posted
been waiting for someone to write a novel that I would like to read, and they just won't do it! So, I'm going to.
Anyway, to start the basic research, I would like to understand how people at a 1500s Europe level of technology would react to sudden exposure to modern technology. Any ideas? And, yes, I'm aware that the staging of the exposure would alter their response.
Also, can anyone tell me just how likely college campuses are to be independently capable of providing their own basic services? Wastewater treatment, water supply, power supply, food, etc.
posted
I would like to understand how people at a 1500s Europe level of technology would react to sudden exposure to modern technology. Any ideas? And, yes, I'm aware that the staging of the exposure would alter their response.
Some of them would try to steal it to use it for their own purposes, and probably fail due to a lack of understanding how it works. Some would try to destroy it, claiming it was the work of the devil. Most of them probably couldn't care less. Until it made them redundant.
Also, can anyone tell me just how likely college campuses are to be independently capable of providing their own basic services? Wastewater treatment, water supply, power supply, food, etc.
Not very likely, IMHO. Perhaps there are one or two that could. Somewhere.
posted
Bio-gas: can be used to process waste (garbage and wastewater), produce energy (heat and electric), create organic fertilizer. The process is not particularly new and has been used in Germany and Switzerland (and other parts of Europe) for several years. I'm not sure about the application during the time period you mentioned, though.
I worked in a town a few years ago that was considering using a bio-gas digestor to compliment their wastewater disposal and composting program. The project was going to be piloted by the agricultural college in town.
As for how people might react to modern technology etc. in the 1500s, well consider Galileo. He had some very modern, forward approaches to science and he was persecuted.
Also, Leonardo Di Vinci. He is from a slightly earlier time, but very much ahead of his time. If the technology of the time had allowed, Di Vinci probably would have built the first air plane.
quote:Leonardo applied his knowledge in a practical way to the creation of mechanical devices. In this room are many schematics and models for the kinds of devices he designed. They include ball bearings, gears, a wind meter, a spinner machine, a printing press, a block and tackle, clocks, a coin stamping machine, and other. It is interesting to note that many of the things he imagined in the early sixteenth century only became practicable in the twentieth.
Researching some of the scientists of the sixteenth century might help build a picture of how laymen from that time would accecpt and perceive modern science.
Perhaps the single most valuable thing I've learned from you so far, is that it would be taken in the context of "their" lives. So, if I stick with that philosophy, then I should be safe.
Which means, of course, that I must understand and create "their lives" in a plausible manner.
Eric Flint does what I want to do, well, in "1632". I'm going to go back and read that again.
I think that there may be some state campuses that are amazingly independent. Many were started out in the middle of the prairie and had no choice but to provide their own services. I don't think it would be too much of a stretch to have one that does it all. Especially if they have found a niche in technology transfer. Good point, Robyn Hood.
Hmmm. It comes to mind that "their lives" may revolve around the church to a vastly greater level than ours do. Guess I'll have to look into that as well.
[This message has been edited by mikemunsil (edited November 22, 2004).]
posted
To answer your second question first, I know that Notre Dame and Wheaton College (my alma maters) supplied their own power.
Notre Dame has its own water treatment plant, its own federal post-office, its own zip code, its own communications grid, its own police force, and its own health clinic etc. It relies on the surrounding town of South Bend for fire and emergency health service.
Rumor has it that Notre Dame used to own surrounding farms and was entirely self-sufficient, but is no longer.
As for your first question, I don't think you can overemphasize the role of superstition and religion, which were often indistinguishable in that time period. The lives of all the people were saturated with religion. It was the 'language of the times,' like tolerance and the free market of ideas are now. It was the lens through which they understood all of reality. It seems like most remarkable events were assigned some sort of religious significance. The second thing to keep in mind is that rationality as we know it is largely a Modern (I mean that in the Freud/Neitzsche/Marx/Locke/Hobbes philosophical sense) trait. There wasn't a lot of stock placed in being objective or what we would call rational. The third thing to consider is: what human characteristics are immutable? Is curiosity natural or a cultural construct? Fear of the unknown? Reasonablness? Mass hysteria? The answer to this question might help fill in some of the holes that history alone can't fill.
posted
Patronage. Now there's something we don't see to as great an extent now as before. (well except in DC and I'm not writing about those scum)
I read recently about the private lives of Roman citizens and it was amazing how much patronage had a part in everday lives. And it ties well into the Church thing, too.
posted
A story to look into, perhaps, would be A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. I must confess to only having seen the variety of interpretations presented by Hollywood, but I think the just of the story is there. The time period is earlier than what you're shooting for, but it might give you some inspiration on how to write about modern things in a historic setting.
Posts: 1473 | Registered: Jul 2004
|
Since we're talking about a period AFTER the developement of the moveable type printing press and at least rudimentary firearms, I wonder if someone thrust into the modern age might be somewhat more accepting of what he sees. He would at least (if he were an educated man [Oops. There I go being sexist and assuming gender! ]) understand that technological advance was occurring and that it could possibly occur to much greater levels than he, in his own time, experiences.
posted
Well that's exactly why I chose this period. It would have been easy (and boring) to set something in the stone age and just have everybody go gaga and all wall-eyed.
I wanted a period which led to the potential for a bright person to see the technology as an outgrowth of existing technology (and thereby accessible). It seemed to offer much greater oppotunities for all sorts of merry hell.
Now I AM going to make that person of an 'upper' class. Not because its a fantasy wannabe story, but because persons who at least had a nurturing family and good nutrition, with at least some education, would be more believable opportunists than Smut the pig-farmers son.
posted
I think it is important to think about what the technology looks like as well. If for instance you are merely throwing in a gun then I don't see people backing off and crying for the witchhunters.
What really worries me is are we really sure they were that superstitious? Witch hunts were carried out by the church. Very few of the commons would have ever worried about it that much without the hype. I hate to stereotype a whole century as being ignorant.
posted
Also, the really avid witch-hunters had perfectly rational (if somewhat evil) socio-economic reasons for their activities.
Galileo got in trouble because he was directly challenging the authority of the Catholic Church and its officers (which ultimately included every ruler holding office by "Divine Right"). Most scientists of the time were content to avoid writing and saying anything blatently anti-Catholic. As a result, the Renaissance had revolutionized the world by the 16th century without much in the way of official opposition.
For instance, if you threw an ordinary mechanical engineer back to that time period with nothing but the clothes on his back, he should be able to do quite well once he found a patron in need of a talented engineer (I'm afraid that a sheila would do rather less well, unless she were remarkably lucky and saavy). The biggest difficulty would be overcoming the language barrier.
So any technologically advanced traveler smart enough to hide anything obviously inexplicable would do as well or better, I should think.
quote:If for instance you are merely throwing in a gun then I don't see people backing off and crying for the witchhunters.
Actually, I was thinking electric lights, clean water from a tap, the lack of stink, large buildings meant to serve humanity instead of God, and rock music.
I do intend to throw a college will-he nill-he into the past, but not a modern college. A 1950s college. With bobbysoxers. And Elvis. And rock and roll.
Now if that wouldn't stir up a witch hunt, what would?
posted
Don't forget the most important historical event of the 1500's -- The Reformation. You just don't have the Catholic Church anymore. You have Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, the Anabaptists, and the establishment of the Church of England with Henry VII. Though I don't know for sure, I would suspect that each figure would have different views.
The one thing you're going to have to avoid is being anachronistic in your portryal of the late-medevial mind. One the one hand, you can't put modern concerns into their society. What need, for example, would they have of large buildings? I don't know; it's just a question. But just don't assume they'd need one.
On the other hand, don't fall into the trap of the Enlightenment and think of medieval man as some mindless moron stumbling through a vast Dark Age ruled by the Church or religious leaders. The reason Bibles were chained to the pulpit was so they wouldn't be stolen, not so they wouldn't be read. Sure, there will be fundamentalists. There are fundamentalists in every age. But just don't think everyone will be a fundamentalist.
quote:What need, for example, would they have of large buildings?
My point about buildings was that it seemed to me that the grandest buildings that the 1500'rs (wince) would have seen were built to serve God, and that upon encountering large buildings meant soley to serve man, they would (eventually) recognize the difference in intent, and would respond, each in his (or her) own way.
Did this clarify my intent, or did I misunderstand your comment?
BTW Balthasar, where can I look for info on the Reformation? You (rightly) have reminded me of the importance of that sweeping change in western Europe.
[This message has been edited by mikemunsil (edited November 23, 2004).]
posted
I once saw a really old news-reel type of film in which a movie of a train was shown to a group of native-Americans. The scene had the camera down between the rails, showing the oncoming train. When the train overtook the camera and went over it, filling up the screen, all the natives jumped out of their chairs and cowered on the floor.
Another story to consider, in light of imagining how a superstitious or "primitive" person would perceive technology or the unknown, is the story of Ezekiel and his vision a great wheel turning in the sky. Some UFO enthusiasts speculate that perhaps what Ezekiel saw was not a vision from God, but a UFO.
It also depends on who's observing the technology and what their station is in life. If a lowly shepherd saw a plasma screen, he might very well think it was a vision of heaven. If a man of the church saw the plasma screen, and felt it threatened his own power and control of the populace, he would brand it as the work of the devil. If the technology is seen first by peasants, and word of its existence goes up the food chain to the priests and bishops, the technology would be denounced as satanic.
If the technology were first seen by the religious rulers, they could use it to their own advantage in order to maintain control over the populace.
posted
There is a cool story called: 'Hawk among the Pigeons"
It is about a fighter jet that get zapped back to WW1.
None of the supporting technologies worked, so the machine looked cool but slowly ran out of fuel, could not track enemy aircraft, nor could it fly slow enough to engage them etc. It was hokey but cool.
The 'far arena' has a gladiator brought into the future and he freaks out waking up in a sisters of mercy hospital, because there were crucifixes everywhere.
posted
If I remember correctly, there was a New Zealand movie named "The Navigator" that featured a group of 11th century tin miners tunneling through into present day Auckland, with both comic and heart-warming results. A fine movie that deserved a better reception than it received.
Ah, here it is... http://www.scifimoviepage.com/navigat.html THE NAVIGATOR: A MEDIEVAL ODYSSEY 14th century English village, not Welsh, Wellington, not Auckland. Oh well.
Still worth seeing. They did a great job of making the villagers reaction to modern-day New Zealand believable. The scene where they are rowing across the bay and encounter a sea monster is worth the cost alone, as is the scene in which they are trying to cross a busy road at night. They could easily have gone overboard with the humor and turned this into a farce, and some people who lack the ability to suspend disbelief will always see it that way, but they didn't, and it is a fine mix of humor and pathos and this is an extremely long sentence, isn't it?
[This message has been edited by mikemunsil (edited November 23, 2004).]
posted
My point about large buildings is this: What practical purpose would they serve. The medievals didn't build large buildings simply as a place of worship. They're works of art. They were seen as sacred places, and each part of the church had a sacred meaning. In that sense, they served a purpose: they helped elevate a person's mind and soul to God.
To build a large building "to serve man" ... my question is, how would it serve them? I don't know the answer. But if I were writing a story like this -- and I'm not really sure what you intend to do other than put modern technology and music into a medieval setting -- I would think long and hard about how a medieval person would repond to it. If a medieval saw a large building, they may or may not be awe struck. Remember, they've been living under the shadows the the great cathedrals for centuries. Now, if you were to tell one of them, "Hey, this building is all about helping you, and other people, get along in the world," I don't know how he'd understand that.
To write this kind of story, you not only have to know something about history, but you need to know a lot about their culture. I'm just not sure a medieval would see any aspect of life apart from it's connection to God. Espeically during the Reformation, when the ideas of God and salvation and truth were ripping European society apart.
There are a lot of books out there on the Reformation. One book you'll definately want is edited by Hans J. Hillerbrand, called simply The Protestant Reformation. It's an anthology of primary sources--the writings of Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, etc.
But you'll also want to get a couple of good histories of the Reformation--from both Protestant and Catholic scholars.
A good study by a German Catholic scholar is The Roots of the Reformation by Karl Adam. This should provide a nice set up.
Now, I know about the Reformation more from a theological point of view, not too much from a historical point of view. But a spring board into any part of Christian history is Williston Walker's famous A History of the Christian Church. A massive 800-page book with a great bibliography for further study. This would be the place where I'd start. You'll probably want to begin with his treatment of the Latter Middle Ages before reading his treatment of the Reformation. This way you'll have a historical context. It's about 300 pages in total--both on the Latter Middle Ages and the Reformation--so it's a substantive overview. Then go to his bibliography to hone your reading.
[This message has been edited by Balthasar (edited November 24, 2004).]
posted
In line with Balthasar's point, I think the speed with which we can build structures now needs to be taken into account as well. One of the reasons few large structures existed in the Middle Ages is because of the enormous resources that had to be put into erecting one. That's why large buildings were either for the church or for the king/lords; they were the only strong reasons for marshalling those kind of resources. The mason/architect who began the cathedral would probably not live to see it completed. (See The Pillars of the Earth by Ken Follett for a fictional telling of the process. It's absolutely amazing.)
[This message has been edited by Keeley (edited November 24, 2004).]
posted
Yeah, cement/concrete technology makes a huge differance. The Romans were able to build purely civic works on a pretty vast scale with it. Castles were also pretty much secular in purpose and design.
I think that conflict between people from the past and people from the future would most likely be over their value systems, not over their technology.
posted
Crap! Mike got to my suggestion first. "The Navagator" was the movie that came right to mind when you put out your query. I thought I was the only one who had seen that movie.
Forgot to mention that modern technology would be viewed with much suspision and even animosity unlike the folks in "A Yankee in King Arthur's Court". They would probably view it as magic or witchcraft. So I'm thinking anyone who brought it with them would have to be very very careful. Not much open-mindedness in that era.
[This message has been edited by Whitney (edited November 24, 2004).]
posted
I know you clarified this in your opening post, but, presentation is such a huge part of how anything accepted. Even today there are sciences and technologies that are not readilly accepted when they are first presented.
If your inventor/scientist/whatever just happened to have some public relations or marketing experience, they could probably sell any number of ideas to the rennaisance crowd. However, if they are less than adept at presenting their ideas, then they could end up at the stake or something.
I'm reminded a bit an alternate history novel that I read called Guns of the South. In it, a racist group from about our time travel back to the Civil War and bring along AK-47s to outfit the Confederate Army. The guns are of course out of place as are the clothes worn by the time travellers, but the Conferacy overlooks these things simply because they have been given a good enough reason -- an ally and an advantage in a war they are losing. If you don't mind some mild sexual content (less explicit than most Harlequins), it is an interesting read simply to see how the introduction of a foreign technology is handled.
posted
AK-47s wouldn't have made a very big differance in the Civil War as a whole. You could probably use them to win a close battle or two, but you'd have to pick your moment.
The Navigator is the wrong century. Even so, it wouldn't be so helpful because the premise is a story about a small group of travelers from the past encountering the entire future.
More interestingly, the story is framed as a dream of a young boy told to a group of older men, Spoiler Alert deleted material.
Anyway, the 1500s were really a much more enlightened period than most people seem to think. Science and magic were well separated by that point in time (officially, at least), so there would be almost no danger of technology being taken for witchcraft unless a) the time travelers elected to deliberately portray it that way or b) the time travelers were obviously anti-Christian in some way. Either one is certainly plausible.
But with reasonable prudence, you could avoid being singled out as a witch as long as you seemed legitimately educated and weren't a woman.
posted
1500's, we are talking about the same sort of time as the Conquistadors? That was a clash of cultures and technologies.
Perhaps take a look at that episode as a guide.
Have you seen The Wrath Of God (1972) by Werner Herzog?
It is about a band of Spanish conquistadors travelling into the Amazon searching for the city of El Dorado, but their leader goes crazy. It is an interesting look at what happens when your inner resources fail in the face of legend, superstition, greed, obsession etc. Technology didn't help much in that scenario.
[This message has been edited by hoptoad (edited November 24, 2004).]
quote:If your inventor/scientist/whatever just happened to have some public relations or marketing experience, they could probably sell any number of ideas to the rennaisance crowd. However, if they are less than adept at presenting their ideas, then they could end up at the stake or something.
You know, Robyn Hood, this is a really good point. Perhaps one of my characters should be a publicist for the college.
One of the things I like about Hatrack is the willingness to support your fellows with your knowledge and wits. I engage in several other forums, but this one is by far the most supportive and thus the one I spend the most time supporting.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
]) understand that technological advance was occurring and that it could possibly occur to much greater levels than he, in his own time, experiences.
