People, Politics, Plots and Paradigms

I'm starting this with no idea where it's going. Maybe to somewhere different and interesting. Meanwhile it's being written from the viewpoint of a writer. Primarily of science fiction.

Writing novels, when it’s going well, is joy. For me, certainly. Often challenging, but joy. I suspect many authors find it so, with characters, people, effects...and sometimes politics. My novel *The General’s President* for example, the story and "the story universe" — replete with ideas, paradigms, plots and politics.

We’re used to the words “people” and “politics” and “plots,” but some of us may not have a good grip on “paradigms.” Ten, fifteen years ago, if I’d ever heard the term “paradigm,” it hadn’t stuck. The first time I recall it, the meaning was somewhat mysterious, and it struck me as needlessly academic — a four-bit professorial term perhaps intended to impress. I wondered if it was newly coined, and looked it up in my Oxford English Dictionary. Turned out to be a word the ancient Greeks knew, and its first cited use in English was way back in 1483. By 1659, an explicit OED citation pretty much fits the sense of the word as widely used today: “The universe...was made exactly conformable to its Paradigme, or universal Exemplar.” And in 1752: “The archetype, paradigm, exemplar, and idea, according to which all things were made.”

Definitely not newly coined, suggesting how low a profile it had in recent mainstream English. A professorial word, sure, but that’s appropriate enough. Professors swim in their own pools, to their own depths, by their own rules, and if we didn’t have professors, we’d be the worse off.

So. For our purpose, consider a paradigm as a pattern or model designed, intended, or conceived of as (theoretically) depicting some natural system, for the purpose of examination, experimentation, argument or what have you.

You might want to file that for further reference. Paradigms can be useful to have around.

Meanwhile this brief piece is intended as a piñata of observations, maybe an aphorism or two, and brief theses dealing with people, politics, plots and ideas. (Paradigms, as a special class of ideas, will be more implied here than explicit.) Also consider this a work in progress; I may improve on it.

Basics

Language is a system of metaphor, existing in variants that differ in grammar, vocabulary, and referents. Mathematics is a language of exceptional precision and marvelous reach, but that precision grows out of laws and agreed-upon rules, that limit its valid application. For example, laws requiring that relationships between variables be linear (rectilinear or curvilinear), which often they are not. And that certain of them be independent of certain others, which also is often not true. And that appearances/measurements can be deceiving, especially when they dodge around a bit. And it can be tricky, for precision is one thing, and accuracy frequently something else.

The point here being that in the real world, those characteristics are commonly missing, and our descriptions and predictions are accordingly...well, consider weather forecasting, and environmental modeling in general. Environmental modeling is very valuable in exploring how things work, but as predictors they are uncertain. Fallible.

Still, mathematics is broadly useful. And like all language, repeated use of mathematics literally programs the brain to accommodate the tools it provides. Enabling the creative aspects of mind to enlarge on that language. And to enlarge the analytical and creative powers of the ensouled life form — in our case human beings.

And if even our best descriptive and analytical tools are more or less faulty, consider our predictions, hopes, fears, prospects!

“We dwell in a physical universe not designed for the convenience or indulgence of humans or other incarnate souls. Intelligence, diligence, and good intentions do not necessarily produce security, comfort, or pleasure. There are no guarantees.

“One can try, and one can hope, but one's expectations are often disappointed. On the other hand, today's victories sometimes lead to tomorrow's woes, while out of today's woes may grow tomorrow's blessings. The roots of joys and griefs can be distant in both time and place, so it is well to be light on your feet, and not too fixed in your desires.” (From page 4 of The Lion Returns, by John Dalmas; Baen Books 1999. From the lips — well, the mind — of a half-ton wild boar!)

This adds surprise — spice, zest — to life. Like horse radish — sometimes hotter than one might like.

Speaking of metaphor: Think of the universe as a holistic, n-dimensional matrix, in constant motion in each dimension simultaneously. Some of the constituent movements are like a bowl of water at a slow boil or rolling boil, others galloping, like a mountain stream with rapids, boulders, eddies, deep holes, beaver flowages, cutbanks... Let those dimensions manifest in color, the whole thing an infinitely nuanced whole.

A dynamic system, a dance eternally evolving.

Obviously this sketch is extremely metaphorical.

Taking a different approach, imagine a moving continuum of fractals. Of mixed fractals! A metaphor providing a different sense of the universe and relationship, tapping more deeply it’s emotional and esthetic aspects.

Listen to Stravinsky’s rich and glorious *Firebird Suite,* or the deep beauty of Borodin’s *On the Plains of Central Asia.* And finally, from polar or subpolar regions, watch a display of the aurora, mesmerizingly — almost heart-stoppingly — beautiful!

The General’s President (Baen, 1988)

So. System models are Pradigms of a sort. But where do Plots and Politics come in here? In fact, especially in science fiction, writers often explore ideas in a novel. The ideas may be the core of the story, or stage settings, or courses in the dinner. But exploration is popular, and among the most popular — most interesting and captivating — are explorations of persons by persons.

Theoretical physicists sometimes create a thought experiment, visualizing a set of circumstances, factors, and “particles,” and what could/might/must result, based on available understandings. Some science-fiction stories resemble thought experiments.

That’s the game I played when writing The General’s President. The geogravitic power converter was not the main idea. The main idea was to explore “what might transpire if: a, in the presence of b, is acted upon by c.”

My purpose in writing “President” was to explore some thoughts on what might develop if, in the 1990s, we had another Great Depression, and a new Roosevelt-like president took on the job of salvaging our society, democracy, and self confidence. I intended it to feel real, to be thought-provoking and enjoyable. (It certainly provoked some people! Nearly twenty years after publication, you can find angry or grouchy reviews of it on Amazon.con.)

And writing it took a lot of time, because (1) it was long. And (2) I had to make it plausible, because many science fiction readers demand plausibility. Thus I did (for me) a huge amount of reading (I do not read rapidly), for example of publicly available military and geopolitical analyses of world trouble spots in the mid-1980s, and books by Soviet defectors — generals and journalists — on the Soviet army, the GRU, the KGB, the Kremlin....

I also made a lot of phone calls. For example to the Secret Service, regarding the White House nuclear shelter (ha ha! Good luck, John), and the White House switchboard regarding fireplaces (gas-burning? wood? “Why wood, of course”). Guided by a Park Service employee over the telephone, I sketched a diagram of the observation floor of the Washington Monument, where I had never been...

As the deadline approached for the completed manuscript, I realized I was in trouble. I quit working out, quit running, cut back on sleep, switched to real coffee, in quantities, and delivered the manuscript in time for the book to reach the stores by the 1988 New Hampshire presidential primary.

An inveterate information junky, I immensely enjoyed writing it.

In that era before Amazon.com, or even the web, I got quite a bit of mail (and some phone calls) regarding "Prez." Meanwhile the experience completed my change from card-carrying Libertarian to vanilla populist, with a general preference for Tom Foley pragmatic democrats (small d, friend, small d).

So, thought experiments, a species of metaphor. Not to be confused with reality, they should nonetheless resemble key parts of it. They’re useful in exploring ideas, exercising the minds of the author and readers.

There! Did we get somewhere? Or more important, how was the trip? Thought provoking? Depends on the reader.