J. P. Telotte. Replications: A Robotic History of the Science Fiction Film. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1995. 222 pp. $19.00, paper, ISBN 978-0-252-06466-1.
Reviewed by Anne Collins Smith
Published on H-PCAACA (April, 1996)
The title of Replications: A Robotic History of ence fction in general and the science fction flm the Science Fiction Film, is more restrictive than in particular. the book's actual content: the book is not a simple The frst chapter is quite dense with theory, history of the genre, but an intensive analysis of but it is important for what follows. Telotte draws selected works. In addition, the author, J. P. on an eclectic mix of sources--flm critics, cogni‐ Telotte, does not restrict the discussion to robots, tive scientists, sociologists, engineers, philoso‐ but extends it to a variety of depictions of artif‐ phers, and others in order to set up the theoretical cial humanity. Indeed, the analysis shines when it framework concerning the construction of the self addresses not only the robot Maria of Metropolis within which each work is contextualized. The or the pleasure androids of Westworld, but also following chapters examine specifc science fc‐ the monster of Frankenstein and the organic tion flms in chronological order--from Metropolis replicants of Blade Runner. to Terminator 2. What these beings have in common is that Each chapter is solid; some stand out as espe‐ they are constructed by man rather than nature; cially penetrating. I particularly enjoyed the chap‐ and in observing their construction we are re‐ ter on Metropolis, where Telotte relates the flm's minded that we, ourselves, are also in some fash‐ theme of the seductiveness of technology to the ion constructed. We may embrace the artifcial be‐ seductive surface of the flm itself. Not only are ing as a human ideal or shrink from it as an eerily the characters in danger of being distracted from humanlike monster, but at some level we always their own humanity by the glittering appeal of identify with it and the ideals or horrors that are powerful machinery, but the audience--and, acted out are our own. Telotte argues that this ex‐ Telotte argues, even the creators of the flm--are ploration of the constructed self through the con‐ in danger of being distracted from its humanitari‐ structed Other is one of the central themes of sci‐ an message by its gleaming cinematography. H-Net Reviews
I was also impressed by the author's ingenu‐ style and content, and I wish that sensitivity had ity in flling the apparent gap between the 1930s been shown in this area as well. and 1950s, a time when few science fction movies This book would make an excellent textbook were made. Telotte points to popular series of the for an undergraduate course on science fction time, such as Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers as flms. Students in an introductory course could be carrying on the enterprise of science fction in put to using the extensive bibliography to re‐ general and the motif of articial humanity in par‐ search and better understand Telotte's theoretical ticular. Unlike earlier flms like Metropolis and background; upper-level students could have the later flms such as Forbidden Planet, these serials further opportunity to research alternate view‐ were not made with pretensions of artistry or ap‐ points and critique some of Telotte's conclusions. parent intentions of conveying signifcant mes‐ In either case, if one had the right video equip‐ sages about the nature, constructed or not, of hu‐ ment and access to the movies, one could show manity. Telotte ingeniously uncovers hidden sub‐ some or all of the flms analyzed in the book, us‐ texts in these serials, hidden messages which are ing Telotte's commentary to spark valuable and all the more interesting for being unintended. rewarding classroom discussion. While Telotte is careful always to address the This review is copyrighted (c) 1996 by H-Net robotic aspects of these flms, other aspects are and the Popular Culture and the American Cul‐ sometimes addressed even better. The strength of ture Associations. It may be reproduced electroni‐ the chapter on Forbidden Planet, for example, lies cally for educational or scholarly use. The Associ‐ not in its analysis of Robby the Robot, which I ations reserve print rights and permissions. (Con‐ found acceptable but unexceptional, but rather in tact: P.C.Rollins at the following electronic ad‐ its discussion of the id-monster unleashed by Dr. dress: [email protected]) Mobius, which contains multi-layered insights. Similarly, the analysis of Total Recall briefy ad‐ dresses the token robot appearance (a cybernetic costume used by the hero in his attempt to reach Mars undetected), but is particularly good when it addresses the protagonist's construction, discov‐ ery, and reconstruction of himself. Two minor stylistic notes. The author tends to use the expression "begs the question," a logical term which means to assume as a premise a con‐ clusion that has yet to be proven, when the author really means just "raises the question." This inex‐ actitude is irritating. Telotte also tends to use "schizophrenic" in the casual metaphoric sense of holding two incompatible positions, as if one had a dual personality. This use of "schizophrenic" is now being actively discouraged by the mental health community. The metaphor is imprecise; as it is a serious and potentially disabling condition, the metaphor is insensitive. Telotte demonstrates a concern for sensitivity in other areas, both in
2 H-Net Reviews
If there is additional discussion of this review, you may access it through the network, at https://networks.h-net.org/h-pcaaca
Citation: Anne Collins Smith. Review of Telotte, J. P. Replications: A Robotic History of the Science Fiction Film. H-PCAACA, H-Net Reviews. April, 1996.
URL: https://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=358
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
3