I don't think that's true. James Lovelock in his Gaia hypothesis suggests that the planet has a self-regulating mechanism which keeps conditions on its surface optimum for life. If he's right, then paving over Earth could well result in our destruction as a species.
What if you lived on a world where not keeping an eye on the seasons could result in your death? Perhaps there's a plague of insects that hatch every year that bring a disease deadly to humans. Perhaps they're short-lived, like Mayflies, and in a few hours they've hatched, flown to mate, and died. It would be possible to co-exist with them, but you'd need to keep a close watch on the seasons, and keep out of the way when they hatched. And what happens if your man on watch doesn't spot the signs, or deliberately doesn't warn people?
Or perhaps winter brings vicious ice-storms that blow up frighteningly fast. If you're caught out in the sub-zero blizzard winds you'll die. You'd have to get out of the fields fast when they're approaching. How would you feed yourself all winter? And what happens if the stockpile of food isn't big enough for everyone?
I've always wondered how post-apocalyptic worlds set in temperate regions grow enough food for their people. Few writers ever mention this. But temperate climate gardeners know there's a "hungry gap" in late winter/early spring when stored crops have run out and the new spring crops haven't grown enough to harvest. And if spring was late in a year when stored crops were low, you have the recipe for disaster.
There's lot of scope in SF to embrace the seasons. I suspect that, however clever our tech, Gaia and nature herself will always be far more clever. And perhaps if our SF showed more awareness of the natural world this might seep through into the present day and encourage more people to take better care of present-day Earth.
No comments:
Post a Comment