H . G . W ELLS AND HIS S CIENCE F ICTION (1894-1904) T HE R EMARKABLE V ICTORIAN

H

.

G

.

W

ELLS AND HIS

S

CIENCE

F

ICTION (1894-1904)

MASTERSCRIPTIE ENGELSE TAAL EN CULTUUR, RIJKSUNIVERSITEIT GRONINGEN

Frank Braamhaar s1530100

Contents

List of Abbreviations 2

Introduction 3

Chapter One The Theory of Evolution in the Writings of H.G. Wells 7 Chapter Two Technology in the Literary Works of H.G. Wells 17 Chapter Three Science, Technology and the Humanities 25

Conclusion 33

List of Abbreviations

Companion Francis O’Gorman, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Victorian

Culture.

First Men H.G. Wells, The First Men in the Moon. Invisible Man H.G. Wells, The Invisible Man.

OED The Oxford English Dictionary (Online Version)

Revision Patrick Parrinder and Christopher Rolfe, eds. H.G. Wells Under

Revision: Proceedings of the International H.G. Wells Symposium.

sf science fiction

Short Stories H.G. Wells, Selected Short Stories: Including The Time Machine. Time Machine H.G. Wells, The Time Machine.

Introduction

English author Herbert George Wells (21 September 1866—13 August 1946) is often credited as being one of ‘the fathers of science fiction’ (Berlin 12)—a title he shares with Jules Verne (1828-1905) and Hugo Gernsback (1884-1967). After taking a closer look at the author’s early life, it is evident that he was a bright student from a young age. Yet, at the outset it did not look likely that Wells would become one of the best-known novelists and public figures of his time. Born in ‘Bromley, Kent, a small market town soon to be swallowed up by the suburban growth of outer London’ (Wells. Time Machine. vii) Wells’ early childhood was happy. His father Joseph, a part-time cricket player, owned a shop which also functioned as the family’s home. However, fortune changed after his father succumbed to an injury that ended his cricket career—an incident that eventually led to his bankruptcy. From this moment on, thirteen year old H.G. Wells was forced to work, and even his mother moved out for her new job as housekeeper in Sussex. The strained financial situation meant that Wells was no longer allowed to go to school, and this is why he was supposed to learn the trade of draper instead. Luckily for Wells, after a long pause, his academic career advanced when he earned a government scholarship at the Normal School of Science in South Kensington in the summer of 1884. (viii). Here, the classes of his biology teacher T.H. Huxley (1825-95) left an

inerasable imprint on Wells’ mind. Starting a student magazine—Wells was the editor as well as main contributor (Smith 12)—and failing the subject of geology are seen as the main reasons why he lost his scholarship in 1887. (10). Wells later recalls that ‘the June examination made an end for ever to my career as a serious student of science.’ (Wells.

Experiment. 197). In the years that followed, Wells became a teacher and a journalist, but his

educational background is still found in his work as he was writing ‘short pieces for journals in the areas of science and education.’ (Smith 17). The 1890s saw the publication of his first and now famous fictional works that discuss (applied) science. The author’s appetite for reading and an admirable work ethic in terms of writing, then, are reasons why Wells was able to produce so many groundbreaking works. Today ideas and themes that are found in Wells’ science fiction continue to form the basis for a great variety of modern stories and films that deal with this genre.

Focusing on Wells’ science fiction in the Victorian era has been a conscious decision since it was the time in which Wells became famous with his science fiction; it was an important era in terms of scientific literature; and linking the author with this period in time and its scientific literature provided me with a good topic for discussion. Of course, one can analyse Wells and his literary legacy from many different angles, and undoubtedly this would provide the reader with new insights on the author and his fiction as well. ‘Science fiction’ was not a commonly used term at the time Wells became famous—in fact ‘[s]f was first named, and first became a genre, in the sf magazines published in the United States before the Second World War [but ...] after 1926 (the year the first specialist sf magazine, Amazing

Stories, was published).’ (James 6-7). What is more, this makes what Wells’ contemporaries

had to say on science in fiction and non-fiction more interesting for me. Furthermore, in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries numerous books were published that deal with subjects such as Victorian science, Victorian literature and Victorian values. In these works one can find what Wells and his contemporaries had to say about the possibilities, pitfalls, promise and meaning of science and technology when it emerged and changed everyday life in Great Britain. Yet, even though Wells has been contextualised before, I found it particularly worthwhile to focus on the author and his science fiction in relation to the Victorian.

In essence, the next three chapters will discuss how H.G. Wells’ fiction fits into the Victorian era; how his writings are similar to that of his contemporaries and in what way he is different. The first chapter will address an important scientific theme throughout the

nineteenth-century—theories of evolution. It can be argued that Wells successfully applies Charles Darwin’s theory in The Time Machine (1895) and The War of the Worlds (1898), while his short story ‘The Country of the Blind’ (1904) proves to be more along the line of Lamarckism. Yet all of these works demonstrate how Wells puts science into writing in the Victorian period, and as one will see, even his less successful effort deserves a closer look. However, before Wells’ literary works in this chapter are discussed in relation to the theory of evolution, one will find a description of the many theories that existed in the Victorian era; how and with what intention scientific and literary writers formulated these theories for their audience; the problems they encountered while doing this; and what effect their work

eventually had on the story-tellers that followed them. Still the most important question that will be answered in this chapter is to what extent the work of his contemporaries relates to Wells’ science fiction.

The second chapter introduces the technology Wells presents in his novels. The War of

The First Men in the Moon (1901). Furthermore, the late nineteenth-century was a period that

saw the introduction of many inventions, and it is interesting to see in what way and to what extent Wells presents this in his stories. Similar to what one will see in chapter one, both scientific and literary writers in Victorian society were interested in describing the latest technological advances for a reading audience. It becomes evident that scientific authors relied heavily on metaphors dealing with the human body in order to describe the workings of the latest inventions. Unlike his contemporaries, Wells did not express his ideas in the

classical languages, and he did not base his fictional work on the classical myths. Chapter two also notes that the scientific writers are often more positive than literary authors about the possibilities and effects of technology. Schooled as a biologist Wells qualifies as both a scientific and literary author and one will see that his work generally reflects a positive image of applied technology, while at the same time he does not leave out its negative aspects.

The third and final chapter unites science and technology and begs the question what Victorian values—a term that only came into existence after the death of Queen Victoria— actually stands for. After all, one can only analyse fiction in relation to a time period if one is aware of what daily life and the moral standards of the people in that society had been like. Before focusing on Wells’ fiction it is also explained that there is a tension between the sciences (including technology) on one hand, and the humanities on the other. In short, the role of sciences in the educational system as well as literature had not been defined yet, and one will see that Wells’ views on this are by no means traditional. The chapter also addresses Wells’ opinion of religion and the role of industrialisation in the Victorian era. Finally, a closer look at Wells’ fiction will demonstrate in what way Wells portrays science and technology as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in his novels The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896), The

Invisible Man (1897) and The First Men in the Moon and ‘The Diamond Maker’ (1894).

Chapter One: The Theory of Evolution in the Writings of H.G. Wells

The theory of evolution is often seen as one of the main scientific themes of the late

nineteenth-century. A modern audience would regard Charles Darwin (1809-82) as the man who discovered that all species on earth descended from common ancestry and that their development is the result of a process called natural selection. The theory of evolution also forms the basis for some heated discussions in fields such as science and religion during the late nineteenth-century. This is why evolution is seen as an important contemporary topic of debate in the Victorian period. The following sections will demonstrate how scientific writers and novelists discussed evolution, and how they competed against one another in order to show that their ideas on the development of species and humankind are the best versions to discuss this matter. In addition, this chapter will demonstrate that it should not come as a surprise that H.G. Wells was interested in putting this scientific theory in his fiction, and one will find out how he portrayed the theory of evolution in his work.

First of all, it should be noted that Darwin was not the first or only person to write about the evolution of species. Other scientists and novelists also ‘called on readers’ imaginations to reveal the way small changes could produce transformations over long

periods of time.’ (Otis, ed. 235). All these writers were presented with a new theme and ‘[t]he challenge was to make readers picture a thousand, ten thousand, or a million years of gradual change, periods that for most people were almost unimaginable.’ (235). From looking at the texts that are written in this time period—Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species (1859) and

The Descent of Man (1871), Jean Baptiste de Lamarck’s Zoological Philosophy (1809), Sir

Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology (1830-3), William Whewell’s Philosophy of the

Inductive Sciences (1840) and T.H. Huxley’s On the Physical Basis of Life (1869) as only a

few examples—one can conclude that the ‘writers [...] thought consciously about the

comparisons they were making.’ (235). The writers used metaphors in order to express their ideas, but they also found that their ‘language [...] often worked against the ideas [they] were trying to express.’ (235). Thus, evolution proved a difficult topic to discuss, and the scientists found it hard to convince an audience that their ideas were the ones that should be accepted as the truth.

In using the right metaphors, scientists believed that a ‘theory held true if one could just read the evidence right.’ (235). What is more, biologists saw ‘developing organisms [as] texts in which one could read the past’ (235) and they regarded it as their duty to explain their findings, which dealt with evolution, to a reading audience. Moreover, another group—the geologists—also had ‘to prove that the world had changed gradually as a result of small, accumulated alterations.’ (235). Like the other scientists they ‘needed to explain (1) that the past could be read, and (2) why gaps in the record made the past so difficult to read.’ (235).

In a time when many theories of evolution were produced by a great number of scientists, disagreements can be found between people commenting on the same topic. To illustrate, ‘[u]ntil the early 1860s the geologist Charles Lyell opposed the zoologist Jean Baptiste de Lamarck’s ideas that animals had evolved, protesting that Lamarck had developed his theories through imagination, not observation.’ (235-236). Knowing that the other portrays his ideas through metaphors, it is not strange that Lyell comes to this conclusion with regard to his own work, let alone someone else’s publication. Still, ‘Lyell was always conscious that he was telling a story, and he knew that he must use every resource to make it more

convincing than rival versions of the past.’ (236). Lyell’s awareness also demonstrates what other scientists and novelists must have taken into account while producing their own theories and stories.

One aspect of evolution that scientific writers and novelists felt particularly uncomfortable with was the minor role that human beings appeared to have played in the entire process. Herbert Spencer even ‘concluded in Principles of Biology that people’s

understanding of selfhood made no sense on an evolutionary scale.’ (237). This might be why ‘[m]any scientific and literary writers would challenge the idea that gradual, cumulative changes could leave a legible record. If one rejected this idea, the individual life looked even less significant.’ (237). Moreover, scientists debated the competing theories of de Lamarck and Darwin. From a modern perspective it is remarkable to find that even as late as at the end of the nineteenth-century that ‘Lamarck’s hypothesis of the inheritance of acquired characters enjoyed more adherents than Darwin’s theory of natural selection, for Lamarck’s idea that individual actions had lasting effects appealed to people’s sense of self-worth.’ (237). Another topic of debate was the concept of organic memory in which ‘individuals could transmit newly acquired traits to their descendants, and according to Darwin, they could not.’ (237-238).

Church wanted its believers to adhere to. The struggle between religion and science also plays an important role in Alfred Lord Tennyson’s poem In Memoriam and ‘Nature is a Heraclitean Fire’ by and Gerard Manley Hopkins. Both compositions ‘resist science’s claim to replace religion as a provider of inspiration and enlightenment. Science deprives people of a sense of purpose, they suggested, promising true knowledge but delivering neither knowledge nor justice.’ (239). Other notable figures in the nineteenth-century such as Huxley and Wells disagreed with these views.

What the writings that concern evolution all show is that the author was not merely interested in presenting a truth he or she believed in, but also one the audience would be able to accept as the truth. Thus writers carefully looked at what the influence of their texts would be on the implied reader, and how they could influence their audience. Looking at texts such as The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man, Darwin has produced works that are the most influential from today’s perspective, but in the nineteenth-century authors were more likely to find inspiration in texts that have been written and taught by one of his

contemporaries.

An aspect that supporters and critics of any theory of evolution would agree on is that in discussing evolution and ‘using well-known strategies, images, and metaphors, [scientists] changed the rules about how stories could be told. Evolutionary theory presented individuality in a new light, emphasizing people’s links to their past and, more importantly, to other

people.’ (240). At the same time ‘Darwin’s and Lyell’s stories suggested new possibilities to novelists, and cultural debates about evolution offered story-tellers ways to recast their narratives of descent and social bonds.’ (240).

As is often the case with a scientific theory, new ideas emerge from the original theory. With the knowledge that humankind continued to develop, and that this development was by no means definite or set, people started to believe in a more grim possibility for humankind—degeneration. Max Nordau, for instance, ‘borrowed various contemporary terms and ideas from the works of [Bénédict] Morel, [Cesare] Lombroso, [Henry] Maudsley,

[Hippolyte] Taine, [Jean-Martin] Charcot and others, [and he] argued that modern society was witnessing a terrible crisis born out of the growing division between the human body and social conditions.’ (Pick 24). This means that the degenerated human species might be taken over by a race more adapt to its surroundings.

Taking the aforementioned information on the theory of evolution and human

read in the previous paragraphs he was definitely not the only one to do so. For a novelist who is generally interested in putting science into his fiction, it should not come as a surprise that he opted to use the theory of evolution in his work as well. In addition, where a scientist would have been criticised for the use of his imagination—Wells as a novelist who is clearly manoeuvring between science and art, will be credited for his speculative portrayal in relation to the topic of evolution. After all, his stories, generally, seem plausible from a scientific point of view.

One of Wells’ major works that include the theory of evolution is his 1895 novella The

Time Machine. Although scientific themes such as technology, time travel, the fourth

dimension and the socio-political theme Marxism are often referred to in relation to this work; it is mainly a text that takes the theory of evolution a step further. In writing a story about an unnamed scientist who decides to visit the year 802,701, Wells introduces the reader to the degeneration of humankind. The minor role of human beings in the process of evolution in the past has been addressed in this work by taking the evolution of human kind eight hundred thousand years into the future. In this sense Wells’ speculative story is unique for his time.

The Time Machine demonstrates that in the distant future two human races have come

into existence. One is a small sized and innocent, but at the same time childlike and ignorant human race named the Eloi. Upon meeting them the time traveller asks himself if these

or gather supplies during daytime, the Morlocks have turned into cannibalistic creatures who hunt for the Eloi during the nights.

While Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution demonstrates that species constantly adapt their physical features which are of benefit to them in the climate and surroundings they live in, Wells has described a similar development with one minor difference—the human race did not develop into what the reader would consider a more sophisticated creature. If anything, the Eloi and the Morlocks are the lesser version of the people in the late nineteenth-century, let alone the early twenty first-century for that matter. The time traveller is aware that the Eloi are not the fittest, but that the Morlocks are at the actual top of the food chain. Moreover, he comes to another shocking conclusion when he finds that many animals have ceased to exist in the future: ‘Indeed, I found afterwards that horses, cattle, sheep, dogs, had followed the Ichthyosaurus into extinction.’ (27). This takes the theory of evolution even further, asking where this process stops. At the same time Wells demonstrates his awareness that the dinosaurs have ceased to exist in the past, and that this may happen to other species in the future as well.

Living in an idyllic environment where it is not necessary to hunt or gather food, the Eloi did not have to improve their brain functions and social skills. At first glance, the Eloi appear as a good example of degeneration, because they come across as child-like and ignorant to the observing time traveller. In addition, their physical appearance is small, because they no longer feel the need to defend themselves as a group. Whenever an Eloi group member is taken away by the Morlocks, the others do not appear to mourn this loss. In that sense the Eloi have accepted their role in the food chain—that is, in case they are aware of it. At second glance, the Eloi are also a good example of a successful evolution. The Time Traveller even states:

It is a law of nature we overlook, that intellectual versatility is the compensation for change, danger and trouble. An animal perfectly in harmony with its environment is a perfect

mechanism. Nature never appeals to intelligence until habit and instinct are useless. There is no intelligence where there is no change and no need of change. Only those animals partake of intelligence that have to meet a huge variety of needs and dangers. (78-79).

These people can manoeuvre effortlessly in the dark, are small of stature, because the

underground caves require them to be like this and they have found a new diet: the Eloi. The fact alone that Wells has managed to come up with a division into two human races is an aspect that takes the theory of evolution a step further. Yet this is often the case when one person starts to speculate and demonstrate his or her own ideas on an original concept. Wells’ story, however, is different from his contemporaries because he describes a possible future in relation to the theory of evolution. Other authors—both scientific and literary—are generally concerned with describing the past since that is where the evolutionary process has taken place. Wells portrays a future that is eight hundred thousand years from Victorian society, and he understood that the changes the human race has been subjected to do not appear to happen overnight.

The lack of the description of personal features of the Eloi and Morlocks can be explained by a point Wells wanted to raise in The Time Machine. Except for the Eloi girl named Weena who is different from the others in the sense that she is curious, all the other creatures appear to have the same character. The time traveller concludes that this is the result of communism:

I looked at the half dozen little figures that were following me. Then, in a flash, I perceived that all had the same form of costume, the same soft hairless visage, and the same girlish rotundity of limb. It may seem strange, perhaps, that I had not noticed this before. But everything was so strange. Now, I saw the fact plainly enough. In costume, and in all the differences of texture and bearing that now mark off the sexes from each other, these people of the future were alike. (29).

Not only are the physical features similar, but it appears that both Eloi and Morlocks are alike in terms of character as well. Wells leaves the question open whether or not the organic memory (believing that the children remember the newly acquired skills of the previous generations) are passed on by the previous generations. Yet the environmental change through communism—which eventually changes the physical appearance of these people—is there for every reader to see, and not just in terms of the way the Eloi dress themselves.

back to civilisation. While wandering in the valley in which he is stranded, Nunez comes across an odd looking village. The first person he sees, does not appear to be able see him and it is here that Nunez realises that he has stumbled upon the much talked about Country of the Blind. The mountain cuts these people from civilisation and Nunez is now one of the first outsiders after the Spanish Inquisition to visit these people. The villagers have been blind for fourteen generations because ‘[a] strange disease had come upon them, and had made all the children born to them there—and, indeed, several older children also—blind.’ (Wells. Short

Stories. 124). Where in The Time Machine the Morlocks and the Eloi evolved because of their

environment, the people in the Country of the Blind initially changed due to a mysterious illness that affected the eyes. On the basis of this information alone, one cannot speak of evolution in ‘The Country of the Blind’. Evolution, however, only appears when the blind people begin to develop their other four senses: hearing, touch, smell and taste. In fact, these four senses are all stronger than Nunez’s, and that leads to a conflict. No matter how hard Nunez attempts to convince these people that sight has so many advantages, they either laugh at him or refuse to understand what they do not need. Moreover, these people are able to hear exactly where Nunez holds up, and are by all means comfortable in the village they do not leave.

Thus while it is clear that in The Time Machine the Eloi and the Morlocks are the backwards version of a human being, ‘The Country of the Blind’ demonstrates that a fifth sense as opposed to the four senses of the villagers does not automatically lead to an

advantage when being forced to live in that society. After all, the blind people appear to cope well in their society while Nunez is seen as the outcast and not the superior. Wells addresses the theme of evolution from another perspective—human beings coping with their

eating at this particular island. In ‘The Country of the Blind’ one can see a similarity with the physical appearance of the villagers, which had changed from people in civilisation because they had turned blind.

Although ‘The Country of the Blind’ comes across as a short story that deals with the theory of evolution, it must be noted that Wells was not as accurate in portraying Darwin’s theory as he has been in The Time Machine. After all, fourteen generations are not enough to detect such a significant change in terms of blindness and appearance. Eight hundred

thousand odd years, like in The Time Machine is a far better time scale from a Darwinian perspective.

This means that ‘The Country of the Blind’ is more along the line of de Lamarck’s theory of evolution. De Lamarck ‘believed that environmental changes bring about changes in needs (besoins), and therefore in behaviour. In time new habits lead to development or

atrophy of organs, which are transmitted in these modified forms to progeny.’ (Litvack 18.15). Fourteen generations is, therefore, enough to find a significant mutation. Despite the fact that Wells does not mention de Lamarck in his autobiography or his correspondence, it is still plausible that he uses Lamarckism in ‘The County of the Blind’. After all, Lamarckism was the more popular theory of evolution in the late nineteenth-century and it is likely that the scientist in Wells was more than familiar with de Lamarck’s ideas. In addition, de Lamarck’s theory appealed more to people’s self-worth than Darwin’s ideas. (Otis, ed. 235).

One of Wells’ texts that also needs a short mention as far as the theme of evolution is concerned is The War of the Worlds. Although human beings on their own are not an

interesting topic to discuss in relation to this scientific concept, the invasion of the Martians demonstrates that these creatures are further in their overall development due to the simple fact that Mars is older than planet Earth. Human beings had of course invented quite a lot already in the late nineteenth-century, but this is nothing in comparison to the revolutionary weapons that the Martians bring to Earth. Their chemical weapons, Heat-Ray and cylinders in which the Martians travel are only a few examples of superiority. Add to this the all round believe in degeneration and the fact that another species could take over the position of humankind in the food chain and The War of the Worlds becomes ever the more interesting to discuss.

Although technological advances do not tell too much about evolutionary advances, it can be argued that Wells portrays the ‘survival of the fittest’ concept in The War of the

Worlds. Despite being the more evolutionary advanced species who at first and second glance

the human beings already are. While many human beings are killed, they eventually survive the invasion because the Martians fail to deal with a disease on earth. A bacterium is what kills the antagonists in this story, and this means that the human beings are still the fittest in their own environment—the planet Earth.

Having discussed the manner in which scientists and novelists made sure the theory of evolution appeared in writing in the nineteenth-century, and how Wells portrays this theory— it is interesting to see to what extent Wells and his contemporaries are alike, and what his motives are for using this concept in the first place. After reading and briefly discussing The

Time Machine, ‘The Country of the Blind’ and The War of the Worlds one will have seen that

Wells does not always come across as a scientific writer (a scientist who writes). Where his contemporaries made use of metaphors in order to describe the evolution of species and humankind, Wells has done the same in describing the Eloi and the Morlocks in The Time

Machine, Nunez and the villagers in ‘The Country of the Blind’ and human beings and

Martians in The War of the Worlds. Thus as a novelist Wells uses groups or characters from his own imagination to portray his speculation on the development of species.

Wells’ interest in the theory of evolution was sparked by his former biology teacher T.H. Huxley. Huxley was the person who taught him Darwin’s theory of evolution (Wells. Experiment in Autobiography. (161) and Wells fondly remembers the time he spent in his class in his An Experiment in Autobiography. Here, he claims that the ‘year I spent in Huxley’s class, was beyond all question, the most educational year of my life.’ (161). Moreover, Wells continues in praising Darwin and Huxley while at the same time he is ridiculing his contemporaries:

These two were very great men. They thought boldly, carefully and simply, they spoke and wrote fearlessly and plainly, they lived modestly and decently; they were mighty intellectual liberators. It is a pity that so many of the younger scientific workers of to-day, ignorant of the conditions of mental life in the early nineteenth-century and standing for the most part on the ground won, cleared and prepared for them by these giants, find a perverse pleasure in belittling them. (162).

one will find that his teacher T.H. Huxley was an atheist, and that he, unlike Tennyson and Hopkins, had no problem in rejecting religion in the ‘science versus religion’ debate. Wells notes that his ‘mother did not like to cast a shadow on my happiness, but yet she could not conceal from me that she had heard that this Professor Huxley was a notoriously irreligious man.’ (Wells. Experiment. 138). This did not turn out to be a problem for Wells as he was not a religious man himself either. When in the nineteenth-century ‘many researchers, raised in Christianity were attempting to reconcile their Christianity, and their science, with the teachings or implications of Darwin, Spencer, and Huxley. Wells had no difficulty with this. He rejected Christianity as inane, and felt a compulsion to instruct others unwilling to take a similar stand.’ (Smith 22). In terms of the writer and his influence, Wells also played a part in the use of the theory of evolution to present ‘individuality in a new light, emphasizing

Chapter Two: Technology in the Literary Works of H.G. Wells

The nineteenth-century was a time in which many technological inventions were introduced and entered British society for daily purposes. For instance, the telephone was an invention of the 1870s, but it was still considered a luxury in the 1890s and 1900s. (Maier, et al. 526-528). The 1830s and 1840s had seen ‘England’s growing railway networks change people’s

conception of distance. [A]dvocates, mainly middle-class industrialists, argued that the new system of communication would create near-organic unity and promote social harmony.’ (Otis, ed. 14). In addition, automobiles began to appear on the streets of London at the end of the century, creating even greater possibilities to travel on land for people who could afford such a vehicle. Therefore, it is hardly surprising that scientific writers in Victorian society were interested in describing these technological advances for a reading audience in greater detail, while literary authors also put these innovations into their fictional work. In general, both sets of writers were positive about the new scientific products. Scientific writers focused on describing how these innovations should be regarded by comparing them to aspects they had found while studying the classical sciences, while both sets of writers compared the functioning of the new technology to what they knew about the organs, movements and capabilities of the human body.

Yet not everyone was content with the technological advances, and the Luddite Rebellion in the 1810s, which is eight decades before H.G. Wells describes technology, is arguably the best example of actual revolt against it during the Industrial Revolution. Brian Bailey’s book The Luddite Rebellion describes the Luddites in the following manner: ‘[s]een at its simplest level, the movement was a prolonged outbreak of machine-breaking by

desperate textile workers intent on self-preservation.’ (Bailey ix). Despite the fact that these workers did not formulate their ideas on the new technology as eloquently as the scientific and literary writers have done, their rebellion against the introduction of machinery is still significant. Another example, The Tools of Empire by Daniel R. Hedrick describes that ‘progress and power of industrial technology’ (Headrick 3) resulted in the ‘domination and exploitation of Africa and much of Asia by Europeans.’ (3). These days the colonisation by Europeans is no longer a celebrated feat. In fact, it shows the negative sides of technological advances such as steamboats and a railway network—all are inventions which made the expansion of the British Empire easier and more profitable. For this reason it is also

Knowing that the technological advances can either be seen as positive or negative for the different groups in Victorian society, this section attempts to explain in further detail how the emergence of the new technology was regarded by H.G. Wells and his contemporaries. Firstly, the scientific writers and their use of metaphors are discussed in relation to Wells. They (scientists) are the first to comment on this topic, while it should be noted that Wells was schooled as a biologist and, therefore, qualifies as a scientist as well. Secondly, the literary authors (a group Wells definitely adheres to) are compared to the scientific writers in terms of their attitude towards the emerging technology in their writings. Lastly, it will be examined what role technology actually plays in Wells’ stories, and if the applied science itself should be regarded as positive and/or negative.

As was seen with works that are produced in relation to the theory of evolution, both scientific and literary authors heavily relied on the use of metaphors in order to explain how one should regard these theories. What is more, in relation to the recent ‘technological’ inventions, scientific writers also made use of metaphors. This is because ‘[t]heir analogies allowed them not just to publicize their findings but to theorize about how one force might be ‘translated’ into another. When conveying their ideas, [they] called upon readers to use their imagination just as they themselves had used it.’ (Otis, ed. 9). This means that scientific writers are consistent if one looks at their manner of portrayal of the theory of evolution and their depiction of technological advances. Furthermore, one will see that imagination also played an important role in the writing process as the readers were eventually challenged to visualise the recent inventions. To illustrate, a good but older example in which technology was visualised for the reader is the telescope. In their description of this innovation ‘[b]oth scientific and literary works made numerous references to the eye and the instruments that enhanced its powers.’ (11). One of the people to do so was astronomer William Herschel (1738-1822) who explained what man can see of the stars without a telescope—which is miniscule compared to what one can see through one. Herschel, therefore, ‘presented the telescope as an extension of the natural eye, one which possessed a greater resolving power but functioned according to the same principles. In Herschel’s writing, the ‘power of penetrating into space’ is the ability to imagine what one cannot see.’ (11-12).

extensively. As was common at the time, they even formulated their new theories in Latin. This is why ‘[i]n both literary and scientific writing, emerging theories blended with classical myths to form a common cultural language,’ (12) which further explains the appearance of classical metaphors that were already known to the reading audience in relation with science—in this case new technology. It should be noted that even though Wells was schooled as a biologist and, therefore, qualifies as a scientific writer, he was not from a privileged background since he had to earn a scholarship. Where attending a college in Cambridge or Oxford could have resulted in better knowledge of the classical languages, the National School of Science in Kensington provided Wells with the necessary knowledge of the sciences. The author did regard Latin as ‘the symbol of mental emancipation,’ (Wells.

Experiment. 118) but references, myths or metaphors in terms of classical cultures are not

found in his fictional works dealt with here. Obviously, the scientific writers did formulate and publish their theories and ideas in the English language, but classical metaphors were still being used to explain the functioning and significance of the latest technology. Thus, in short, not including classical metaphors in his work is what makes Wells different than most of his scientific contemporaries.

Apart from using classical metaphors, scientists often compared the technological advances to the human body. For instance, while trying to convince ‘the US Congress to finance his electromagnetic telegraph in 1837, Samuel Morse presented it as a national nervous system.’ (Otis, ed. 13). From what was known of the human body, those in power were able to recognise the significance of Morse’s invention. However, Morse was not the only person to explain the importance of his invention with the use of a metaphor. Moreover, ‘the resemblance between sensory organs and technical devices was more than an informative metaphor; it inspired the design of communications devices.’ (13). With the emergence of the telephone, ‘a writer explaining their development revealed that Alexander Graham Bell, like Morse, had thought in terms of the human body.’ (13). Even ‘[b]efore constructing his

receiver, Bell consulted an ear specialist so that his device might function as efficiently as the human organ.’ (13).

Similar to his contemporaries Wells portrays the technology in a metaphorical manner in The War of the Worlds so that the reader can imagine what the weapons, which the

(Wells, War Worlds. 75). In this instance, Wells describes the object by using another piece of recent technology in order to describe the fictional element. After all, Wells speaks of ‘the camera that fired the Heat-Ray’ (75) and the reader will be able to visualise what the machine looks like. The first appearance of the weapon itself provides the reader with an actual human body metaphor: ‘A kind of arm carried a complicated metallic case, about which green flashes scintillated, and out of the funnel of this there smoked the Heat-Ray.’ (64). The cylinder in which the Martians had travelled to Earth is compared to or mistaken for a meteor. Wells’ protagonist calls it a ‘Thing’ which ‘had a diameter of about thirty yards’ (17) when he first sees it and he notes that ‘most meteorites are rounded more or less completely. It was, however, still so hot from its flight through the air as to forbid his near approach.’ (17). In portraying the cylinder as a meteor, readers who were familiar with astronomy or who knew what a meteor looked like, would be able to understand what the ‘Thing’ represented and how it is similar to other objects from outer space. Thus in comparing the technology in his work to other known machines, the human body, and other recent discoveries, Wells was similar to his scientific contemporaries.

At this point, only scientific writers have been discussed in relation to Wells and technology, but by looking at texts such as ‘Mental Telegraphy’ (1891) by Mark Twain, ‘In the Cage’ (1898) by Henry James, Dombey and Son (1847-48) by Charles Dickens and ‘To a Locomotive in Winter’ (1876) by Walt Whitman all of which dealt with the new technology, one can see that ‘[i]n their effort to achieve credibility, fiction writers describing

communications technologies used the same strategies as scientists.’ (Otis, ed. 13). Mark Twain ‘published the tall tale ‘Mental Telegraphy’ in which a narrator argues that thoughts can be transmitted from mind to mind. At first, Twain’s anecdotes about coincidental discoveries seem to offer convincing evidence for thought-transmission because they are interspersed with scientific references.’ (13). Yet this changes when the narrator ‘innocently invokes ‘mental telegraphy’ to explain scientific and literary disputes about authorship. The real subject of Twain’s tale is plagiarism, an issue as essential to science as it is to literature.’ (13). Henry James, offers a different view as his story ‘In the Cage’ suggests that ‘technology feeds the imagination,’ (14) and this is in accordance with what scientific writers have to say about technological advances.

communications proves illusory. As James implies, however, technology inspires its users to think, particularly about their own bodies and identities. (14).

Meanwhile Charles Dickens did not celebrate the new technology (14), despite the fact that he used this form of public transport quite often. Perhaps some of his negative portrayal can be explained by the railway accident he survived in 1865. The character Mr Dombey, who has just lost his son, in Dickens’ novel Dombey and Son, feels a growing dislike for trains, and he compares the mechanical power of the train to the merciless forces that have also taken the child’s life. Meanwhile Dombey’s disgraced brother Carker is fleeing for him after he is been disloyal to him for many years. The train ride reminds Carker of a sort of monster that is haunting him. Both characters describe their dislike and/or anxiety of trains by using

metaphors, and it is the machine that invokes these traumatic experiences. In addition, it can also be argued that the new forces that people experience on the train appear to crush their humanity. Still one needs to be careful in claiming that Dickens’ characters also represent his own view on technology advances. Seeing a downside of travelling by train and presenting this in fiction does not make the train a ‘bad’ invention.

A negative description cannot be found in Walt Whitman’s poem ‘To a Locomotive in Winter’ (14), because he seems to celebrate technology by noting how it is similar to the human body. For Whitman the machine is alive as it manages to challenge the natural

elements in winter. In his composition nature is the enemy and Whitman attempts to convince his audience to side with humankind’s invention, which is successfully fighting the natural forces.

Thus by looking at some examples from literary authors one can see that scientific writers are generally more positive about recent technological advances, despite the fact that their literary counterparts often celebrated these innovations as well. Making use of similar metaphors was not uncommon, especially as ‘mechanized industry developed, [and] writers from all fields compared bodies to machines.’ (14). Overall, ‘In nineteenth-century Europe, the rapid development of technology encouraged all those who used it to rethink their notions of mind, body, and identity. Through their comparisons of bodies and machines, scientists and literary writers contributed to a new cultural understanding of selfhood. Both, in turn, revised their understanding of the body as an entity increasingly dependent on tools and open to outside forces.’ (15).

advances. In making sure that the author’s ideas come across, fiction is of course an effective tool to reach a great number of people. Wells speculates on technological possibilities in many of his writings, but mentioning only a few examples of technology in works such as The

War of the Worlds (1898) and The First Men in the Moon (1901) already leave a good

impression of what the author has done with this topic.

Evolution is only one of the themes that can be found in The War of the Worlds, because the story is also concerned with the technological advances of the Martians. The Martians are seen as the more evolved race and they are more advanced when it comes to technology than human beings. Nevertheless, the novel is as much a text about the future of humankind as it is about the fictional Martians. In order to explain what the capabilities of humankind might be like, Wells uses the fictional technology of the Martians in this novel as an example. What is interesting is that this novel has proven to be fairly realistic in terms of the eventual future outcome—meaning that The War of the Worlds has aged well. Some of the inventions by the Martians actually came into existence in real life, decades after Wells’ book was first published. Primary examples of the technological devices that were used by the Martians are the chemical weapons (which were later used in World War I), the Heat-Ray (similar to the laser device which came into existence in the 1950s) and the cylinders used for space travel (which is fairly similar to the spacecraft NASA uses). Thus The War of the

Worlds takes technology a step ahead of its time, while at the same time Wells remains

realistic in his depiction of what the capabilities of technology are for the ‘people’ who are controlling the devices. The author also presents how a technological advantage is crucial in becoming an established power and maintaining this position. To illustrate, The British Empire—which in the 1890s was a ‘successful colonial power’ due to its technological advances over people in Africa and Asia—ends up being colonised in The War of the Worlds, because the Martians are superior to humankind in terms of technology. In this sense Wells produces a story in which role reversal, if one compares it to reality, is clearly visible.

In addition, The First Men in the Moon is a good example of how the author usually presents the inventors in his work. As one will see in texts such as ‘The Diamond Maker’ (1894), The Time Machine (1895), The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) and The Invisible

Man (1897) one of the main characters in the story is always a British scientist who works on

his own. This is similar to how practicing scientists were working at the time. The scientist often informs a limited number of people—usually just one—of what invention he has come up with. This is the case, for example, for Doctor Cavor who has invented a material called

who only confides to protagonist Mr Bedford, revealing that this new material is able to shield off gravity. It is actually Bedford who sees the financial benefit of this new invention and he decides to help Cavor in the further development and appliance of cavorite. Together the two men build a spacecraft and travel to the Moon. Although the surface of the Moon in the novel is nothing like the way it is in reality; Wells, of course, had no knowledge of this. After all, the Moon landing only proved possible until sixty eight years after the publication of the story. On the Moon’s surface, which in the story is covered with plants and other native fauna, the two men are taken captive by the natives named the Selenites. Mr Bedford is able to escape and travel back to the Earth, but Cavor is still in captivity. The two are able to communicate via Morse code and a radio transmitter that Cavor was able to build or find—it is not clear how he gained access to this device in the story. A radio transmitter was a new invention in the late nineteenth-century, but people were not able to speak over long distances until the first transatlantic phone call on 7 March 1926, let alone use Morse code without a cable on such a distance. Wells, therefore, takes communication a step into the future as well. The material named cavorite remains speculative as Doctor Cavor’s explanation on how to make it is interrupted, and all contact with Earth is lost at the end of the story. In this way the author protects himself from providing his audience with a false recipe.

As Wells describes the new inventions Doctor Cavor comes up with in The First Men

in the Moon, he cleverly refers to one of his contemporaries in literature—one of the other

fathers of science fiction, Jules Verne. When the two characters in the novel discuss the building process of the ‘sphere’, Doctor Cavor says: ‘[...] there will have to be a valve, so that things may be thrown out, if necessary, without much loss of air.’ (Wells. First Men. 45). Although the reader will probably be able to imagine how this works, Mr Bedford responds: ‘Like Jules Verne’s thing in A Trip to the Moon.’ (45). In the next sentence it is explained that the scientist does not understand Mr Bedford’s comparison since ‘Cavor was not a reader of fiction.’ (45). What follows is a further discussion between the theoretical Cavor and Mr Bedford—the character the audience would relate with. Mr Bedford, like the reader, is more or less the outsider when it comes to the production of applied science. In this way, Wells always makes sure that readers who do not know much about science, are able to understand what the actual thinking behind the latest technology is like.

Chapter Three: Science, Technology and the Humanities

The previous chapters have discussed how H.G. Wells and his contemporaries described science (chapter 1) and technology (chapter 2) in their scientific and literary writing. Yet, there is an important aspect that has not been discussed at this moment in time; and that is the difference between the two terms ‘science’ and ‘technology’. As much as the two labels appear alike at first glance, one should always keep in mind that science and technology do not describe the exact same process, product and/or field. To, illustrate, ‘[t]he word science once meant knowledge acquired by study.’ (Chapple 1). Here, the former meaning of the word continues to demonstrate one of the main objectives for scientists (these days and in the late nineteenth-century). After all, the natural philosophers—as scientists were once called— are interested in analyzing how interactions, effects and causes influence subjects by

conducting experiments. Scientists work in different fields (biology, physics, chemistry, psychology, geology, zoology and astronomy are only a few examples), but they are all interested in formulating their ideas in writing, which is what Wells’ scientific contemporaries have demonstrated in chapter one. Science, then, is used for technology when (these same) scientists begin to apply their acquired knowledge from their field of expertise in order to produce a new material or device. This is also the reason why technology is often referred to as ‘applied science.’ Thus scientific ideas form the basis for the production of a machine or material which is then labelled with the collective term ‘technology.’ The aeroplane is a good example of technology, when one keeps in mind that this invention was only possible through the appliance of scientific laws of gravity. In addition, the existing technology can also help in the field of science as the microscope has demonstrated over time. For example, a

hypothetical experiment in which two types of bacteria are compared (science) can only be conducted successfully when the scientists are able to use the microscope (technology). Thus what the aforementioned information attempts to demonstrate, is that a good understanding of the two terms is necessary in order to comprehend science and technology as separate topics in relation to Wells and his fiction.

political perspective that Thatcher was concerned with. A more complete description of Victorian values also includes the fact that people hoped to find improvement for themselves and their family. In daily life this meant that one had to be a decent, hard working, and religious citizen. Similar to the American Dream—which derives from a Puritan work-ethic— the father had to provide for the family while the mother was concerned with raising the children.

Despite the fact that it might appear as though the Victorians all had high moral and/or Christian standards, the opposite was often true. As a result of the industrialisation the cities were filled with poverty, and decency and sexual morality—which was often seen as the ideal—was often neglected by members from all the social classes in the Victorian era. Another reason why the sciences and humanities are hard to grasp in connection to each other can be explained through debates in both the present day and the Victorian period. ‘The modern debate about science and human values is often less than sincere; it is stylized and ritualistic.’ (Paradis and Postlewait, eds. vii). While the ‘[a]rtists and humanists are likely to claim the realms of affective thought and symbol; scientists and applied scientists appear content with certain logical realms of systematic thought and fact.’ (vii). This leads to debates and differences in terms of ‘belief and reason, feeling and computation, figurative and literal language, the personal and the public, and so on.’ (vii). As a result, scientists and non-scientists are divided and only look at points which adhere to their own field or category. Back in the Victorian period one can detect a similar division, but there is one major difference: most ‘scientists, artists, and critics alike—assumed that a culture, however diversely organized, was itself an organic unity in which the values motivating the scientist could be reconciled with those of the artist and humanist.’ (vii). Although the reconciliation of sciences and humanities is an ongoing process, it is not as significant as it was in the late nineteenth-century. Still, ever since the Victorian period, the debate ‘inspired a remarkable series of public, literary work, and journalistic controversies that collectively weighed the cultural significance of science.’ (vii). Therefore, it remains an interesting topic for discussion that should not be left unmentioned even if one does not look at H.G. Wells and his fictional works on science and technology in the Victorian period.

‘science and technology’ are pointed out as positive or negative in Wells’ science fiction, and how his writing relates to the Victorian era.

The Scientific and literary writers attempted ‘to preserve the generalist spirit of knowledge.’ (ix). In the nineteenth-century Matthew Arnold (1822-88)—a poet, essayist and social and literary critic—objected to the views of the biologist Huxley who wanted ‘to make the training in natural science the main part of education, for the great majority of mankind at any rate.’ (Lightman. Companion. 12). Opposing Huxley, Arnold claimed that scientific knowledge ‘was unable to put us ‘into relation with our sense for conduct, our sense for beauty.’ [Thus,] if science could not fulfil basic human needs, then, Arnold argued, we must turn to another body of learning as the foundation of education: classical language and literature.’ (12). This is, of course, all in accordance with the classical metaphors that scientific and literary writers used to describe the science. Here, the debate between Huxley and Arnold in the early 1880s begs the question whether or not this is the start ‘of a cultural divide between scientists and literary intellectuals’(12)—a discussion which is even apparent in the early twenty-first century. This does not automatically mean that Huxley was

‘attempting to divorce science from literature, or from culture. On the contrary, Huxley’s main goal is to redefine the Victorian concept of culture while including a significant role for literature in education.’ (12-13). Rather than arguing that traditional literature in education should be perceived as unimportant or even abolished, Huxley merely asked for the addition of modern literature and sciences ‘to a curriculum overly focused on classical literatures and languages.’ (13). The interpretation and teaching of Latin and Greek was no longer sufficient to define Victorian society and culture according to the Huxley and his followers.

A modern audience is likely to agree with Huxley since the educational system actually turned out to be more in accordance with his views than Arnold’s. Huxley was

supported by two important literary figures of his time, George Eliot and Thomas Hardy. Both ‘[n]ovelists belong[ed] to the literary school known as ‘realism’’ (14) and they ‘recognized the importance of modern science.’ (14).Similar to H.G. Wells they were interested in putting science into their novels—works which they themselves regarded as literature despite the fact that these recently published works were not part of the canon.Therefore, ‘[t]he notion, then, that the Huxley-Arnold debate signalled the beginning of a cultural divide between scientists and literary intellectuals, is misleading.’ (14). This is exactly where the science versus humanities debate becomes complex, should one forget to take this into account.

Already in the eighteen fifties Huxley was hammering away at the importance of biology in education. The drive of this need was resisted by the established religions, the ruling

aristocracies and whatever remained over of the ‘scholarly’ mediaeval universities. The new educational organizations essential to the proper working of the new order, had to grow against these resistances and were greatly delayed, dwarfed, distorted and crippled in the process. (Wells. Experiment. 166-167).

Wells clearly mocks the old system, while at the same time he supports Huxley’s views. As a keen admirer of Huxley this is to be expected. In addition, Wells recognised the importance of Huxley’s views for the future of the British educational system by mentioning this in his autobiography. However, the name Matthew Arnold and the debate itself are not discussed in this context though this is not necessary if one needs to establish who Wells would have supported in this instance.

Wells’ fiction in the Victorian period often includes a ‘mad’ scientist based on Huxley and his views. During his school years ‘Wells absorbed Huxley’s pessimistic take on late-Victorian evolutionary theory, particularly his emphasis on the inherent brutality of natural selection.’ (Stiles 139). The mad scientist and pessimistic take on evolutionary theory come back in works such as The Island of Doctor Moreau, The War of the Worlds and The First

Men in the Moon, and it can be argued that both themes have a link with Huxley. Moreover,

another influence on Wells’ fiction was ‘the clinical association between genius and insanity that developed in the mid-nineteenth century. Authors like Scottish journalist and materialist philosopher John Ferguson Nisbet, English eugenicist Francis Galton, and Austrian Jewish physician Max Nordau—all of whose works were reviewed in Mind—argued that mankind had evolved larger brains at the expense of muscular strength, reproductive capacity, and moral sensibility.’ (139). Wells even entered the debate and contributed to Mind magazine with an article named ‘‘Scepticism of the Instrument’’ in 1904.

locomotives. As a result, authors began to write about these evident changes. Where the authors from privileged backgrounds are often mentioned when this topic is discussed, ‘working-class writers including Thomas Cooper, Benjamin Brierley and Thomas Preston sought to put the experiences of their peers into autobiographies, novels, poetry, plays and journalism.’ (Daly. Companion. 45). Wells cannot be seen as working-class, since he was and considered himself to be from the lower middle-class when he grew up—but he also

commented on the possibilities and effects of technology in his writings. Similar to the science and humanities debate, he did not have to reconcile technology with his faith, while others might have felt obliged to do this.

Having mentioned that his contemporaries had to take religion into account when writing about science and technology in relation to Victorian culture, it is clear that Wells is in a unique position from which he informs the reader. Furthermore, in the previous chapter the scientific and literary writers either applauded the new possibilities of science and

technology or demonstrated cautiousness towards its introduction to their society. In terms of Wells and his work one can see that he opts to portray both the positive traits of the invention or the conducting of research as well its negative aspects. To illustrate this, one can point to examples of literary works in which Wells points out the effects of the latest (or imagined) developments in terms of science and technology. Perhaps due to the fact that the author points out the possibilities and the pitfalls of new developments in Victorian society, it remains difficult to determine whether or not he considered these particular examples of science and/or technology as ‘good’ or ‘bad’.

Vivisection is arguably one of the more sinister sciences that were conducted in the nineteenth-century. The word vivisection comes from the Latin vivus: ‘alive’ and sectio: ‘cutting’ and the term can also be defined as ‘[t]he action of cutting or dissecting some part of a living organism; spec. the action or practice of performing dissection, or other painful experiment, upon living animals as a method of physiological or pathological study.’ (“OED” par. 2). This, of course, makes it an interesting theme to discuss in the field of literature. After all, back in the late nineteenth-century vivisection was a contemporary topic of debate as the possibilities of the procedure had not been set.

animals. Moreau therefore fled the country and now conducts his research in all freedom. The island is populated by horse, leopard, and pig-like creatures that live according to human morals—meaning they cannot kill the animals or other inhabitants of the island. Yet Moreau ends up being killed by one of the animals in his laboratory, and the so called Beast Folk turn against his assistant Montgomery, which results in his death as well. Prendrick, therefore, remains the only human being on the island. He eventually needs to escape when the Beast Folk gradually return to their former animal-like instincts, ignoring the rules that were set by Doctor Moreau. Wells clearly explores the consequences of vivisection in this novel by implying that half-human, half-animal-like creatures are likely to act out of instinct rather than reason. This means that these hybrids are a danger to any modern society. Wells proves to be a good teacher in showing the reader what the possibilities and pitfalls of animal vivisection are like—in this case, in a society with Victorian standards. In addition, Wells includes what his own society would have thought of the fictional applied scientist by making him an outcast in British society.

At first glance, technology does not play an important role in The Invisible Man. Whereas the villagers of Iping, a small town in West Sussex, are all portrayed as decent people—and they would, therefore, qualify as adherents to what would later be considered Victorian values—the man referred to as Griffin clearly is not portrayed as admirable. Yet if one reads between the lines one can see that Wells initially portrays the villagers as

unintelligent and gullible, while the readers learns to admire Griffin. From the moment the main character enters the village, he comes across as mysterious, impolite, grumpy and reserved. Although Griffin is an enjoyable protagonist at first, he becomes a burglar by using his invisibility to his advantage and he even ends up killing a police officer. As the story progresses the reader learns that Griffin has a dark past, while the gullible villagers are eventually clever enough to capture the rebelling protagonist. In this sense, Wells cleverly uses flashbacks to reveal Griffin’s true nature. In case the story had been written in

Southampton, Manchester, Brighton and Horsham travelled with locked doors, and the goods traffic was almost entirely suspended.’ (Wells. Invisible Man. 275) Although the actual invention of the train and speculative introduction of invisibility have their advantages— better mobility and not being detectable respectively—Wells includes the negative aspects of technology as well.

The First Men in the Moon demonstrates how the invention of cavorite (the science)

and the spacecraft (technology possible because of cavorite) eventually have a negative effect on the main characters, but not on the bigger picture—the Victorian society. First, the mad scientist and Mr Bedford explore the Moon, which is possible through their own applied technology, a place no other human beings have come before them. After this achievement their luck turns when Doctor Cavor is taken captive by the Moon’s inhabitants. Despite the fact that Cavor is able to establish contact with Earth via the use of Morse code, the

technology eventually fails him and he is not rescued.

Finally, Wells’ ‘The Diamond Maker’ (1894) is an example of a story in which the protagonist as well as the reader is challenged in believing whether or not the production of diamonds is scientifically plausible. In this short story, Wells describes an unnamed narrator who responds to a man who attempts to start a conversation with him. The reader notices that the main character does not know what to think of the other person, especially after the man confides to him that he can make diamonds. Having already described the diamond maker’s poor appearance, the narrator jokingly responds: ‘I suppose [...] you are out of work just at present?’ (Wells. Short Stories. 155). This annoys the diamond maker, and he shows him the valuables he is hiding under his coat. After putting the ‘brown pebble’ (156) to the test, the narrator is able to confirm that it might, in fact, be a diamond. He wonders how the poor man became the owner to which the diamond maker responds: ‘I tell you I made it[.] [...] Give it back to me.’ (156). The poor man then explains to the narrator how he has wasted his money on making diamonds. Although one can doubt the man’s story, the way in which Wells’ character presents the diamond maker’s work is plausible from a scientific perspective.

chemists are small and dark, and worthless as jewels. [...] You know time is an important element in crystallisation. If you hurry the process the crystals are small—it is only by prolonged standing that they grow to any size. I resolved to let this apparatus cool for two years, letting the temperature go down slowly during that time. (157-159).

The diamond maker cannot sell his product to jewellers because they will call the police on him, and this is why he wants to sell a diamond to the narrator for a mere one-hundred pounds. Yet the narrator is cautious and only leaves his business card, which allows the diamond maker to drop by his office. The two men never meet again, even though the diamond maker did come to the office once when the protagonist was not around. At the end of the story the narrator says: ‘I sometimes think I might at least have risked five pounds.’ (161).

Thus in ‘The Diamond Maker’ Wells has once again portrayed the ambiguous

Conclusion

This thesis has situated H.G. Wells and his science fiction in the Victorian era, and investigated to what extent his work compares to that of his scientific and literary contemporaries. Linking Wells’ work between 1894 and 1904 to other literary texts that discuss Victorian science, literature and values has been a worthwhile journey. One often learns to appreciate an author even more by seeing the work he or she produced in its proper context. In the case of Wells, one can say that he has demonstrated admirable knowledge and awareness of scientific and technological advances throughout his professional life. In

addition, those who have read Wells are likely to find his work enjoyable, thought-provoking; even fascinating—attitudes which in my opinion are more than justified. Perhaps this is exactly why it is essential to approach the author critically. What is more, the Victorian era has been interesting to examine since the sources that describe Victorian science, literature and values often contain good examples of what scientific and literary authors had to take into account when writing about scientific theories and technological advances. By comparing the contents of these works to the subject of Wells I was able to find that his writing is, at least, to some extent similar his contemporaries’ approach. Luckily, however, it was also possible to establish that the author and his science fiction have its own unique place within the Victorian era.

I found it important to discuss the many theories of evolution in the Victorian era in relation to Wells’ science fiction, and in that sense, it is especially The Time Machine that should be considered a ground breaking work. The theory of evolution was a contemporary topic of debate in the late nineteenth-century, which is why one will come across some heated discussions between scientists (e.g. Lyell versus de Lamarck) who each did everything to make sure the audience would accept their theory as the truth. Due to his educational background Wells can be categorised as a scientific writer, and that is why this thesis

constantly refers to both scientific and literary writers as the author’s contemporaries. What is more, focusing parts of chapters on how his contemporaries put their ideas in writing,

this is not stated in the novelists’ fiction. Moving back to Wells, The Time Machine, ‘The Country of the Blind’ and The War of the Worlds can be identified as works in which he uses groups or characters from his own imagination. These imagined people function as the tool that takes the existing theory a step further. As was argued Wells applied Darwin’s theory of evolution in a formidable manner in The Time Machine and The War of the Worlds. However, ‘The Country of the Blind’ is where the author is more along the line with the Lamarckian theory.

In using Darwin’s theory for literary texts, Wells was uncommon for his time period as ‘Darwinism had never been popular among Victorian biologists.’ (Bowler 18).

Furthermore, ‘[t]hose associated with the myth, especially Huxley and Spencer, came to be regarded as outdated and scarcely worthy of mention.’ (18). Here, it is interesting to find that Wells actually presented Darwin’s theory of evolution, which a modern audience arguably accepts as the main/true theory on this topic. Thus Wells produced a revolutionary story by basing The Time Machine on a perceived outdated myth from his own time; and in that light it is even ironic to see that a modern audience would regard Darwinism as a commonly used theory.

Finding that Wells can be categorised as belonging to the non-religious side (in and outside the evolution debate), makes him part of the minority among scientists in the Victorian era. As was demonstrated, his contemporaries (Tennyson and Hopkins) were reconciling science with Christianity in their writing. Arguing that reconciling faith and science was common at the time can be illustrated by ‘Francis Galton’s 1874 survey [which] showed that seventy percent of English scientists still regarded themselves as Anglicans and several later surveys still confirm a surprisingly high level of religious belief.’ (15). Yet, like his former biology teacher Huxley, Wells was not a religious man, which is why one will not find similarities with Tennyson or Hopkins on this particular topic. Wells’ views on religion become even more significant when one looks at the future of science. After all, ‘[t]he

atheism that the Victorians had seen as a threat on the horizon [became] the dominant attitude of the intellectual elite’ (23) in the twentieth-century.