I've just completed Jack McDevitt's latest sci-fi book, Cauldron [2007, Ace Books, New York]. I've been a fan of his work for a long time, and this one adds to my appreciation of and for his work. Very few, probably no, book has lasting value unless it gives the reader reason to think beyond the words of the author. This book is no exception.
There's a faint connection between this, his latest, book and earlier ones, but it isn't a connection the new McDevitt reader needs to be aware of to enjoy this one. Priscilla Hutchins is, once again, a primary member of the cast, and the mission is to trace the origin of the omegas in deep space. Omega was the title of an earlier McDevitt novel, with Priscilla Hutchins its heroine.
Since reading Cauldron, I've been considering a sequence that, I believe, McDevitt uses to ask the question I've used at title for this post. It's not asked directly, and I may be reading more into the section that makes me ask, but I don't think so. I'm not going to attempt to fill you in on the story, just give some quick facts and get to my question. First, they know the civilization they reach is millions of years old, older by eons than Earth. They know that much earlier in its history it had explored space, sending out interstellar vehicles.
The two ships sent out to explore reach a planet orbiting Makai, a class-K orange star. One planet is inhabited. Through their initial examination, they see it is much like Earth, populated with beings very much like humans.
They contact one person, a Mr. Smith, who they think is a physicist, and set up a meeting. The meeting is outside one of their large cities. Mr. Smith isn't a physicist, but a "health guru". During the meeting, they determine that, other than accident or suicide, the inhabitants of the planet don't die, they have no elections, and no real leaders. Everyone has a specialty, building high3ways for instance, and does it.
Mr. Smith is vaguely aware that his people had sent out interstellar explorations many thousands of years ago, but the civilization had lost the ability. They knew that they had once had it, but weren't interested in regaining it. The planet's technology is now approximately the same as Earth's mid 20th century.
By the end of the chapter, our explorers had left the planet. The chapter ends with:
Antonio's Notes
It was hard to believe, looking down on those earthbound cities, that these were the same creatures that had sent starships across vast sections of the Orion Arm, that had shown us Babylon and its Hanging Gardens, that had demonstrated a relentless interest in the rise and fall of civilizations in distant places. And they had done it all without FTL. I couldn't imagine what had driven them to such accomplishments. And I wondered where it had all gone wrong. Maybe when they stopped dying?
"Maybe when they stopped dying?" Is that McDevitt's answer to my question? Or is it the other way around? Do we die when we stop exploring? A little of both? McDevitt doesn't push the question any further, leaving it for his readers to consider.
If you're wondering my answer, I haven't one. It seems to me that exploring the bounds of our selves and our surroundings is so ingrained as to be in our DNA. When Lucy trekked across Africa, it was for more than another food source, or at least I believe it was.
It's an admirable goal to extend life indefinitely, but its success would create a completely different set of questions. McDevitt has the luxury of not having to confront any of them in this book. They simply press on to the next objective, though with some misgivings as Antonio's notes tell us. We don't know how those creatures experienced population or food problems. We don't discover how they solved them. We only know that they regressed.
Cauldron is a strong book, thought provoking along with a good story. Throughout the book, McDevitt makes small references that seem to say that he doesn't believe we will halt global warming or its environmental consequences, technological scams, or religious nut's claims by 2255, the year of Chapter 1. He end chapters with short recaps, in early chapters they're news headlines indicating the state of civilization. We can see that not a lot has changed by 2255.
This question is a small portion of the book. I could possibly write a couple other posts about the book's story and how it relates to us all, but I hope to resist. It is well worth finding a copy and reading it. Mine is hardback, just published, so I don't suppose there is a paperback out just yet. Perhaps your library has it. However you do, I recommend you get it, read it, and consider the questions it raises. Let me know what you think.
Your question, "Why Does Mankind Explore?" can be answered, I would think with its first word, "Why", man's eternal question.
Mac
Posted by: Mac | January 18, 2008 at 11:47 AM
Humankind explores ... for many reasons, I think. Perhaps as many reasons as there are humans.
I've just said, elsewhere, "because humans are animals, and all animals have built into them the hard wired survival need to know and understand their environment" - but also,inthe same place, that that isn't sufficient.
Sometimes from greed, sometimes from necessity ... and sometimes from a sense of wonder.
Posted by: Felix Grant | January 18, 2008 at 05:11 PM