Copied from Poul Anderson Appreciation, 7/6/2017.
This
essay had its origins in a comment by Dr. Paul Shackley in a blog piece
he wrote called "Space, Time and Experience" (POUL ANDERSON
APPRECIATION blog, Sunday, May 14, 2017): "If a fictional character has
qualitatively different sensory experiences and/or thought processes,
then how does the author convey these qualitative differences to his
readers?" The story by Poul Anderson which best fitted what Dr.
Shackley said was "Night Piece" (to be found in the Anderson
pocket paperback collection THE GODS LAUGHED, TOR, 1982). It's my
belief that "Night Piece" is the toughest story to understand of all the
works of Poul Anderson. And I meant that as a compliment, not a
criticism, because Anderson strove in that story to give us some idea of
what a truly alien, superior, non human mind might be like.
Unusually
for him, Poul Anderson attached some fairly lengthy prefatory remarks
to "Night Piece": "It's quite unlike anything else I've done. But
that's precisely why I'm fond of it." Instead of writing "Night Piece"
in a straight forward narrative fashion, Anderson experimented
with very different methods, as he wrote: "I have no pretensions to
being a Kafka or Capek, but it did seem to me it would be interesting
to use, or attempt to use, some of their techniques." Lastly:
"Therefore "Night Piece" is at least three concurrent stories, two of
them symbolic. I'm not likely to do anything of this sort very
often--some of those archetypes scared the hell out of me--but I hope
that I succeeded in getting across a small part of that which I was
trying to get across" (all quotes in this paragraph taken from
pages 33-34 of THE GODS LAUGHED, to be mostly cited hereafter as
"TGL").
The unnamed POV character was a scientist
studying ESP phenomena, such as telepathy, and had been working at his
laboratory on an "ESP amplifier," a device apparently designed to sense
the radiations from the minds of beings with ESP abilities. This POV
character had also hypothesized that another "intelligent" race had
evolved on Earth alongside mankind with abilities so different from ours
that normally human beings would not sense that other race's
existence. And, somehow, this amplifier had "sensitized" his mind so
much that he had stumbled onto the plane of existence inhabited
by Superior, at that simplest level of activity sometimes engaged in by
Superior most like those familiar to mankind, conflict or strife.
I
need to backtrack and give some explanation of how a race alien to and
superior to mankind could have evolved alongside ours on Earth. The
POV character, after briefly reviewing what unicellular life forms,
plants, animals, and human beings had in common, such as tropisms,
instincts, and varying degrees of intelligence, said of the human race:
"Man, of course, has made this [conscious intelligence] his particular
strength. He also has quite a bit of instincts, some reflexes,
and maybe a few tropisms" (TGL, pages 45-46). This scientist
then wondered WHAT would make such an alien race truly different from,
or superior to ours: "To surpass us, should Superior try to out-human
humanity? Shouldn't he rather possess only a modicum of reasoning
ability by our standards, very weak instincts, a few reflexes, and no
tropisms? But his speciality, his characteristic mode, would be
something we can't imagine. We may have a bare touch of it, as the apes
and dogs have a touch of logical reasoning power. But we can no more
imagine its full development than a dog could follow Einstein's
equations" (TGL, page 46).
This scientist's wife asked
what could be the unique speciality of a superior race which had evolved
alongside mankind. Her husband replied, "Conceivably in the ESP
field--Now I'm letting my hobby horse run away with me again. (Damn it,
though--I am starting to get reproducible results.) Whatever it is,
it's something much more powerful than logic or imagination. And as
futile for us to speculate about as for the dog to ponder Einstein"
(TGL, page 46).
I admit to finding the idea that an
"intelligent" race could have a speciality, a characteristic mode of
acting or "thinking" far beyond anything we can imagine to be puzzling.
How could such an alien race have "only a modicum of reasoning ability"
and still be superior to ours? How could such a race even be able to
use this speciality and characteristic mode without also having the
intelligence needed to know HOW to use it? Would a mere "modicum of
reasoning ability" truly be enough for Superior?
Another
quote from "Night Piece," from pages 46-47 of THE GODS LAUGHED: "But,
assuming Superior does exist....hm. Do mice know men exist? All a
mouse knows is that the world contains good things like houses and
cheese, bad things like weatherstripping and traps, without any orderly
pattern that his instincts could adapt him to. He sees men, sure, but
how can he know they're a different order of life, responsible for all
the strangeness in his world? In the same way, we may have co-existed
with Superior for a million years, and never known it. The part of him
we can detect may be an accepted feature of our universe, like the
earth's magnetic field, or an unexplained feature like occasional lights
in the sky; or he may be quite undetectable. His activities would
never impinge on ours, except once in a while by sheerest accident--and
then another "miracle" is recorded that science never does find an
explanation for."
The scientist's wife then asked
whether these beings could have come from another planet. He replied:
"I doubt that. They probably evolved here right along with us. All
life on earth has an equally ancient lineage. I've no idea what the
common ancestor of man and Superior could have been. Perhaps as recent
as some half-ape in the Pliocene, perhaps as far back as some amphibian
in the Carboniferous. We took one path, they took another, and never
shall the twain meet" (TGL, page 47).
Getting back to a
point I mentioned earlier, how did this POV character, the scientist,
stumble onto the Superior mode of existence? Again quoting from "Night
Piece": "He wasn't sure how he had blundered onto the Superior plane of
existence, or, rather, how his mind or his rudimentary ESP or
whatever-it-was had suddenly begun reacting to the behavior-mode of that
race. He only knew, with the flat sureness of immediate experience
that it had happened." The next paragraph reads: "His logical
mind, unaffected as yet, searched in a distant and dreamy fashion for a
rationale. The amplifier alone could hardly be responsible.
But maybe the remembrance of his speculative fable had provided the
additional impetus necessary?" (TGL, page 47).
Before grappling with how
a Superior mode of existence might affect a human mind, I need to
define more clearly what Superior's plane had in common with that of
mankind. The scientist had happened to stumble into accessing
Superior's mode of acting at the point where it was most like that of
mankind: "The activities of Superior were always and forever
incomprehensible to him, but he could describe their general tendency.
Violence, cruelty, destruction. Which didn't make sense! No species
could survive that used its powers only for such ends." The scientist
reasoned further: "Therefore, Superior did not. Most of the time,
he/she/it? was just being Superior, and as such was completely beyond
human perception. Occasionally, though, there was conflict. By
analogy, mankind--all animals--behaved constructively on the whole--but
sometimes engaged in strife. Superior? Well, of course Superior didn't
have wars in the human sense of the word. Conflicts of some kind,
anyhow, where an issue was decided not by reason or compromise but by
force. And the force employed was (to give it a name) of an ESP nature"
(TGL, pages 51 and 52).
Poul Anderson mentioned in
his prefatory comments to "Night Piece" : "I have no pretensions to
being a Kafka or a Capek, but it did seem to me it would be interesting
to use, or attempt to use, some of their techniques." Which means I
have to briefly discuss what kind of writer Franz Kafka was, what it was
in his works that Anderson took over to use in writing "Night
Piece." In the ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA'S article on Franz Kafka I
found this: "The characters in these works [of Kafka] fail to establish
communication with others, they follow a hidden logic that flouts
normal, everyday logic; their world erupts in grotesque incidents and
violence. Each character is only an anguished voice, vainly questing
for information and understanding of the world and for a way to believe
in his own identity and purpose" (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA, MICROPAEDIA,
volume 6, page 678 [Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc., 2002])
After
the POV character in "Night Piece" was "sensitized" to Superior's mode
or plane of existence, the scientist suffered strange torments and
grotesque experiences of a truly Kafkaesque kind. He first experienced
Superior as alien sounding footsteps coalescing into this description:
"The footsteps picked up. They weren't loud, which was just as well, for
they seemed less human each second he listened. There was a slithering
quality to them: not wet, but dry, a scaly dryness that went slithering
over dirty concrete. He didn't even know how many feet there were.
More than two, surely. Perhaps so many that they weren't feet at all,
but one supple length. And the head rose, weaving about in curves that
rippled and rustled--becoming less sinuous as the hood swelled until the
sidewide figure eight upon it stood forth plain; a thin little tongue
flickered as if frantic; but there was an immortal patience in the eyes,
which were lidless" (TGL, page 37). This should not be understood as
being an actual description of Superior--rather, it was how the POV
character strove to understand what he was experiencing
in comprehensible metaphors.
One of the methods used
by Kafka in his works is for his characters to lose contact with others,
to fail in establishing communication with them. Anderson first showed
this as happening to his POV character's reaction to a police officer
finding him: "For a moment he considered asking the policeman's help.
The fellow looked so substantial and blue. His big jowly face was not
unkind. But of course the policeman could not help. He can take me
home, if I so request. Or put me in jail if I act oddly enough. Or
call a doctor if I fall boneless at his feet. But what's the use?
There is no cure for being in an ocean" (TGL, page 40).
An
explanation of what made Kafka's works "Kafkaesque" and how it applies
to "Night Piece" is necessary: "Many of Kafka's fables contain an
inscrutable, baffling mixture of the normal and the fantastic, though
occasionally the strangeness may be understood as the outcome of a
literary or verbal device, as when the delusions of a pathological state
are given the status of reality, or the metaphor of a common figure of
speech is taken literally" (ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA, MICROPAEDIA,
volume 6, page 678).
The unnamed POV character stumbled
into the Superior mode or plane of existence in that aspect
most comprehensible to men: strife or conflict. But this character
could only "understand" Superior's plane of existence in an
"inscrutable, baffling mixture of the normal and the fantastic." Two
beings of this Superior race were at fierce conflict with each other and
one of the ways the human character perceived this strife was as a
mountain: "Across many wild miles he saw the mountain rise from the
waters. Black and enormous it was lifted; water cascaded off its
flanks, fire and sulfur boiled from its throat. Shock followed shock,
flinging him to and fro, over and under. He felt, rather than saw; the
whole sea bottom lifting beneath him" (TGL, page 49).
In
his daze the POV character had sought refuge in a bar, and, after it
closed he walked to a bus: "Habit had taken him over the street to the
bus. He stopped in front of the doors. What was he doing here? The
thing was an iron box. No, he must not enter the box. The hollow
people sat there in rows, waiting for him. He must tear down the
mountain instead" (TGL, page 50). Here we see another of this mix of the
normal and the fantastic characteristic of Kafka's writings: ordinary
things like walking across a street to a bus and perceiving it as a
menacing iron box filled with "hollow people."
How did
the scientist/POV character finally escape from perceiving what was to
him Superior's intolerable plane of existence? He had blundered into
that mode partly because of both his speculations and the ESP amplifier
he had been working on "sensitizing" him to that alien, non human mode
of existing. The means he found of saving his sanity and returning to
the human plane of thought/existing was, oddly, to keep STILL. As
Anderson wrote: "Of course. Consider the pattern. Forward and backward, you are still moving within the currents. But if you remain still--"
(TGL, page 54). But to do this "keeping still" would cause the POV
character intolerable anguish. However, he managed to get through this
pain and entered the bus, thus snapping out of perceiving Superior's
plane of existing.
In one sense, the ending of
Anderson's "Night Piece" is not characteristic of Kafka's style of
writing, because the POV character SURVIVED. In stories and novels like
"The Judgment," "The Metamorphosis," THE TRIAL, AMERICA, THE CASTLE,
etc., Kafka's POV characters die miserably and in anguish. Poul
Anderson chose not to have his POV character suffer a similar fate. My
view is that either kind of ending is legitimate, depending on many
factors, such as the differences in authors characters and the logical
ways the plots of the stories they were writing determining the most
artistically satisfying endings for their tales.
Poul
Anderson's "Night Piece" is not only the single most difficult to
understand of his stories but also one of the toughest to write about.
Because of both his use of Kafka's methods/techniques and striving to
show us how a truly alien and superior "intelligent" species could have
evolved alongside the human race on our Earth. The very idea is
difficult to understand for many reasons. One being HOW two such races
could co-exist with each other on the same planet without mankind
eventually and unequivocally discovering such a species. Even if
Superior's mode of existing was based on him having powers or
abilities impossible for men to naturally perceive, wouldn't both races
need many of the same kinds of RESOURCES to merely live?
Wouldn't members of the Superior species need to EAT, for example? How
would human and Superior farmers be able to practice agriculture without
getting in each other's way? Or has Superior somehow transcended the
need for food, clothing, shelter, etc? I do not believe it is possible
for an intelligent race with physical BODIES to somehow skip the need
for such things. Or could I be wrong?
I want to go back to a point made by Poul Anderson in his prefatory remarks about this story: "Therefore Night Piece
is at least three concurrent stories, two of them symbolic" (TGL, page
34). I argue that the non-symbolic story can be found largely in the
POV character's discussion with his wife on WHAT would make Superior a
race superior to mankind. And the first symbolic story would be how the
POV character reacted to blundering into Superior's mode of acting and
existing. And the second symbolic story is how the human character
perceived Superior's mode of acting, with all the pain and anguish
that gave him.
One last point should be discussed: Poul
Anderson cited Karel Capek as one of the two authors whose works helped
to inspire him in writing "Night Piece." I focused on Franz Kafka's
influence because I believe it was largely that writer's work whose mark
is most clearly seen in "Night Piece." That is why I have not thought
it necessary to discuss Capek's possible influence on "Night Piece,"
aside from me noting here that he too wrote science fiction.
Kaor, Paul!
ReplyDeleteThanks for copying this article to the "contributor articles" section of your blog. This was a very hard essay to write, commenting on what has to be the single most difficult story written by PA. I hope some readers will be interested enough to leave comments here, in the combox.
Sean
A very well-written article, Paul. I'm unfamiliar with this particular work, but from your description it sounds vaguely "Lovecraftian" in plot- protagonist driven mad by secret, inscrutable beings.
ReplyDeleteKeith
Kaor, Keith!
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, I am not familiar with Lovecraft's works. I THINK I tried to read some of his stories, but I admit they did not "grab" me.
While Anderson may well have read some of Lovecraft's stories, it was the works of Kafka and Capek that he had in mind as an inspiration for "Night Piece."
I did read a collection of Kafka's stories after I wrote this essay. I thought it right to do so to make sure the quotes I took from the BRITANNICA'S article on Kafka would fit what I wrote about "Night Piece." And I was satisfied with their accuracy.
Sean