Zoltan Istvan has written a book called The Transhumanist Wager. He is a ‘Futurist’

Futurist and Pastist

Zoltan Istvan has written a book called The Transhumanist Wager. He is a ‘Futurist’ and I’m finding the concepts he writes of fascinating. To simplify a bit, there’s conflict between the long established religion/government and a wave of scientists who seek to improve the human condition in innovative ways. 

I write books about the ancient past; if Zoltan is a ‘Futurist’ I reckon that makes me a ‘Pastist’. It doesn’t have quite the same ring to it but hey, it’s only a label, right?

Right.

As I was reading his work (not through it yet – sadly, reading under the influence of exhaustion is not a generally recommended practice, sigh) I found that I really do like his characters. And I actually GET what he’s saying.

Now, the rebuttable presumption, which I rebut, is that a ‘Futurist’ and a ‘Pastist’ whose writing styles are diametrically different, whose subject matter seems incompatible, and whose works are miles apart in recognition would have little or nothing in common.

Ah but - I’m also INFJ. That’s a personality type based on the Meyers Briggs Type Inventory. One of the things I do instinctively is find patterns.

A couple of patterns pop out at me.

One is humanity’s inherent resistance to change, in conjunction with the fact that change is inevitable.

Another is that the, apparently insurmountable, odds against diametrically differing perspectives ever co-existing without conflict aren’t really the least bit insurmountable.

What the bloody heck am I talking about?

*laughing*

Okay, Zoltan is writing about the future; I write about the past. His ‘status quo’ characters are pretty much opposed to the steps being taken to make changes in ‘life as we know it’. My ‘status quo’ characters are also adamantly opposed to the changes that are taking place in the world as they know it.

It’s humanity at its finest, for good or for ill. We are probably never going to lose that trait – some call it loyalty, some refer to it as hard-headedness. We are ready, willing, and able to fight for what we believe in; sometimes we win, sometimes we lose, but we’ll always be in there fighting.

We are also creative and innovative; this too is humanity at its finest. This too is a trait we are never going to lose.

And so the second point comes into play. Zoltan’s characters are taking the changes in the world we know above and beyond the changes my characters have to deal with – BUT – remember that time zone thing. At the time, the changes that challenged my characters were no less threatening to them than Zoltan’s scientists’ changes are to his ‘status quo’ characters.

Honestly, it’s the conflict that’s universal.

How the resolution evolves, I don’t know as I have yet to sit down and finish reading The Transhumanist Wager. The resolution of the conflict in my own books takes many generations of sacrifice and commitment, and a sort of (fictional?) sneakiness on the part of many.

What I see in both the ‘Futurist’ and the ‘Pastist’ is a sort of circle that’s developed over the course of the intervening time.

Odd as it may seem, the protagonists of my books would not have evolved into the antagonists of his but would probably (Probably? Ha. Absolutely) have been in the fore of those standing for freedom to explore and develop innovative technology. Bet on it.

Remember the first part of the Legacy? First and always comes Choice. Rome tried to dictate; it didn’t go over too well and to this day the Choices of our ‘back then’ people are impacting us.

To protect and preserve, that was the goal.

How it was done? I think, from the mysterious ‘disappearance’ of the Sidhe, clear back in long ago antiquity, through the Culdee in historic times, that the answer, like Poe’s Purloined Letter, lies in being ‘hidden’ in plain sight.

That’s where the sneakiness comes in.

I write fiction but I don’t live in a fantasy world.

Myth and legend aside, let’s think about the Sidhe for example, just for a minute.

The entire population of a race of people disappears by going to live in an enchanted underground world?

Really?

No.

If they went ‘underground’ it wasn’t literally.

Perpetuating, perhaps initiating, the myths and legends, would have served them well, however.

Columba (leaving out Ninian for the moment as he seems to have been ousted from officialdom) miraculously converts a notorious, historically recalcitrant, nation of barbarian pagans to Roman Christianity in no time flat and the Culdee were their Roman priests?

Really?

No.

Sorry, but no.

And I’m not really all that sorry.

Protection and preservation, remember?

Fictionally speaking, as opposed to verifiable concrete evidence, the Druids who ‘became’ Culdee would not have had it in them to just up and abandon thousands of years’ worth of beliefs at the drop of a hat, no matter who was doing the dropping of said hat.

Five hundred years is plenty of time to incorporate new information (Christ’s birth, life and teachings, death, resurrection, and promise) into perfectly compatible older belief systems, and vice versa. Albann/Alba/Caledonia/Scotland already knew Christ, long before Columba or the Church got there.

In my story lines the conflict is not between Pagan and Christian. The one stems as naturally from the other as limbs from a trunk.

The conflict is between having the freedom to choose for one’s own self and being dictated to.

Think about this for a moment: the Dark Ages, coincidentally (perhaps?) started at about the time the Western Roman Empire fell, right? And they ended right about the time people finally began to look, once again, for themselves, at what they had been taught or had been forced into complying with (at least outwardly) for that whole time.

Am I imagining a pattern that doesn’t exist?

Maybe, but I don’t think so.

Rome gets too big for its britches, splits politically, geographically, and religiously.

Rome adopts Christianity, turns it into a political and military tool, assigning previous military regions to ‘new’ religious ones. Church and State are one.

Western Rome falls.

Eastern Rome (Constantinople) hangs in there.

The Dark Ages ensue.

The Dark Ages, coincidentally (perhaps?) are finished when people figure out that communication (notably reading and writing, and printing and dispersing information) is a good thing and that they maybe ought to 1) think for themselves, and 2) connect with like-minded people.

The power and control of organized religion and established government is challenged by people who think for themselves, and share their thoughts on the differences between their handed-down (protected and preserved) beliefs and the way things were in their world at the time.

An example?

Okay.

6 April 1320 Scotland

Sent to the pope:

Declaration of Arbroath

http://www.scotsman.com/news/the-text-of-the-declaration-of-arbroath-1-465230

I love this document; aside from the sentiments it presents, the very presentation itself I find impressive in a sort of Dickensian way.

These guys are telling the ipso facto Boss of the World (a little more diplomatically and with more imaginative language): 

Look, here's the way it is, here's how come we CAN do this, here's how come we DID do this, and it would be nice if you as the Boss of the World (including our neighbors but not really us) would kindly tell Edward II to get off our backs about it since he won't listen to us. However, it doesn't really matter to us what you think or say, one way or the other; it's done and it's gonna stay done. 

The Lollards

1396-97

 http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chaucer/special/varia/lollards/lollconc.htm

The Lollards present Richard II of England and the parliament with a list of 12 Conclusions regarding the Church and basically challenging it to prove by what authority it was behaving as it was.

Namely:

1)    Temporality (civil, secular, political, possessions/authority) of the Church of England, following in the footsteps of Rome, not Christ

2)     The priesthood has become something that Christ never ordained to his Apostles

3)     In prejudice of women, the law of continence has been annexed to the priesthood

4)     Transubstantiation is nonsense and not based on anything Biblical 

5)     Exorcisms and Hallowings are money-making scams

6)     Clerics in secular offices: logic of separation of Church and State, essentially

7)     Prayers for the dead - another money-making scam

8)     Pilgrimages - a waste of time and money, and idolatry to boot

9)     Confessions: blessings and curses, bindings and unbindings, heaven and hell for sale

10)   War, Battle, and Crusades are against the fundamental teachings of Christ

11)   Female vows of continence, unreasonable in the first place, lead to abortions, which are worse than the women having had sex against the rules - let them marry/remarry at will for cryin' out loud

12)  Arts and Crafts - not what we think, this refers to the fancy schmancy stuff the church and its personnel indulged in - the money could be better spent caring for those who need help - get back to the basics

Now such things don’t just spring up out of nowhere all of a sudden.

What on earth could have made the Scots think for one minute that they had the right to kick their King out of office if he failed them? And send a notice to the Pope about the whole thing ... 

How did the Lollards come by the audacity to write out a list of conclusions like that? 

What gave them the right to even THINK of them? Good Church people don't question what they're told, you know, let alone approach anyone in Authority about it.

Gee.

Maybe it had something to do with the quiet preserving and protecting that had been going on for almost a thousand years by that time.

These people didn’t just up and think of any of this on the spur of the moment.

It was born and bred into them, and into their ancient kin. Maybe it was in their very DNA, the DNA so very many of us share, who knows?

And by now you’re yawning, have already stopped reading, or are seriously wondering what any of this might have to do with ‘Futurists’ and ‘Pastists’ having anything in common.

I see a line, and it’s a pretty distinct and straight one, from Essene and Druid to Culdee to Lollard to Presbyterian to Quaker to the Independent (political and religious) person that I am.

What do they all have in common?

Independence of Spirit, Freedom of Individual Choice, Personal Commitment once that choice has been made, that Preserve and Protect the Legacy thing, and the too often suicidal compulsion to Speak whether they’ve been spoken to or not, to give Voice to something that might help someone else.

These are some of the traits of my characters that I see reflected in Zoltan's characters, the protagonist ones I’ve met so far anyway.

And so the circle wheels around.

Thank you Zoltan, for making me THINK.