I'm writing a story that's set in the distant future where earth is just a big 'ol puddle, no remnants of mankind left. But on the moon...well, there's some stuff to see. My backstory includes a long-ago exodus from the earth to settle another planet (just one, at least that's what's in my backstory so far.) The story features a man and woman on a scout expedition looking for raw materials. Because of my backstory, to me the fact that they're humans, looking at a long-deserted earth is not a problem. However, I don't plan to go into the backstory in this piece - it's a short story (sub-5k. Right now it hovers in the 2500 range but needs some work.)

So...particularly for those who read a lot of sci-fi, would it bother you to have humans visiting a deserted earth? Do you need to know the exodus story for it to make sense? Would you be waiting all along (once it became apparent what planet the MCs were looking at) for me to reveal that they have a third eye or lizard skin or an articulated tail or something?

Thanks in advance!

 

What resources the couple scout for might offer as much information about human origins as a short story needs. Say, they seek complex hydrocarbons or other carbon compounds in sinks resulting from probable causes of the exodus, ie, being overrun with organic wastes that have since become fossilized deposits, peat, coal, petroleum, or even plastics deposits. What resources they seek offer opportunity to characterize their native society too.

One likely scenario of Earth's far-flung future is diminishment of the Moon's tidal influences, resulting in stagnant seas and extinction of estuarine life. Estuaries are the single most productive habitat on the planet, producing four times as much biomass as the most productive terrestrial habitats, rain forests. As far as resource scouting might be concerned, without tidal flushing and lacking decayed organic life to contaminate soils, estuaries would become ideal places for clay deposits of fine feldspars useful for making specialized ceramics.

Feldspathic soils brought back from the Moon have demonstrated some interesting properties that might be of interest to potters. However, there's been no dedicated effort to date owing largely to the scarcity of material with which to experiment.

What sort of adaptive changes humanity might have undergone in the intervening years could orient on the home world. Differing gravity, differing climate, differing solar light chemistry, differing environmental chemistry. Say, heavy metals, nickel, copper, or silver, for example, might be more abundant or less abundant in their diets. Pigmentation coloration would be different, stature different. Sensory apparatus might be different, different ranges of sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch, perhaps, maybe even additional sensory perceptions, like echolocation, electroreception, pressure sensation. I doubt biometric symmetry would change, though.

[This message has been edited by extrinsic (edited January 26, 2009).]
 

The story becomes a mystery of what happened to the civilzation.

In the end, they come to the realization that this was the home planet, earth, that they came from.

You don't know the back story until the very end. They may have a myth about going to their own planet and everything shows this is the home planet according to the myth.

The cause of the destruction of the planet might effect how the story might go. Is it war, or the sun "burping?" or comet strike, or being ravaged by passing through a nebula. Each would leave certain amounts of civilization left and certain amounts of recognizable signs left also. The people who went to the stars might have been a small group who saw it coming and prepared, while the rest of civilization said that it would not happen.

sorry for rambling, but you can avoid showing the back story until the end if you make it a mystery where the team are trying to figure out what happened and then figure out this is where their ancesters were from.

I think the short answer is that it depends on the attitudes of your characters, because we tend to get our cues as to what to worry about -- or not -- to some degree from the characters in the story.

If the characters don't care about the exodus, if they regard it as a long-lost mystery -- as we know of dinosaurs yet not the reason for their disappearance -- then it won't matter. Indeed, not explaining the exodus could add to a sense of loss the characters might feel.

Alternatively, it could be that the exodus is common knowledge, something they would not discuss during the course of the story. They might simply refer to "the exodus" without explaining it, in the same way as the Firefly characters talk of "Earth that was".

Indeed, there could be some portrayal of distance and loss in their not understanding some of the remains which, to us, are perfectly clear.

I think that not explaining everything (judiciously, in a way that's authentic to the characters and their conversation, while at the same time making clear all that the reader needs in order to understand the story) can lend depth to a story -- and, of course, leave open the door to sequels.

Hope this helps,
Pat
 

Which is why I firmly believe that all those ancient texts that we've unearthed here are all based on flawed translations. It's all just menus, and ancient want ads.
 

[This message has been edited by Zero (edited January 26, 2009).]