2021年6月29日 星期二

Can Isaac Asimov’s legacy be saved?

Taking a break to worry about movie adaptations.
1984's "Dune."Allstar Picture Library Ltd./Alamy
Author Headshot

By Paul Krugman

Opinion Columnist

These are terrifying times. Today's column is about how an increasingly authoritarian Republican Party has decided that its interests are best served by making Americans as ignorant as possible. One of the things the G.O.P. wants us to be ignorant about, climate change, is looking deadly real, with the Pacific Northwest — the Pacific Northwest! — experiencing the kind of temperatures we normally associate with Saudi Arabia. And I promise that I'll be getting back to important stuff later this week. But I need a break. So today's newsletter is going to be about … my hopes and fears for two forthcoming film adaptations of classic science fiction novels.

These days science fiction and its not entirely distinct cousin fantasy are all over the culture. But it was not always thus. When I was growing up, serious culturati sniffed at genre fiction, considering it a refuge for nerdy teenage boys — which wasn't entirely wrong at the time.

I was, however, one of those nerdy kids. I read a lot of science fiction, and still do. There were two novels that had special meaning for me — and both have film adaptations coming out this fall.

One of them was Frank Herbert's "Dune," a sweeping epic set on a desert planet, with knife fights, mystical powers and, oh yes, giant worms. It's an amazing piece of world-building; Herbert was clearly possessed by a vision and worked obsessively to get it right. The closest recent equivalent I can think of, in which an author manages to engross readers in a strange world conveyed with almost hallucinatory clarity, is N.K. Jemisin's "Broken Earth" trilogy.

ADVERTISEMENT

"Dune" is also an extremely cinematic novel, which has in fact been the subject of two adaptations. Unfortunately, both were terrible. In each case the directors lost all of the novel's subtlety and depth. I don't know whether that was because they didn't get it, or had too much contempt for their audience to believe that viewers would get it.

Anyway, there's a new version — much delayed by the pandemic — coming out soon, and what we've seen in trailers looks true to Herbert's vision. I'm optimistic about this one.

The other great science-fiction novel of my nerdy youth was Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" trilogy — I even wrote an introduction to the Folio Society edition. The conceit of the "Foundation" novels is that galactic civilization is collapsing, but nobody knows it except a handful of mathematical social scientists — the psychohistorians, led by a guy named Hari Seldon — who devise a plan to limit the damage. Civilization, their math tells them, can't be saved, but they can limit the duration of the dark age that will follow. The "Foundation" novels trace the progress of their plan across the centuries.

"Foundation" had a huge impact on me personally — you see, I wanted to be one of those psychohistorians, a mathematical social scientist saving humanity. Economics was, unfortunately, as close as I could get.

ADVERTISEMENT

The thing about "Foundation," however, is that aside from not being very good literature — Asimov's ideas were amazing, but his characters were as two-dimensional as they get — it's the opposite of cinematic. It's a gripping tale in its way, but there's hardly any action — the handful of space battles that even get mentioned take place essentially offscreen, and you eventually learn that they didn't matter anyway, because the Seldon Plan doesn't depend on heroic derring-do. Mostly the novels involve people talking to each other.

So how could you even try to film the "Foundation" novels? Well, yesterday the second trailer for the forthcoming Apple TV movie dropped, with far more information than the first trailer. And what's clear is that in an attempt to give the story sufficiently striking visuals, the filmmakers have chosen to make some big changes from the original novels. A clone dynasty? Massive CGI space battles? None of that is in the books.

Which might be perfectly OK. Great showrunners can do incredible things with seemingly unpromising material. I saw the original movie version of "Westworld," which was so cheesy it gave Velveeta a bad name (although Yul Brynner was born to be a homicidal robot cowboy); somehow it became a mind-bogglingly good, even profound TV series.

So I'm anxiously waiting to see how this turns out. Will Apple pull off a video miracle, or will it tarnish the memories of my nerdy youth?

ADVERTISEMENT

And with that, I'm going back to the many threats menacing our actually existing, merely terrestrial civilization.

Quick Hits

Some people have tried to follow the psychohistorian career track more closely than I did.

Asimov was clearly thinking of the fall of the Roman Empire. But the Romans weren't much like us.

Although their economy appears to have been surprisingly sophisticated.

It pains me to learn that Newt Gingrich was also an Asimov fan.

Feedback
If you're enjoying what you're reading, please consider recommending it to friends. They can sign up here. If you want to share your thoughts on an item in this week's newsletter or on the newsletter in general, please email me at krugman-newsletter@nytimes.com.

Facing the Movies

CGI, Robot?YouTube

Well, this doesn't look like the book. But we can hope.

IN THE TIMES

How Weird Is the Heat in Portland, Seattle and Vancouver? Off the Charts.

The heat smothering the Pacific Northwest has little precedent in four decades of record-keeping.

By Aatish Bhatia, Henry Fountain and Kevin Quealy

Article Image

It's Some of America's Richest Farmland. But What Is It Without Water?

A California farmer decides it makes better business sense to sell his water than to grow rice. An almond farmer considers uprooting his trees to put up solar panels. Drought is transforming the state, with broad consequences for the food supply.

By Somini Sengupta

Article Image

Obamacare's Survival Is Now Assured, but It Still Has One Big Problem

Twelve states have refused to expand Medicaid, leaving millions of poor Americans without health coverage and Democrats divided over how to respond.

By Sarah Kliff

Article Image

New York and New Jersey Need an $11B Tunnel. Will Biden Make It Happen?

The transportation secretary said building a new rail link under the Hudson River is critical to the economy far beyond the region.

By Patrick McGeehan

Article Image

Subscribe Today

New York Times Opinion curates a wide range of views, inviting rich discussion and debate that helps readers analyze the world. This work is made possible with the support of subscribers. Please consider subscribing to The Times with this special offer.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for Paul Krugman from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018

On Tech: Apple’s strategy bends the world

How Apple's business tactics, partly driven by fear, affect the rest of us.

Apple's strategy bends the world

Timo Lenzen

I'm going to put Apple and other technology giants on the therapist's couch: To understand their motivations and actions, it's helpful to examine their vulnerabilities.

I've been surprised this year that Apple mostly hasn't budged as regulators and some app companies complain loudly about the downsides of the app system that Apple created more than a decade ago. The gripe essentially is that Apple abuses its control over iPhone apps to impose unfair fees and complexities on app developers. That's the claim in a lawsuit that Epic Games, the maker of the Fortnite video game, has pending against Apple.

Apple says that it is right to exercise control over apps and collect commissions for some things that we do on our phones. But there's also something else at work: fear.

Connecting the dots between Apple's business predicaments and its choices helps us understand why the company does what it does — and by extension how those actions affect everyone, whether we own an Apple device or not. Apple's strategy bends the world.

Why should Apple be worried? It is wildly successful and has so much cash that … well, corporate employees sit in desk chairs that might cost more than your sofa. Or your car.

ADVERTISEMENT

But the reality is that sales of smartphones will probably never again have a growth spurt like the one in the 2010s that made Apple a superstar. Smartphones have become a necessity of modern life in many countries, like refrigerators, but there are fewer potential first-time smartphone buyers every year, and people are waiting longer to replace phones they already own.

(I'll acknowledge that Apple has sold a bunch more iPhones and other devices recently. We'll see if that's lasting, or a pandemic-related blip.)

Apple and lots of people who keep tabs on the company don't think it's a problem if Apple has a harder time selling more iPhones each year. Instead, the company has shifted its strategy to make more money from the gadgets that we have in our homes and pockets — in the form of app downloads, subscriptions like Apple Music, AirPods headphones and other Apple products or services connected to company devices.

It's a smart strategy that's working very well, but also one born of necessity now that the peak smartphone era seems to be over.

ADVERTISEMENT

There's also a long shadow cast by Apple's need to become more than the iPhone company. Would Apple, for example, be more willing to reconsider aspects of the app store if it weren't so reliant on generating money from sources other than iPhone sales? And how much are Apple's tactics changing all of the technology that we use?

The Vox writer Peter Kafka recently wrote that Facebook decided to start newsletters that people read outside of Facebook's apps in part to avoid paying the fees that Apple demands from digital subscriptions sold inside its iPhone apps. The billions of people who use Facebook are affected by Apple's strategy to squeeze more cash from apps.

Companies have also said that they felt forced to charge people money in their iPhone apps because of Apple's rules. In short, those apps might be worse for users, because of Apple's strategy shift.

It's not unusual for the world around us to be shaped by companies' business models and finances. And sometimes it works in our favor. Microsoft is giving Windows PC users access to more kinds of apps partly because it — unlike Apple — doesn't need to make money from app fees, and Microsoft wants to thumb its nose at Apple.

ADVERTISEMENT

We aren't completely at the whims of big companies' tactics to make money. But I find it useful to examine the ways that our technology choices are not accidents, nor are they purely driven by what we want.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here.

Subscribe Today

We hope you've enjoyed this newsletter, which is made possible through subscriber support. Subscribe to The New York Times with this special offer.

Before we go …

  • A win for Facebook in a likely long war: A federal judge said that a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit that wants to break up Facebook lacked too many essential facts to move ahead. The judge told the government to try providing evidence that Facebook meets the legal definition of a monopoly, Cecilia Kang reported. DealBook has an analysis of the opinion from the judge, who also said that more than 40 states had waited too long to bring their own antitrust case.Related: All of the antitrust investigations and lawsuits against Big Tech companies are terrific for lawyers, Cecilia and David McCabe write. One example: 51 lawyers from 21 law firms have appeared in court related to antitrust cases against Google.
  • Life is just fodder for online posts: Residents in a rural county in China dress up as old-style farmers and fishermen to stage scenes of a bygone China for local and foreign tourists to photograph and post online, my colleague Vivian Wang writes. The setups are elaborate, including burning straw to simulate mist.
  • Robot pets are meh but also promising: "They could become sophisticated enough to become their own category of thing — not a living pet necessarily, but not a glorified toaster either," says a writer for Gizmodo.

Hugs to this

This is a mesmerizing video of a herd of sheep, recorded from a drone over several months and sped up. (I spotted this first in the Garbage Day newsletter.)

We want to hear from you. Tell us what you think of this newsletter and what else you'd like us to explore. You can reach us at ontech@nytimes.com.

If you don't already get this newsletter in your inbox, please sign up here. You can also read past On Tech columns.

Need help? Review our newsletter help page or contact us for assistance.

You received this email because you signed up for On Tech with Shira Ovide from The New York Times.

To stop receiving these emails, unsubscribe or manage your email preferences.

Subscribe to The Times

Connect with us on:

facebooktwitterinstagram

Change Your EmailPrivacy PolicyContact UsCalifornia Notices

LiveIntent LogoAdChoices Logo

The New York Times Company. 620 Eighth Avenue New York, NY 10018