On my drive into work today I imagined
myself being interviewed and being asked about my view on what it means for
something to be natural or unnatural because I had explored the
natural/unnatural topic in a very successful novel.
And in the interview I said that
there is nothing unnatural and there were audible gasps from the crowd. I guess
we were live in front of a studio audience.
And the interviewer asked me to
explain because he or she (as long as it is someone hip and cool) was
incredulous.
And I say: “here is what I mean, a
square circle is unnatural. It can’t exist based on the definitions of squares
and circles. Same goes for the laws of physics, thermodynamics and so on.”
“Consider,” I’d say “someone living
in the Pleistocene, surviving on a day to day basis: killing what it eats, not
being eaten, open to the elements but,” I’d say “learning to control fire.”
“Now what if you could take Mr. or Mrs.
Pleistocene and take him/her through the future and the first thing you do is
light a match in front of them. Magic! Just imagine the grunts of incredulity.
Next show them a muzzle-loader and shoot a Mastodon from 400 yards. Dead! Dinner
is served. Then sit them in a model A car and drive through streets lined with tall
buildings using arches and then stop your drive at the airport where a jet takes
off and flies in the sky. Inconceivable! They would grunt uncontrollably and
you would put your earbuds in and select a song from itunes and walk off
into the sunset.”
“So you see,” I’d say “natural/unnatural
is the mootest (I’d coined the term in the very successful novel) distinction.”
The host would look at me with all
the content of a student of Socrates and every audience member would smile and
I’d say:
“The future is unnatural to the
past and a square circle is the least of our concerns.”
My next novel would fail miserably.
No comments:
Post a Comment