William Gibson explains why science fiction writers don’t predict the future


mostlysignssomeportents:

image

William Gibson speaks with Wired’s Geeta Dayal about his new book Distrust That Particular Flavor (my review), and particularly the idea that science fiction sucks at predicting stuff.

Science fiction writers aren’t fortune tellers. Fortune tellers are
fakes. Fortune tellers are either deluded or charlatans. You can find
science fiction writers who are deluded or science fiction writers who
are charlatans — I can think of several of each in the history of the
field. Every once in a while, somebody extends their imagination down
the line, far enough with a sufficient lack of prejudice, to imagine
something that then actually happens. When it happens, it’s great, but
it’s not magic. All the language we have for describing what science
fiction writers and futurists of other stripes do is nakedly a language
of magic.

I’m having a week where some well-intentioned person on the internet
describes me as “oracular.” As soon as one of the words with a magic
connotation is attached — I know this from ongoing experience — as soon
as someone says “oracular,” it’s like, boom! It’s all over the place;
it’s endlessly repeated. It’s probably not bad for business. But then I
wind up spending a lot of time disabusing people of the idea that I have
some sort of magic insight…. You can also find, if you wanted to Google
through all the William Gibson pieces on the net, you can find tons of
pieces, where people go on and on about how often I’ve gotten it wrong.
Where are the cellphones? And neural nets? Why is the bandwidth of
everything microscopic in Neuromancer? I could write technological
critique of Neuromancer myself that I think could probably convince
people that I haven’t gotten it right.

Because the thing that Neuromancer predicts as being actually like the
internet isn’t actually like the internet at all! It’s something; I
didn’t get it right but I said there was going to be something. I
somehow managed to convey a feeling of something. Curiously, that put me
out ahead of the field in that regard. It wasn’t that other people were
getting it wrong; it was just that relatively few people in the early
1980s, relatively few people who were writing science fiction were
paying attention to that stuff. That wasn’t what they were writing
about.

I published an essay with my take on this in Locus: A Vocabulary for Speaking about the Future.

William Gibson on Why Sci-Fi Writers Are (Thankfully) Almost Always Wrong

(Photo: Jason Redmond/Wired)