How successful is Wells’ recipe? Discuss with examples of science fiction that both follow and break
with this advice.
The Wellsian rule states that science fiction should only contain one surprising element in order
to 'domesticate the impossible hypothesis '. It would therefore be easy to assume that because some
successful forms of science fiction do not adhere to 'Wellsian rule ' then Wells ' theory must be wrong.
This essay will show that rather than Wells being ‘wrong’, he was trying to teach a particular method
for writing successful, meaningful science fiction. Success, in this essay, will mean either that the
piece of fiction has sold extremely well, won relevant science fiction awards or has had a lasting
influence …show more content…
The Time Machine therefore emphasises Wells ' point that in
order to get the reader to believe the “impossible hypothesis” then it must be done in a world
they would recognise.
Earlier evidence of Wellsian theory in action can be seen in the book Frankenstein. This novel was
published in 1818 and so predates Wells. Despite this, one of Frankenstein 's strengths is the fact that the
reader can emphasise with the central character Dr. Frankenstein and this can only be done by making
the world of Frankenstein familiar. In fact, Frankenstein sticks to the 'Wellsian rule ' by only changing one
part of the non-fiction world and that is the introduction of the monster. This “impossible hypothesis” of
creating life (monster), is grounded in a highly realistic portrayal of the Doctor 's thoughts and feelings
through the use of the narrator. This, combined with the realistic depiction of the alpine scenery, make the
reader relate to the fictional world. This is a perfect example of a novel that follows Wells ' rule and how it
can be used to make the seemingly impossible, a realistic …show more content…
The physicist turned science fiction author Karlheinz Steinmüller has said that science fiction is
“a kind of thought experiment... [containing] inherent logics... [and] derives some results, perhaps
surprising ones” (Steinmuller, 2003, p. 176). For Steinmüller 'domesticating the impossible hypothesis '
is not the key aim of science, because if it was, then there would not contain “surprising results”. For
Steinmüller, logic is much more important as this is what the author must use in order to answer their
thought experiment. An example of a 'Steinmüller ' text can be found in Brave New World. The novel
is set as a dystopian future where there is a 'world state ' that controls every aspect of a person 's life:
from modifying their development as a foetus to enabling a quick, emotionless death. Brave New
World can therefore be seen as a thought experiment by Huxley of what could happen if the 'test-tube
baby ' and capitalism became widespread. It is clear the reader is not familiar with this world as it was
the authors intention to shock the reader of the potential future in order to bring about social
with this advice.
The Wellsian rule states that science fiction should only contain one surprising element in order
to 'domesticate the impossible hypothesis '. It would therefore be easy to assume that because some
successful forms of science fiction do not adhere to 'Wellsian rule ' then Wells ' theory must be wrong.
This essay will show that rather than Wells being ‘wrong’, he was trying to teach a particular method
for writing successful, meaningful science fiction. Success, in this essay, will mean either that the
piece of fiction has sold extremely well, won relevant science fiction awards or has had a lasting
influence …show more content…
The Time Machine therefore emphasises Wells ' point that in
order to get the reader to believe the “impossible hypothesis” then it must be done in a world
they would recognise.
Earlier evidence of Wellsian theory in action can be seen in the book Frankenstein. This novel was
published in 1818 and so predates Wells. Despite this, one of Frankenstein 's strengths is the fact that the
reader can emphasise with the central character Dr. Frankenstein and this can only be done by making
the world of Frankenstein familiar. In fact, Frankenstein sticks to the 'Wellsian rule ' by only changing one
part of the non-fiction world and that is the introduction of the monster. This “impossible hypothesis” of
creating life (monster), is grounded in a highly realistic portrayal of the Doctor 's thoughts and feelings
through the use of the narrator. This, combined with the realistic depiction of the alpine scenery, make the
reader relate to the fictional world. This is a perfect example of a novel that follows Wells ' rule and how it
can be used to make the seemingly impossible, a realistic …show more content…
The physicist turned science fiction author Karlheinz Steinmüller has said that science fiction is
“a kind of thought experiment... [containing] inherent logics... [and] derives some results, perhaps
surprising ones” (Steinmuller, 2003, p. 176). For Steinmüller 'domesticating the impossible hypothesis '
is not the key aim of science, because if it was, then there would not contain “surprising results”. For
Steinmüller, logic is much more important as this is what the author must use in order to answer their
thought experiment. An example of a 'Steinmüller ' text can be found in Brave New World. The novel
is set as a dystopian future where there is a 'world state ' that controls every aspect of a person 's life:
from modifying their development as a foetus to enabling a quick, emotionless death. Brave New
World can therefore be seen as a thought experiment by Huxley of what could happen if the 'test-tube
baby ' and capitalism became widespread. It is clear the reader is not familiar with this world as it was
the authors intention to shock the reader of the potential future in order to bring about social