailey describes "Scientific fiction" as "a narrative of an

imaginary invention or discovery in the natural sciences and consequent

adventure and experiences."^ But John W Campbell lays stress on the

premises of a technologically based society: "Fiction is only dreams written

out; SF consists of the hopes and dreams and fears of a technologically based

society."* SF critic Moskowitz laying stress on the element of fantasy

interprets SF as "a branch of fantasy identifiable by the fact that it eases the

'willing suspension of disbelief [....] by utilising an atmosphere of scientific

credibility for its imaginative speculation in physical science, space, time,

social science and philosophy."'

Another SF critic and writer Kingslcy Amis slrclclics his imagination

beyond the boundary of human visual perception:

Science fiction is that class of prose narrative treating of a

situation that could not arise in the world we know, but which

is hypothesised on the basis of some innovation in science or

technology, or pseudo-technology, whether human or extra­

terrestrial in origin.*

Similarly, Reginald Bretnor in Science Fiction Today and Tomorrow interprets

SF as "fiction based on rational speculation regarding human experience of

science and its resultant technologies."^

"A handy short definition of all science fiction might read", writes

Robert A. Heinlein that it is a "realistic speculation about possible future

events, based solidly on adequate knowledge of the real world, past and

present, and on a thorough understanding of the nature and significance of the

scientific method."^" But, Brian Ash expresses a negative attitude about the

genre. He defines SF as "the search for a definition of man and his status in the

universe which will stand in our advanced but confused state of knowledge

(science), and is characteristically cast in the Gothic or post Gothic mould." '̂

In a virtual summation of the elements of fantasy and rationality,

Evgeni Brandis in "The Horizons of Science Fiction"(1982), establishes a

relationship "between man and technology and man and nature." Therefore he

opines, "science fiction blends the scientific and artistic visions of the world in

constant flux, in endless changes in time."'^ He also suggests:

Science fiction writing is to be Judged not by the scientific

criteria but in terms of the artistic logic of the search that

catches the spirit of enquiry. Science fiction may or may not

coincide with science proper. As long as it corresponds to the

kind of scientific thought prevalent in its time, it has a fair

claim to being called science fiction.

Some critics view SF from different angles in the same work. In this

regard, Norman Spinrad defines, "Literature informed by future oriented

vision is science fiction."''* In the later part of the work he adds:

Science fiction [...] is an evolutionary inevitable literary mode

with its roots in the rise of the Age of Reason and its raison

d'etre in the replacement of the lost fantasy landscape beyond

the sea with the scientifically plausible wonderlands beyond the

bounds of the quotidian present. '̂

The Road to Science Fiction (1977) edited by James Gunn highlights a new

perspective of the genre:

Science fiction is a branch of literature that deals with the

effects of change on the people in the real world as it can be

projected into the past, the future, or to distant places. It often

concerns itself with scientific or technological change, and it

usually involves matters whose importance is greater than the

individual or community; often civilization itself is in danger. '*

Edmund Crispin presents a more stylistic stress on the technological

presence in the genre. He interprets SF as "one which presupposes a

technology, or an effect of technology, or a disturbance in the natural order

such as humanity, up to the time of writing, has not in actual fact

experienced." Crispin also highhghts Darwin's Theory of Evolution in his

modified definition. Accordingly, SF is the "origin of species fiction", since it

is "about us as we have [been] shaped by our genesis, our biology, our

environment, and our behaviour."'' Theodore Sturgeon gives a down to Earth

humanising definition. He observes that an SF story is "a story about human

beings, with a human problem, and a human solution, which would not have

happened at all without its science content.'^

The most convincing definition of SF is perhaps given by Asimov in

an interview with Earl.G.IngersoU. He states, "[...] SF is the branch of

literature which deals with the response of human beings to changes in the

level of science and technology."'^Elsewhere, he writes that SF is the

depiction of the "existenfial predicament of man in the future."^"Similarly, for

Darko Suvin too, SF is "a literature of cognitive estrangement."^^

In his introduction to Science Fiction Periodicals, Thomas D.Clareson

says that it is difficult to limit the meaning of the genre within a few words in

the form of a definition as the genre is constantly growing in all the directions:

Science fiction cannot be defined by simple formula. Nor is

there a kind of science fiction, which is infinitely preferable to

all others. [...] the genre has [been] giving... expression to the

dreams of heroic adventure, whether he is a spaceman in a far

distant world or a barbarian imitative of Robert Howard Conan

in some alternative universe. [...] science fiction will always

measure the impact of science and technology upon society,

creating futures (near futures) which may result if certain

tendencies are extrapolated.

Thus, the latest trend in SF criticism is that most of the critics like Samuel

Delany , Darko Suvin and Thomas Clareson feel that there is no concrete

definition for SF at all just as there is no single story, which could explain all

the concepts of SF.

« o »

James Gurm marks the basic difference between SF and mainstream

fiction:

Science fiction, [...] is a search for humanity's origin, its

purpose, and its ultimate fate. Mainstream fiction may seem

more 'real' because it reflects the reality that most people deal

with in their everyday existence.[...] The shape of mainstream

fiction is dictated by its belief in what is important. It is dense

with character.^^

In contrast, SF writers create a 'novum' - a radical deviation from the

empirical reality of their time and world. Even though fantasy employs

'novum' it is magical and supernatural. Often SF is also criticised for its

thinness of characterisation. With regard to plot, Gunn opines that mainstream

fiction has minimised or discarded plot as 'mere incident', while plot remains

at the heart of Science fiction.̂ ^ He adds:

This suggests that for the mainstream what happens docs not

really matter; nothing new is going to occur, and the only

proper concern is how character should react to repetition.

Science fiction, on the other hand exists in a world of change,

and the focus is on external events ^̂

Science Fiction in the Real World (1990) by Norman Spinrad distinguishes SF

from other forms of literature. Spinrad states, "Historical fiction is about the

past, contemporary fiction is about the present, SF is about the future."^^ In the

same way, Krishnamoorthy's A Scholar's Guide to American Science Fiction

(1982) distinguishes SF from other forms of literature:

In a piece of reportage, it is blanket indicative tension: this

happened. The subjunctive level for a series of words labeled

naturalistic fiction is defined by: could have happened. In

fantasy, it is the reverse: could not have happened. In Science

fiction, the situations and events are defined by: have not

happened.^"

"To put the matter in the simplest terms", observes Bruce Franklin,

"realistic fiction tries to imitate actuaUties, historical fiction past probabilities,

science fiction possibilities [...].""" Ultimately, as Gunn says, "Mainstream

fiction can do without Darwin entirely. But the predominant factor that

governs science fiction is the element of evolution it deals with."

The culmination of the historical adventures; the emergence of the

spirit of curiosity; the discovery of the geographical routes; the emergence of

technology as an offspring of science, and the resultant challenge offered to

the Biblical description of the world were together responsible for the

emergence of SF and it has grown enormously in recent years particularly with

regard to the themes it deals with. Scholes and Rabkin classify them into three

simple groups: 1. Imaginary worlds 2. Imaginary Beings 3. Sex and Race." It

is possible to list thirty-two SF themes from a reading of Peter Nichols' The

Science in Science Fiction (1982). Of these the major themes are Aliens,

Androids, Clones, Genetic Engineering, Time Travel, and Telepathy.'''' The

stories about robots - which were formerly perceived as androids- deal in

general with all these themes. As a branch of SF, Robotics (Robotistic works)

thematically represents major ideas of the genre.

10

Robotics is the study of the change in the attitude of human society in

the presence of robots. In other words, robotics is the study of human

behaviour in the emergence of the machine. Though much progress in the area

has been made from early times (Proto-SF), the actual history of robotics

begins with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1818). It was closely followed by a

movement which attempted to make automatic toys. Later, the development of

robotics took further shape with the writing of the play R. U.R. (1920) by Karel

Capek.̂ ^ Till the end of the 1930s, robots were created, and destroyed in SF

stories. Only Asimov with 'scientific humanism', has tried to present a positive

attitude towards robots.

Though Asimov has produced a variety of works, his name is a

synonym for SF. While his works invite comparison with those by Arthur

C.Clarke, H.G.Wells, Heinlein or Philip K. Dick, any other author cannot

match the rational excellence and huge variety of his writing. During the long

span of his literary career from 1939 when his first short story "Marooned off

Vesta" was published to his death bed product^ Asimov (1992), Asimov has

been an extremely prolific writer and has published as many as four hundred

and seventy works. Marjorie Miller has listed Asimovian works in Isaac

Asimov - A Check List (1982). It runs to about eighty pages. These include,

however, four volumes of autobiography, his commentary on the Bible and

Shakespearean works, books on scientific topics, several essays on the

11

mechanics of SF writing, interviews, speeches, addresses in conventions,

conferences, a book on Hugo winners, award ceremony speeches, works of

humour, and nearly one hundred thousand letters (unpublished) in response to

his fans' letters. In this regard, a major Asimovian critic Gunn comments,

"Asimov's skills have been sufficient. Rarely more than adequate in the

traditional literary qualities of style, plot, and characterization, he has been

superior in the qualities peculiar to science fiction."''^

Asimov's SF works fall into two major categories: the Foundation

series / the Empire novels and the Robotistic works. The first category deals

with the innovative idea of Tsycho-history'- which is the method of predicting

the mass behaviour of a heterogeneous group of people in a futuristic world.

Probably, as a Professor of biochemistry, Asimov has applied the principle

involved in the 'Kinetic Theory of Gases' which propounds that the behaviour

of individual molecules is unpredictable, but at the same time, the mass

behaviour of the entire gas in the container could be predicted. But Gunn notes

that these works reiterate the history of the Roman Empire in a plausible

scientific world. Asimov too has frankly admitted that Edward Gibbon's

Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire has influenced his Foundation series.^

Isaac Asimov has been one of the most significant and prolific writers

of SF. While his works concern themselves with various aspects of scientific

progress such as time and space travel also, his works in the area of robotics

12

have had special significance, since he has attempted to deal with the

problems that could arise in day-to-day human life due to the use of these

'man-machines'. As Asimov has asserted in one of his volumes of

autobiography In Joy Still Felt (1980), "In fact of all my science fiction

stories, I enjoy my robot stories most, I almost feel as though I have the patent

on the robots."^^ When Gunn interviewed him too Asimov confirmed,

"Certainly the stories that really satisfied me and made me feel good about my

writing were my robot stories, and the robot stories, of course, [...]"

Joseph F. Patrouch's The Science Fiction of Isaac Asimov (1974/°,

James Gunn's Isaac Asimov: The Foundation of Science Fiction (1982) and

Isaac Asimov (1991) by William F. Touponce'*' are the three major critical

works on Asimov's Robotistic works. A few unpublished Ph.D., dissertations

highlight the elements of Asimov's Foundation series. In addition, some

M.Phil theses too focus on the themes which appear in Asimov's / Robotf^

Further, Stanislaw Lem's essay, "Robots in Science Fiction"(1976)'*- ;̂ The

Cybernetic Imagination in Science Fiction (1980) by Patricia S. Warrick'*'*;

Annals (1982) and The Mechanical God (1992) edited by Thomas Dunn &

Richard D. Erlich'* ,̂ treat Asimovian Robotic works in a scholarly manner. But

a majority of these works highlight the elements of science. As Gunn points

out in his introduction, "What is needed is a criticism serious in its standards

13

and its concern for literary value but willing to take seriously a literature based

on ideas, types and events beyond ordinary experiences.""*

Gunn has emphatically called for a serious scholarly literary study of

Asimov's works and the present dissertation titled "The Robotistic Works of

Isaac Asimov: A Study" attempts to fill this gap through a study of Asimovian

robotics as detailed below: While the first section of the introduction has

discussed various definitions of SF and attempted to distinguish it from

mainstream writing, besides highlighting Asimov's contributions to the field,

in the second section of the introduction, an attempt will be made to trace the

growth of robotistic works till Asimov.

The second chapter titled '"Overcoming Frankenstein': Asimovian

Robotics" aims to analyse a major part of Asimov's robotic short stories and

the four robot novels. Simultaneously, the chapter proposes to lay focus on the

Three Laws of Robotics and Asimov's unique mission of eliminating the

'FrpiJ^kenstein Complex' from the minds of the people through his works.

In the third chapter entitled "The Portraiture of Women in Asimovian

Robotics" a study is made of latent feminist perspectivQfin Asimov's works. It

is noteworthy that Asimov has adapted a feminist point of view in his writings

right from the beginning of his literary career through a portrayal of women

characters in his works. Feminist criticism focuses on the invisible component

14

of 'gender' which is not a biological but rather a sociological issue in all its

discourses. The third chapter hence proposes to study the Asimovian robotic

works in the light of feminist and gender concepts.

The fourth chapter examines "Colonial and Racial Overtones in

Asimovian Robotics". Hitherto, the trend in the SF genre has been to portray

the domination of the developed over the developing. Allegorically robots also

represent colonised people. The chapter will discuss colonial and racial

problems and plausible solutions for them through a study of his fiction.

The fifth chapter "The Use of Psychology in Asimovian Robotics" has

three sections: In the first section, Lacan's study of E.A.Poe's "The Purloined The

Letter"'*' and S.A. Cowan's "Five Finger Exercise [...1"'*^ form basis forc^

study of the Unconscious in Asimov's detective fiction. Asimov's works have

been a media of propaganda for the production and sale of robots. Hence, an

attempt is made to study his works keeping Consumer Psychology in mind in

the second section. As Asimov has imputed some of his personal traits to his

characters, a few psychoanalytical tools are made use of in the third section to

study his robotistic works. The final chapter will bring together various

threads presented earlier, and attempt a summing up of the dissertation's

arguments.

« o »

15

II

In this section of the introduction, a discussion of developments in

robotics before the Asimovian era, is attempted. The concept of a robot has

existed from primitive days. Asimov traces the origin of the concept to:

[...] the eighteenth book of Homer's Iliad. Hephaistos, the

Greek God of the forge is described as having for helpers, 'a

couple of maids...made of gold exactly like living girls; they

have sense in their heads, they can speak and use their muscles,

they can spin and weave and do their work...' Surely, these are

robots.'*'

Asimov also cites evidence from a medieval robot story. In its construction it

was similar to an artificial human being - a robot made out of clay. Since the

creatures referred to earlier lack the attributes of life, Asimov christens those

unformed substances as 'Golem'.

The Cybernetic Imagination in Science Fiction (1980) by Patricia S.

Warrick employs the concept of 'Golem' to draw inferences about the

mysteries of the birth of two children Night and Erebus who were bom of

shapelessness. After narrating the original story of Prometheus of the Greek

version, Warrick quotes from Gaston Bachelard's The Psychoanalysis of Fire

(1938), to prove that the "Prometheus complex" or the 'Frankenstein

16

Complex' has not vanished yet.̂ " She also indicates that the Bavarian

scholastic philosopher Albertus Magnus (1204-1282) first built automation in

human form. Although Magnus worked theoretically on the concept of robots

for a period of nearly thirty years there are no records of his experiment and

only the tale has survived. Later, Alchemist Paranecisus (1493-1541) also

attempted to make 'Golem'.

Following the industrial revolution there was a positive growth of

machine culture. Historically, Braise Pascal in 1645 could practically create a

calculating machine that could add and subtract. In 1665 Gottfried Leinbritz

attempted to create a robot which could do arithmetical calculations combined

with reasoning. In those days, Charles Babbage too tried to create a working

model of a computer. The scientific principle involved in his model however

has created an impetus for the moulding of an almost perfect computer in the

present century by technologists.

Patricia Warrick gives full credit to the contribution of Jacques de Vau

Canson (1709-1782) for making a toy, which could move, eat, drink, and

behave like a duck. Furthermore, Warrick lists "automata in human form,

ranging from small to life size figures poured from the workshops of inventors

and clock makers; dancing dolls, mechanical soldiers, bugle, flute, and piano

players" in Canson's work.̂ * The above inventions might have prompted the

German writers like E.T.A.Hoffman to write fiction by making use of these

17

themes. The New Encyclopaedia of Science Fiction (1988) edited by Gunn

observes, "Mechanical humanoids were common since the publication of

Hoffman's 'The Sandman' in 1816.""

Most literary works till the beginning of the nineteenth century

thematically focused on the relationship between man and God. The Industrial

Revolution, however, shook the religious beliefs of the people. It was difficult

for them to accept that man had emerged from lesser beings and was not a

descendent of God. Therefore, many anti-SF works came to light, which

evinced a rebellious attitude against the then emerging man made 'Machines'.

These works highlighted the limitations of man's inventive capacities since

creation, preservation and destruction were traditionally the domain of God.

These works also raised doubts whether the created machines would ever

subvert man and the result would be anarchy, or whether they would dominate

over the world replacing God and man. Theologically, there is a supposition

that man is already overburdened with a remote sense of 'Sin', for which all of

humanity is repenting and trying to make good. One such production, which

represents the voice of the people of those days, is the archetypal SF novel

Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus Unbound (1818) by Mary Shelley.

This work of art examines the true relationship of man, machine and

God. The protagonist Victor Frankenstein a University scholar creates a

monster. Incidentally, the monster does not bear any name, but even today he

18

is well known as the Frankenstein monster. Victor lacks the expertise of

advanced technology to create a human being; hence, he makes use of crude

overgrown organs of corpses for his new creation. In one of the movies, Mary

Shelley's Frankenstein (1994), the monster gets the elixir of life through

thunder and lightning. In a human environment of hatred, avarice, and

jealousy, the monster longs for a female partner but it is not provided one. The

obvious reason might be that the inventor had realised a little too late the

psychological, philosophical and ethical implications that humanity would

have to face if he fulfilled the monster's ambition.

The novel also analyses the psychological trauma of Frankenstein,

which drives him to feel a sense of guilt and remorse. Mary Shelley thus sows

the seed of a powerful image - that of the 'Frankenstein Complex' which not

only deals with the basic existential question of man and God, but which also

projects the universal psycho-sociological problems of society. In fact, the

impact of the 'Frankenstein Complex' has been so deep that it has fascinated

quite a few critics over the past one hundred and eighty years. For instance,

David Ketterer in an article entitled "Mary Shelley and Science Fiction" " lists

forty works and scholarly articles on Frankenstein and provides an overview

of them. Ketterer observes that Frankenstein is the first Science romance,

which has the common 'Gothic' theme in those times. Also, the study marks it

to be a radical rhapsody. Primarily, the work views Frankenstein as a

19

biographical, critical, historical, psychological and stylistic work. The article

deduces material from secondary sources like books, articles, reviews,

dissertations, theses, as also theatrical, film, and television productions of

Frankenstein.

Ketterer comments IJTrftthe presentation of the monster in the novel "as

a Rousseauistic 'noble savage' combined with the application of Godwinian

precepts, conflicts with the dominant Faustian theme." '̂* He highlights the

"profound dialectical involvement of the creature and the creator in the

murderous pursuit of power over death. "̂ ^ The study also analyses the

monster's unconscious "rebellion against the Enlightenment World" of the

author in the light of autobiographical elements.^^

In an examination of the criticism on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

(1818), Mari-Jane Rochelson's article "Mary Shelley's Progeny" (1990)

comprehensively analyses Mary K.Patterson Thomburg's The Monster in the

Mirror: Gender and the Sentimental/ Gothic Myth in Frankenstein (1987),

Anne K. Mellor's Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters (1988)

and AUene Stuart Phy's Mary Shelley (1988). The article highlights the

psychoanalytical study in support of the autobiographical elements present in

the works of Mary Shelley. It also attempts a comparative study of the 1818

and 1831 editions and discloses that the creation of the monster was the result

of the traces of Mary Shelley's 'waking dream' in 1816.

20

David Soyka's article "Frankenstein and the Miltonic Creation of Evil"

(1992), comments on the religious aspects of the novel and Mary Shelley's

view that "mankind is the source of troubles in the world."^^ Soyka quotes

William Walling's assertions that "Victor is portrayed as 'a version of the

Creator' - of God Himself , and comments that "Evil in Frankenstein is

grounded in the concept of creation"^' since God has also created Satan the

destroyer. He points out that "His monster fills the multiple roles of the fallen

Adam and Satan avenging the God vi'ho cast him out, as v̂ 'ell as of a Job-like

victim of circumstances beyond individual control."***

Commenting upon the subtitle of the novel Soyka highlights the fact

that 'Prometheus' means forethought - which is decidedly lacking throughout

the novel. The lack of purpose in the monster's creation is only realised at the

time of Victor's marriage when the monster warns "I shall be with you on your

wedding night. " '̂ This view of the particular incident revives the underlying

theme which "is rooted in Miltonic questions about [the] first creation. If God

is the creator of things, why did He create evil to ruin his creation?"*"^ Perhaps,

it is expected that Science and Philosophy might present the solution to such

conflicts. Soyka tries to answer the question why the monster created in the

laboratory goes unnamed. He suggests "it is just another aspect of Victor"^^

and that "Frankenstein and the monster must be the same entity."^'' His

suggestion thus links Victor the monster with the character of Mr.Hyde in R.L.

21

Stevenson's DrJekyll and Mr.Hyde. He traces the source of Mary Shelley's

creation to "the grim terrors of [her] waking dream" and interprets these

dreams as "the sort of alternative, sometimes overlapping reality in which their

'double' or 'doppelganger' may participate in the art of creation."^^

Soyka concludes that the innumerable works on Frankenstein suggest

that humanity has the ability to learn from mistakes; from a feminist point of

view, Frankenstein is a book which deals with what happens when a man tries

to produce a baby without a woman; the fact that Frankenstein is upheld as a

progenitor of SF, and is hence given respectability, is precisely because of its

literary richness.̂ ^ Various writers, film makers, television serial directors,

painters and artists have been creating robot images from different

perspectives against humanity so as to build up a repulsion to their creation.

This attitude is christened 'Frankenstein Complex' in /, Robot (1950) by Isaac

Asimov.

Frankenstein Complex is a very powerful image, which might have

influenced the emergence of a number of works in later years. In this regard,

Patricia Warrick mentions Samuel Butler's Erewhon (1872) which tried to

"satirize the idea of evolution and ridicule reason [...]." '̂ Butler's intention was

to revolt against technological progress and also the evolutionary theory of

Darwin. The chief reason for this dystopian view is that machines in future

may gain consciousness and might rule the world. This kind of an ideology is

22

also present in Tales from Hoffman by Jacques Offenbach in 1881 which deals

with the theme of mechanical humanoids. The trend might have influenced

Thomas Edison to build a talking doll in 1894,presently known as the Tik-

Tok Machine Man'.

Similarly, "Moxon's Naster" (1894) by Ambrose Bierce deals with the

philosophical question pertaining to the relationship between living beings and

automation. Hence, Bierce concludes "that all matter is sentient, that every

atom is a living, feeling, conscious being. There is no such thing as dead, inert

matter; it is all alive [...]."̂ ^

Another predominant classical dystopian work is Karel Capek's play

Rossom's Universal Robots (1920), which was first staged in the year 1921.

The robots in the play have revolted against their creator Rossum. Warrick

opines that R. U.R. is "a satire attacking capitalism and the alienation of the

masses and not an exploration of the development of artificial intelligence."^^

The robots herein are organically made and hence they are termed as

humanoids (androids) and not robots. In other words, these robots are assumed

to be slaves of human masters:

Human reproduction begins to cease and population declines.

The robots begin to develop sensitivity and become irritated at

23

being allowed to function only as servants. They revolt against

dwindling mankind, which fights the robot rebellion by ceasing

the manufacture of more robots. °̂

But Warrick opines that the result would be more devastating as "man's desire

[is] to exercise his freedom even at the cost of unhappiness." '̂ According to

her, if man is treated like a machine, then the play would suggest that man

would also be transformed into a machine.

However, Karel Capek was the first person to use the word 'Robots',

which is the etymological derivation of the Czech word 'Robota'- meaning

thereby bonded labour. Karel Capek in an article "The Author of the Robots

Defends Himself (1935) which is republished in Science Fiction Studies

(1996), asserts that his "robots were created quite differently - that is, by

chemical path", by which the product of the various emulsions behaves like

living matter.'̂ Further, he has speculated that such a substance might

artificially be produced in test tubes. The newly created thing will behave

exactly like an organic being by chemical synthesis and could thus be an

alternative to life if the robot would acquire a soul. This particular stand

evidently shows that his robots have not emerged "with the technological

hubris of a mechanical engineer, but with the metaphysical humility of a

spiritualist" because, their perception of theology is akin to the line of thought

of a human being.̂ "' The article ends with a dystopian note that someday

24

robots might demand a soul in protesting against the mechanical superstition

of our times.

Another remarkable work in the history of SF is Lester del Rey's

"Helen O' Loy"(1938)^''. In his article "The Artificial Alien: Transformations

of the Robot in Science Fiction" (1983), Morton Klass observes that this story

deals with the principles of 'feminism'/^ He touches upon the practical

revolution that robotic SF has brought about. He also comments on the

transformation of the earliest robots from "flesh and blood creations, * ^ •>

perceived as potentially inimical in a number of ways", to "mechanical

equivalent[s] of humans" taking on "many but not all the attributes of

aliens."'^ Examining the SF works in 1930s and 1940s -the Golden age of SF-

Klass observes:

There is no single theme that encompasses all of science

fiction, of course, but this confidence that humans could cope

with the problems posed by science and technology was

certainly pervasive in the literature, and so was an awareness of

what I have called Faustian question.^^

Although Klass deals with the primitive ideology of robots of the Golden Age,

the article is noteworthy for its classification of robots into two kinds: Robot

as servant and Robot as an alien.

25

In another important study, "Robots in Science Fiction"(1971)

Stanislaw Lem deals with the fundamental ideas of Science fiction:

The sum total of all texts of science fiction consists of

two kinds: 1. either Science fiction talks about what possibly

can occur in the real Continuum (in the future) or could have

happened (in the past) and then tries to become a branch of

robotic literature that follows through its hypotheses; or 2. it is

a game, played with autonomous rules which can deviate at

will, firom the rules to which our world is subject.'*

Thus the game played might be an empty one or it could also be addressed to

the world. As far as the robots in SF are concerned, Lem views them "as an

attempt at futurological prediction."'̂ Lem also considers their appearances,

the operational technology, the impact on socio-psychological problems and

the "metaphysical world view."^°

Another major contribution of Lem with regard to the criticism on

Robotics is that it can project nothing about the 'existential problems' of

robots. He analyses that "it can only be an allegory, a parable, a fairy tale, a

humorous sketch or something grotesque." '̂Lem dismisses Kafka's

Metamorphosis, in which a human being is transformed into a bug, because "it

does not say anything about the Tuturological perspectives." ^̂ Lem's stand in

26

this respect helps to eliminate a number of works of this kind during further

discussions in the present study. Lem also classifies robots in SF stories into

four major categories, based on the relationships depicted. They are, "the

relationship between man and machine; the relationship between master and

slave; the relationship between man and succubus or incubus; the relationship

between man and transcendence (Deity, etc)."^^He coins a new word- 'robot

neurosis' to mean the incapability of human beings to shoulder all the

responsibilities. His works generally exhibit a negative approach to robotics.

« o »

To sum up. Robotics is the study of the change in the human behaviour

in response to the emergence of robots. Though the manufacture and the use of

robots can be traced from ancient times, the history of robotistic works begins

with Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1818). Even though automatic toys have

entered the market, robotic stories still highlight the 'Frankenstein Complex'.

Much progress in the field of robotics has been evident since the staging of

Karel Capuehe's R.U.R. However, the common negative theme in the robot

stories has been that robots are created and they in turn kill their masters.

Asimov, however, is a pioneer in the writing of positive robotistic stories and

he has tried to present a world in which men and robots can co-exist, as

becomes evident through the following analysis of his works, in the next

chapter.

27

« o »

Chapter I

End Notes

' Mary Shelley, Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus, (New York:

Airmont, 1963).

^ William Wilson, A Little Efajrnest Book Upon A Great Old Subject

(1851) quoted by John H. Timmerman, Other Worlds: The Fantasy Genre,

(Ohio: Bowling Green UP, 1983), 13.

^ Hugo Gemsback quoted in // Happened Tomorrow edited by Bal

Phondke, (New Delhi: National Book Trust, 1995), ix.

"* The Compact Oxford English Dictionary ^Microscopic' (New York:

OxfordUP, 1992), 1674.

^ J.O.Bailey, Pilgrims Through Space and Time, (1947; Westport:

Greenwood, 1977), 10.

^ John W Campbell quoted in P.S.Krishnamoorthy's, A Scholar's

Guide to Modern American Science Fiction, (Hyderabad: ASRC, 1982), 8.

' Sam Moskowitz, Explorers of the Infinite, (1963; Westport:

Hyperion, 1974), 11.

28

^ Kingsley Amis, New Maps of Hell, (New York: Amo, 1974), 18.

' Reginald Bretnor, "A Discursive Symposium by Bova and Others."

Science Fiction of Today and Tomorrow, (New York: Harper, 1974), 150.

'" Robert A Heinlein quoted by Krishnamoorthy, 8.

' ' Brian Ash, Faces of the Future: The Lessons of Science Fiction,

(London: Elek/Pemberton, 1975), 17.

'̂ Evgeni Brandis, "The Horizons of Science Fiction", Science Fiction

of Today, (Moscow: Writers Union of USSR, No.l,{406}, 1982), 147.

'̂ Brandis, 147.

''' Norman Spinrad, Science Fiction in the Real World, (Carbondale:

Southern Illinois UP, 1990), 56.

'^Spinrad, 221.

'̂ James Gunn, ed.. The Road to Science Fiction (New York: New

American Library, 1977), ii.

'̂ Edmund Crispin, ed.. Best SF Six: Science Fiction Stories.

London: Faber and Faber, 1966, 7.

'̂ Theodore Sturgeon quoted in Scholars Guide by Krishnamoorthy, 8.

29

'̂ Earl G. IngersoU, ed., Interview, "A Conversation with Isaac

Asimov", Science Fiction Studies, 14 (1987), 68.

°̂ Asimov quoted in Darko Suvin's Metamorphosis of Science Fiction,

(London: Yale U, 1979), 5.

^' Darko Suvin, "On the Poetics of the Science Fiction Genre", College

English, 34 (191713Sl.

^^ Thomas D.Clareson, Science Fiction Periodicals, A Microfilm,

(Nest Port: Green Wood P Series II, Introduction, n.d.) n.pag. Source:

(Hyderabad: ASRC Vertical file.)

^̂ Samuel Delany's speech at the Intensive Institute [SF], U of Kansas,

Lawrence, the USA on 3.7.2000.

^^ See Darko Suvin's Positions and Presuppositions in Science

Fiction, (Kent: The Kent UP, 1988).

^̂ See Thomas Clareson's Understanding Contemporary American

Science Fiction, (Columbia: U of South Carolina P, 1990).

^̂ James Gunn, "The World View of Science Fiction", Extrapolation,

36 (1995): 95.

" Gunn, 95.

30

^̂ Gunn, 95.

^̂ Spinrad, 56.

•'" Krishnamoorthy, 154

^' H. Bruce Franklin, Future Perfect: American Science Fiction of

the Nineteenth Century. (London: Oxford UP, 1978), 3.

^̂ Gunn, 1995, 94.

" Scholes and Rabkin, Science Fiction: History, Science and Vision,

(London: Oxford UP, 1977), 82.

'' Peter Nicholls, ed., The Science in Science Fiction: Does Science

Fiction Foretell the Future? (New York: Crescent, 1982).

^̂ Karel Capek, Rossum 's Universal Robots (1920), trans.Paul Silver

(1923; New York: Dutton, 1963).

^̂ Gunn, (1982), ix.

•'̂ Asimov, Gold: The Final Science Fiction Collection (London:

HarperCollins, 1995), 248.

^̂ Asimov, In Joy Still Felt: An Autobiography 1954-1978, (New York:

Doubleday, 1980), 9.

39 Gunn, 1982, 22.

31

''° Joseph F Patrouch Jr. The Science Fiction of Isaac Asimov. (New

York: Doubleday), 1974.

"" William F Touponce, Isaac Asimov, (Boston: Twayne ), 1991.

'̂ ^ The dissertations are "Fiat Homo- Let There be Man - Apocalyptic

Renewal in Asimov's Foundation Series" (1992) by K.S.Purushothaman and

J. Panneer Selvam's "Credibility Criterion in Asimov's Foundation Trilogy"

(1997). The Indian theses are Prakash S. Rao's "Isaac Asimov's Works of

60's and 70's: A Study in Scientific Humanism". M.Phil. Thesis. (Hyderabad:

Osmania U), 1982; Veena's "Parodoxes of Order in the Fiction of Isaac

Asimov". M.Phil. Thesis. (Hyderabad: Osmania U), 1982; S.Guruswamy's

"Asimov's Vision of Utopia in Foundation's Edge and Foundation and

Earth." M.Phil Thesis, (Thiruchirapalli: Bharathidasan U), 1989 and Maria

Gerdy's "The Human-Robot Relationship: The Theme in Isaac Asimov's

Robot Trilogy" (1986; Columbia University Teacher's College thesis).

Gerdy's work centres around "the Three Laws of Robotics" which form "a

code for proper robotic behaviour". {DAI, Al. 3 .1986), 815A.

"̂ Stanislaw Lem. "Robots in Science Fiction". SF: The Other Side of

Realism Ohio: Bowling Green UP, 1971.

'*'' Patricia S. Warrick. The Cybernetic Imagination in Science

Fiction. (London: MITP), 1980.

32

''̂ Thomas P Dunn and Richard D Erlich, eds. The Mechanical God:

The Machines in Science Fiction. (Westport: Greenwood P), 1982.

^^Gunn, 1982,vii.

^̂ E.A Poe's "The Purloined Letter: A Gift (1845) is critically analysed

in Marie P Bonaparte's The Life and Works of Edgar Allen Poe: A

Psychoanalytic Interpretation, (London: Imago, 1949); and see Jacques

Lacan's "The Seminar on The Purloined Letter' Ecrits; and also Shoshana

Felman's Jacques Lacan and the Adventure of Insight: Psychoanalysis in

Contemporary Culture, (Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1987), 27-51.

^^ S.A.Cowan, "Five Finger Exercise: Asimov's Clues to the Plot

Solution of'Catch That Rabbit". Science Fiction Studies 16.1 (1989).

^^ Asimov, Robot Visions, (Great Britain: Victor GoUancz, 1990), 10.

°̂ Warrick, 29.

'̂ Warrick, 34.

" James Gunn ed., The New Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, (New

York: Viking, 1988), 389.

^̂ David Ketterer, "Mary Shelley and Science Fiction - A Select

Bibliography Selectively Annotated." Science Fiction Studies 5.2 (1978).

33

^'^ Ketterer, 174. Here 'Godwinian precepts' refers to the perception of

Mary Shelley as is presented in the works.

" Ketterer, 175.

^̂ Ketterer, 176.

" David Soyka, "Frankenstein and the Miltonic Creation of Evil",

Extrapolation, 33.2 (1992): 166.

"̂ Soyka, 166.

^̂ Soyka, 167.

°̂ Soyka, 167

'̂ Soyka, 167.

^̂ Soyka, 167.

" Soyka, 168.

^̂ Soyka, 170.

^̂ Soyka, 168-169.

'^'^ Soyka, 169-176.

^̂ Warrick, 41.

^̂ Warrick, 40.

^̂ Warrick, 49.

'° Warrick, 49.

'̂ Warrick, 48.

34

^̂ Karel Capek, "The Author of the Robots Defends Himself, Science

Fiction Studies, 23 (1996): 143-144. [Originally published in a newspaper-

Lidove noviny, 43.290 (9 Jun 1935): 9.]

'^ Capek, 144.

'̂* Lester del Rey, "Helen O' Loy" Astounding Science Fiction, Dec 1938.

" Morton Klass, "The Artificial Alien: Transformations of the Robots

in Science Fiction", Robotics: Future Factories, Future Workers: The

Annals. 4 {19S3).

^̂ Klass, 171.

^̂ Klass, 175.

^̂ Stanislaw Lem, "Robots in Science Fiction", SF: The Other Side of

Realism, ed. Thomas D. Clareson. (Ohio: Bowling Green UP, 1971), 311.

'^ Lem, 312.

°̂ Lem, 312.

'̂ Lem, 312.

^̂ Lem, 312.

^̂ Lem, 313.

« o »