Beyond Cyberpunk: Towards a Solarpunk Future(thedorkweb.substack.com)
thedorkweb.substack.com
Beyond Cyberpunk: Towards a Solarpunk Future
https://thedorkweb.substack.com/p/towards-a-solarpunk-future
86 comments
I agree. I also agree that the author, like many who try to define solarpunk by pulling utopic goals (ie startrek utopia, singapore vs HK) and fantasies, confuse the readers on what is punk and solarpunk.
Punk is not about where you are going, is not about what will become. Punk is about doing it regardless of that and what others expect you to. A solarpunk is certainly hopeful that actions will lead to a better reality, but they are more focused on action today than what will be of tomorrow.
A solarpunk is a punk because, unlike other more mainstream ecologist they don't need to convince others of their view to act. They just act.
Punk is not about where you are going, is not about what will become. Punk is about doing it regardless of that and what others expect you to. A solarpunk is certainly hopeful that actions will lead to a better reality, but they are more focused on action today than what will be of tomorrow.
A solarpunk is a punk because, unlike other more mainstream ecologist they don't need to convince others of their view to act. They just act.
[deleted]
Just some historical context for those saying solarpunk is too wholesome sounding to be ‘punk’. Check out Minor Threat and the straight edge movement. Seemingly not punk at all, but actually the MOST punk.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_Threat
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_edge
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_Threat
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straight_edge
Is it just your interpretation of what “punk” in “cyberpunk” means? The author of the word seems to disagree with you: http://www.textfiles.com/russian/cyberlib.narod.ru/lib/criti....
>The kids who trashed my computer; their kids were going to be Holy Terrors, combining the ethical vacuity of teenagers with a technical fluency we adults could only guess at. Further, the parents and other adult authority figures of the early 21st Century were going to be terribly ill-equipped to deal with the first generation of teenagers who grew up truly "speaking computer."
>THEREFORE, if you thought that punks on motorcycles were a problem, just wait until you meet the -- the -- You know, there isn't a good word to describe them?
>So I set out to create and define that word.
>The kids who trashed my computer; their kids were going to be Holy Terrors, combining the ethical vacuity of teenagers with a technical fluency we adults could only guess at. Further, the parents and other adult authority figures of the early 21st Century were going to be terribly ill-equipped to deal with the first generation of teenagers who grew up truly "speaking computer."
>THEREFORE, if you thought that punks on motorcycles were a problem, just wait until you meet the -- the -- You know, there isn't a good word to describe them?
>So I set out to create and define that word.
I wrote a bit about Solarpunk a few months back in March [0].
It's interesting that you framed things through the concept of a narrative arc because that's exactly how I pictured it when I wrote my piece. I wonder if it's because as humans, both individually and within the context of society as a whole, it's important for us to have a sense of direction / purpose when carrying out action.
[0]: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/possibility-adversity-hope-fa...
It's interesting that you framed things through the concept of a narrative arc because that's exactly how I pictured it when I wrote my piece. I wonder if it's because as humans, both individually and within the context of society as a whole, it's important for us to have a sense of direction / purpose when carrying out action.
[0]: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/possibility-adversity-hope-fa...
> it's building anything from nothing
sounds like DIY and Zen.
The one problem I have with solarpunk is that much of the fiction is simply not that good.
I think most emblematic of that is maybe Cory Doctorow's book "Walkaway".
I have lately come to accept that the book had a huge influence on me; it just keeps coming up in conversation. Well... I bring it up, because it struck a chord, and because it fits well with the conversations I have.
But the writing is so.... aaaargh, so shoddy at times. And half of the book is just a brain dump of ideas and projections of current trends in the future, but it's just not presented as a good plot line. It's very clear that the intention is to wrap some (powerful) ideas into a plot to make it digestible, but it's just not that well executed.
But as I said, I made my peace with this love-hate relationship I have with the book. I just hope there will be more, better solarpunk art. Something I can actually recommend to friends without it feeling like homework.
I have lately come to accept that the book had a huge influence on me; it just keeps coming up in conversation. Well... I bring it up, because it struck a chord, and because it fits well with the conversations I have.
But the writing is so.... aaaargh, so shoddy at times. And half of the book is just a brain dump of ideas and projections of current trends in the future, but it's just not presented as a good plot line. It's very clear that the intention is to wrap some (powerful) ideas into a plot to make it digestible, but it's just not that well executed.
But as I said, I made my peace with this love-hate relationship I have with the book. I just hope there will be more, better solarpunk art. Something I can actually recommend to friends without it feeling like homework.
> The one problem I have with solarpunk is that much of the fiction is simply not that good.
I agree. I was intrigued by the genre and picked up what happens to be the only books mentioned in the article by name: The Dispossessed and Sunvault.
They're both fairly boring. Slow paced, lack of nail-biting moments, some stories from Sunvault completely went over my head (barely understood anything from them)...
I have respect for Doctorow from an advocacy perspective, but I'm not a fan of his fiction at all.
I agree. I was intrigued by the genre and picked up what happens to be the only books mentioned in the article by name: The Dispossessed and Sunvault.
They're both fairly boring. Slow paced, lack of nail-biting moments, some stories from Sunvault completely went over my head (barely understood anything from them)...
I have respect for Doctorow from an advocacy perspective, but I'm not a fan of his fiction at all.
Le Guin is all about the slow burn. I recommend giving her another chance -- her short stories IMO are better for getting your feet wet than her novels particularly the anthology "The Wind's Twelve Corners"[1] which introduces many of her universes, including the Hainish Cycle (the universe of The Dispossessed) and Earthsea. The first story in TWTC in particular, Semley's Necklace, is wonderful -- I remember being frustrated 3/4 of the way through it because it felt very "high fantasy" which is not generally my preference, only to be dealt a bucket of ice water in the face by the end. Much of her work is that way.
Her parents were anthropologists and she herself was politically engaged, so much of her work deals with themes of culture, the relationship between culture and technology, cultural supremacy, gender, and power in general. Much of her work inverts the racial and gender order of traditional scifi.
"The Rule of Names" is another short story in that anthology that I loved -- this one was less political in nature, and introduces her Earthsea universe. It's fairly easy to find a PDF copy of this one on the internet.
As far as her novels go, "A Wizard of Earthsea" might be the best starter novel if you're interested in giving her novels another shot.
IMO this quote from it captures the essence of her writing (and the experience of reading it) pretty well:
“You want to work spells,' Ogion said presently, striding along. 'You've drawn too much water from that well. Wait. Manhood is patience. Mastery is nine times patience. What is that herb by the path?'
'Strawflower.'
'And that?'
'I don't know.'
'Fourfoil, they call it.' Ogion had halted, the coppershod foot of his staff near the little weed, so Ged looked closely at the plant, and plucked a dry seedpod from it, and finally asked, since Ogion said nothing more, 'What is its use, Master?'
'None I know of.'
Ged kept the seedpod a while as they went on, then tossed it away.
'When you know the fourfoil in all its seasons root and leaf and flower, by sight and scent and seed, then you may learn its true name, knowing its being: which is more than its use. What, after all, is the use of you? or of myself? Is Gont Mountain useful, or the Open Sea?' Ogion went on a half mile or so, and said at last, 'To hear, one must be silent.”
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wind%27s_Twelve_Quarters
Her parents were anthropologists and she herself was politically engaged, so much of her work deals with themes of culture, the relationship between culture and technology, cultural supremacy, gender, and power in general. Much of her work inverts the racial and gender order of traditional scifi.
"The Rule of Names" is another short story in that anthology that I loved -- this one was less political in nature, and introduces her Earthsea universe. It's fairly easy to find a PDF copy of this one on the internet.
As far as her novels go, "A Wizard of Earthsea" might be the best starter novel if you're interested in giving her novels another shot.
IMO this quote from it captures the essence of her writing (and the experience of reading it) pretty well:
“You want to work spells,' Ogion said presently, striding along. 'You've drawn too much water from that well. Wait. Manhood is patience. Mastery is nine times patience. What is that herb by the path?'
'Strawflower.'
'And that?'
'I don't know.'
'Fourfoil, they call it.' Ogion had halted, the coppershod foot of his staff near the little weed, so Ged looked closely at the plant, and plucked a dry seedpod from it, and finally asked, since Ogion said nothing more, 'What is its use, Master?'
'None I know of.'
Ged kept the seedpod a while as they went on, then tossed it away.
'When you know the fourfoil in all its seasons root and leaf and flower, by sight and scent and seed, then you may learn its true name, knowing its being: which is more than its use. What, after all, is the use of you? or of myself? Is Gont Mountain useful, or the Open Sea?' Ogion went on a half mile or so, and said at last, 'To hear, one must be silent.”
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wind%27s_Twelve_Quarters
Doctorow is a pundit and pseudo-futurist who thinks he can write (or at least has convinced some small subset of this particular delusion.) In small doses like short stories or selected snippets from his novels there is a bit of fun, but too much and it becomes apparent that he is better at the idea than the literary execution.
I tend to agree, except with the tone of your message, or the tone as it arrived at my end at least.
I think there is a lot of value in the ideas there, we desperately need them, and they are very clearly formulated. Just a bit^Wlot too clearly. He should have chosen a different format, although I can't really think of a good one either. World building needs plot to give it any credibility, and tee point was to give these ideas exactly that.
So I don't want to trash talk Doctorowh in general here.
I think there is a lot of value in the ideas there, we desperately need them, and they are very clearly formulated. Just a bit^Wlot too clearly. He should have chosen a different format, although I can't really think of a good one either. World building needs plot to give it any credibility, and tee point was to give these ideas exactly that.
So I don't want to trash talk Doctorowh in general here.
Don't want to trash talk Doctorow, but I just think he missed his calling at the New Yorker or somewhere similar writing near-future short stories that were subtle critique of current issues. If we criticize Neal Stephenson for building great worlds and telling an interesting story but not being able to consistently stick the landing then I think Doctorow builds the world but can never really get a good story going. They are all better writers than I, but overall Doctorow to me seems a bit over-hyped for someone who under-delivers on the possibilities of his world-building.
If you can do better, where is your writing?
Doctorow has added more to my life than the whole of New Yorker, and I'm grateful.
Doctorow has added more to my life than the whole of New Yorker, and I'm grateful.
What a strange comment. What does it matter if he is a writer or not? Critique is not magically less valid because of it
People can criticize without providing a solution.
People can criticize without providing a solution.
There are entire sports' worth of armchair quarterbacks who would disagree with you
You don't need to be a chef to give your opinion on food.
That is true but a chef is classed as a (usually) expert so knows what they're talking about. Put another way, I value the opinion of a chef about food than everyone else.
To the point though, if somebody told you that Bills Burger Bin had great burgers and you responded with "How would you know? Where are all the burgers you've made?", that would make you a jackass.
Yes but if that somebody was a chef, I would value their opinion more.
I think he's a much better essayist (and polemicist) than he is a fiction writer. I'm skeptical about his positions a lot of the time, but I enjoy reading him when he's making cases about technology and free speech. The problem comes when he tries to rewrite those same essays in narrative form, which does not play to his strengths.
This. I think it's good to have someone who can communicate this clearly and mostly understands the tech they're writing about (and actually bothers writing about it regularly)
This is a problem I've noticed especially with some of the collections of Solarpunk short stories. I really wanted to like them and couldn't
Walkaway was way better than most of it and as you said the writing is, pretty awkward at times. But some of the ideas (reclaiming and rebuilding bad areas, sharing how to do brain uploads) were evocative enough to stick with me. That being said DM me if you ever run a bookclub on it
Also avoid Radicalized it's the worst part of Walkaway
Walkaway was way better than most of it and as you said the writing is, pretty awkward at times. But some of the ideas (reclaiming and rebuilding bad areas, sharing how to do brain uploads) were evocative enough to stick with me. That being said DM me if you ever run a bookclub on it
Also avoid Radicalized it's the worst part of Walkaway
Just started Walkaway a few days ago.
Agreed, would love to hear about a bookclub if someone were to do it.
Agreed, would love to hear about a bookclub if someone were to do it.
Another solarpunk influence is Ursula Le Guin. The issue is that Le Guin is a one-of-a-kind, amazingly good writer and most solarpunk writers...aren't that.
I tried to read the Left Hand of Darkness but just gave up. Although her descriptive style is warm and enjoyable I found the story unplausible, like a fairytale for adults.
Reading his synopsis, all I think can think is "ugh. How boring."
And I don't agree with their hijacking of the word punk. I'm no punk but from what I've seen they aren't short on empathy.
And I don't agree with their hijacking of the word punk. I'm no punk but from what I've seen they aren't short on empathy.
> Most importantly Solarpunk is a rejection of dystopic fears and a return to hope, not as a con-trick, but as a construct.
Yeah I just don't find that to be very "punk." In cyberpunk, we have drug-addicted hackers, alienated from society. "Solarpunk," to me, sounds pretty wholesome and very much in line with the direction that society wants to go.
Yeah I just don't find that to be very "punk." In cyberpunk, we have drug-addicted hackers, alienated from society. "Solarpunk," to me, sounds pretty wholesome and very much in line with the direction that society wants to go.
In 2020, being wholesome - not addicted, not acquisitive, not narcissistic, not "dark and edgy", not alienated - is the ultimate narrative taboo.
> not addicted, not acquisitive, not narcissistic, not "dark and edgy", not alienated is the ultimate narrative taboo.
And the curious thing is that being "wholesome" - at least in the 1950s kind of way - is just the narrative that the addicted acquisitive narcissists of today appeal to.
Topsy turvy times indeed.
And the curious thing is that being "wholesome" - at least in the 1950s kind of way - is just the narrative that the addicted acquisitive narcissists of today appeal to.
Topsy turvy times indeed.
Yeah, my workin theory is we are twenty years away from a New Victorianism.
Those folks are being way too dramatic. This is not a year devoid of wholesomeness.
The 2020 meme is by far the worst meme of the year (and worst meme of the decade since we've started saying $CURRENT_YEAR is bad). These are peculiar times but it's far from the end of the world. In fact it's given us some perspective and respite from modern frantic life in some aspects.
Its extremely peculiar. 10% of the country is unemployed.
Business and museums are shutting down for good.
Cities are emptying out.
Hugging another human has been demonized and is considered irresponsible.
People are getting fined for not wearing facial coverings.
Our way of life has been completely hijacked by fear.
Things are very unstable and then we have an election.
Business and museums are shutting down for good.
Cities are emptying out.
Hugging another human has been demonized and is considered irresponsible.
People are getting fined for not wearing facial coverings.
Our way of life has been completely hijacked by fear.
Things are very unstable and then we have an election.
One can take the necessary precautions to protect themselves and those around them without living in fear
The best precaution is being under the age of 70 years old.
And not having any of the plethora of conditions that also put one in a high risk category.
Yep, if you're either one of those categories why would you even leave quarantine? You could die!
OTOH, if you're not in one of one categories you have very little to worry about.
OTOH, if you're not in one of one categories you have very little to worry about.
Punk is about change and rebelling fundamentally - including ironically against the concept of rebellion which has established its "norm".
We were at this before with both cyberprep and steampunk too in different ways. Cyberprep was more "work inside the system" and "technology has potential for good" and rebellion against tired old luddite science fiction 20th century tropes of fear and panic against science and technology. Steampunk is fundamentally dated such that its progressive or radical ideas and aesthetics as very old hat, its past traditional ways laughably obsolete. How much of the usual era suspect's past (Usually Victorian but one could on a trchnicality put in Bronze Age Hero punk as it is only an incorrect descriptor by convention) and old mores are included or not and how praised, condemned, or simply presented how it "was" unflinchingly.
We were at this before with both cyberprep and steampunk too in different ways. Cyberprep was more "work inside the system" and "technology has potential for good" and rebellion against tired old luddite science fiction 20th century tropes of fear and panic against science and technology. Steampunk is fundamentally dated such that its progressive or radical ideas and aesthetics as very old hat, its past traditional ways laughably obsolete. How much of the usual era suspect's past (Usually Victorian but one could on a trchnicality put in Bronze Age Hero punk as it is only an incorrect descriptor by convention) and old mores are included or not and how praised, condemned, or simply presented how it "was" unflinchingly.
> very much in line with the direction that society wants to go
Or at least, he direction that society should want to go.
I don't see that much conscience about climate change, renewables, energetic sustainability, resource depletion, etc, around me.
Or at least, he direction that society should want to go.
I don't see that much conscience about climate change, renewables, energetic sustainability, resource depletion, etc, around me.
Depends where you live. In Europe it's everywhere even if it's greenwashing posing as the real thing. It's in the EU's stated political agenda, clearly discernable under Building a climate-neutral, green, fair and social Europe.
Wow harsh. I mean.. You don't even know me...
Society doesn't really seem to want to strongly go to more anarchist structures, simpler lives and less stuff, but much rather trends to continuing how its going while hoping for some tech miracle to save everything. Otherwise deep environmental activism wouldn't be put in the "hippie" corner it still is. "Everyone has a Tesla" isn't solarpunk.
Being deviant or alienated in a sick society is healthier than being normal. (I read that on a sticker in a bus years ago)
>"Solarpunk," to me, sounds pretty wholesome and very much in line with the direction that society wants to go.
I'm not sure if you're paying attention, but current society wants capitalism and consumption until the earth has been pillaged. For instance, Joe Biden said no fracking after 2050. That's 30 years from now.
I'm not sure if you're paying attention, but current society wants capitalism and consumption until the earth has been pillaged. For instance, Joe Biden said no fracking after 2050. That's 30 years from now.
That's right, we need to end fossil fuel usage right now. If we don't switch solely to solar and wind worldwide in the next ten years there's going to be an apocalyptic ecological event. It's a climate crisis. I don't understand why people can't just follow the science. It doesn't matter how much food and energy prices would rise if fossil fuels were abruptly banned; a few poor peoples' ability to eat or stay warm is nothing in the face of the climate crisis.
https://rebellion.earth
https://rebellion.earth
> a few poor peoples' ability to eat or stay warm is nothing in the face of the climate crisis.
Or maybe, in such a case, the people who have actually been consuming (and emitting) like there is no tomorrow all these decades should make substantial adjustments to their lifestyle (i.e. pay more taxes), so that the people who have been consuming nothing can eat. Sounds a bit more reasonable to me. And we are not talking about a few people, especially if you are referring to the whole world.
Actually, for a brief moment I thought you were joking.
Or maybe, in such a case, the people who have actually been consuming (and emitting) like there is no tomorrow all these decades should make substantial adjustments to their lifestyle (i.e. pay more taxes), so that the people who have been consuming nothing can eat. Sounds a bit more reasonable to me. And we are not talking about a few people, especially if you are referring to the whole world.
Actually, for a brief moment I thought you were joking.
It was in fact extreme sarcasm
>If we don't switch solely to solar and wind worldwide in the next ten years there's going to be an apocalyptic ecological event.
Well, being as how there's 0% probability of us ending fossil fuel usage in that time, I guess we'll put your prediction to the test. Personally, I don't see it happening...
Well, being as how there's 0% probability of us ending fossil fuel usage in that time, I guess we'll put your prediction to the test. Personally, I don't see it happening...
Fossil fuel usage will end itself once other more convenient energy sources become relevant. You can't possibly suggest leaving vulnerable people without shelter, heat or food because there's an impending apocalypse brewing. Fossil fuels be banned sounds like a quote from the nutcake realm. You're probably using ICE engines for transportation, gas and electricity for indoor lighting and heating like everybody else. Imagine if these were turned off for your own good and the survival of modern society.
IMO Solarpunk is cool, but it's not going to offer many realistic social lessons or warnings like cyberpunk does because it still relies on globalisation, huge logistics networks, and large factories to support the lifestyle and direction it promotes. In that sense, it's at odds with itself because there's still a divided population who have to work to support that infrastructure while the solarpunks get the real freedom of living.
Cyberpunk offers realistic social lessons or warnings? That is news to me like the number of cyborg street thugs and automatic weapon proliferation. Jokes aside it is a Texas Sharpshooter fallacy and more something that one can look back on and find resemblances by comparision like say Star Trek and Tricorders vs cell phones and replicators vs 3d printing.
I don't think that is a difference on solarpunk's part though. One thing that became more and more explicit with cyberpunk was that the "independence from society" was fundamentally a lie the "fringer" told themself because they broke into offices and factories for money instead of working in them and obeyed laws only when the barrel of a gun was staring them down but fundamentally they were just as much as an interchangeable cog as everybody else. Getting over that delusion could be considered a painful step forward as they need either steps towards truer independence or move to try to change what they don't like about society. They don't have to be subservient proles by any means but well the first step to solving a problem is recognition.
I don't think that is a difference on solarpunk's part though. One thing that became more and more explicit with cyberpunk was that the "independence from society" was fundamentally a lie the "fringer" told themself because they broke into offices and factories for money instead of working in them and obeyed laws only when the barrel of a gun was staring them down but fundamentally they were just as much as an interchangeable cog as everybody else. Getting over that delusion could be considered a painful step forward as they need either steps towards truer independence or move to try to change what they don't like about society. They don't have to be subservient proles by any means but well the first step to solving a problem is recognition.
I don’t think the infrastructure required for the scarcity free society necessarily has to be a global / universal one. The political angle seems more anarcho-socialist to me which would lead to a decentralized model enabled by technology. Think self sufficient city states.
Science fiction was born as a critique of social constructs. The sci-fi patina was less of a Branded Genre Thing and more of a wink-and-nod to make the critique acceptable in the public sphere.
Solarpunk, like all the other ___punks, is just another Thing that people like. This is why you sometimes hear authors dump on "genre fiction," because making aesthetics the guiding star of a story doesn't usually make for compelling fiction.
As far as social commentary, why do we have to name everything - what if instead of a "Solarpunk Future" it was just...the future? Branding something has an interesting effect: it turns it into a fandom. Branding draws borders. It turns ideas into a tribe, and makes in-groups and out-groups of us all. Now instead of discussing specific solutions for our very real, very big problems, we descend into discussions of what is or is not solarpunk, or cyberpunk, or the relative merits of each.
Let's stop branding everything and just talk about real problems and real solutions, not which literary or artistic aesthetic is the best "path forward."
Solarpunk, like all the other ___punks, is just another Thing that people like. This is why you sometimes hear authors dump on "genre fiction," because making aesthetics the guiding star of a story doesn't usually make for compelling fiction.
As far as social commentary, why do we have to name everything - what if instead of a "Solarpunk Future" it was just...the future? Branding something has an interesting effect: it turns it into a fandom. Branding draws borders. It turns ideas into a tribe, and makes in-groups and out-groups of us all. Now instead of discussing specific solutions for our very real, very big problems, we descend into discussions of what is or is not solarpunk, or cyberpunk, or the relative merits of each.
Let's stop branding everything and just talk about real problems and real solutions, not which literary or artistic aesthetic is the best "path forward."
While I agree there is no need to brand everything, it can serve a useful purpose, eg especially if a philosophy wants to try to spread a shift in thinking around reducing consumerism/how we live etc. This could be seen as 'tech-hippie' or other such labels, 'solarpunk' seems quite descriptive in that way. Being able to succinctly describe a philosophy that might agree with your life choices and values, it can also help reinforce those ideas to yourself in hard times as well as organize + discus with others who might share some overlap of values.
'in-groups and out-groups' and division can result from this but doesn't have to, it's not a given. Like a lot of philosophies, gate keeping via some kind of strict rules/definition I've found is usually (not always) done for other reasons by self proclaimed leaders. Being inclusive, from a community stand point, commonly is pushed aside by those that want to min/max some profitable (monetary, power, influence etc) aspect of that community causing said division. So while it might not need a name, a narrative around those ideas with a name does improve the ability to spread those values, 'solarpunk' being a brand isn't inherently bad.
We do have "very real, very big problems", ones that will need an almost unthinkable amount of cooperation to resolve. These aren't purely tech problems, these are largely social problems, and narrative/branding is immensely powerful in that sense. And all these possible solutions (technical or otherwise) are individually only going to solve small parts, slowly but surely as people work extremely hard on all these very real and hard problems, we move towards a new 'normal' without those problems, but during that long long time without those touch stones of values as reminders of _why_, it is very easy to lose focus. Narrative and branding can help solidify those ideas.
It's kind of funny in a sad way that some of the biggest companies in the world are advertising companies but when those same techniques are even slightly used and not rammed down our throats we pick up on those methods and say they are not needed. To solve those very real, very big problems, I'd say we should use everything we can to move the needle in positive direction and that 'branding', in that sense, is needed to drive the level of cooperation to address them. Maybe not the branding of 'solarpunk' but if that resonates with people, I'm all for it.
'in-groups and out-groups' and division can result from this but doesn't have to, it's not a given. Like a lot of philosophies, gate keeping via some kind of strict rules/definition I've found is usually (not always) done for other reasons by self proclaimed leaders. Being inclusive, from a community stand point, commonly is pushed aside by those that want to min/max some profitable (monetary, power, influence etc) aspect of that community causing said division. So while it might not need a name, a narrative around those ideas with a name does improve the ability to spread those values, 'solarpunk' being a brand isn't inherently bad.
We do have "very real, very big problems", ones that will need an almost unthinkable amount of cooperation to resolve. These aren't purely tech problems, these are largely social problems, and narrative/branding is immensely powerful in that sense. And all these possible solutions (technical or otherwise) are individually only going to solve small parts, slowly but surely as people work extremely hard on all these very real and hard problems, we move towards a new 'normal' without those problems, but during that long long time without those touch stones of values as reminders of _why_, it is very easy to lose focus. Narrative and branding can help solidify those ideas.
It's kind of funny in a sad way that some of the biggest companies in the world are advertising companies but when those same techniques are even slightly used and not rammed down our throats we pick up on those methods and say they are not needed. To solve those very real, very big problems, I'd say we should use everything we can to move the needle in positive direction and that 'branding', in that sense, is needed to drive the level of cooperation to address them. Maybe not the branding of 'solarpunk' but if that resonates with people, I'm all for it.
Ok. I think that the popular aesthetics in science fiction actually do have a very significant effect on daily life though. So although it's great to actually work on solving problems, it's still somewhat worthwhile to have science fiction, and in that case think about the worldview.
Maybe that would be good. At least to go more in a SolarPunk than CyberPunk direction.
I was into CyberPunk in the 90s. I always wondered what came after it in science fiction. I mostly stopped reading novels so I don't really know.
What is the actual normal common flavor of science fiction today? Or flavors.
I guess I did read one or two Singularity genre books and also Altered Carbon which is CyberPunk.
What section does Ramez Naam go under?
Maybe that would be good. At least to go more in a SolarPunk than CyberPunk direction.
I was into CyberPunk in the 90s. I always wondered what came after it in science fiction. I mostly stopped reading novels so I don't really know.
What is the actual normal common flavor of science fiction today? Or flavors.
I guess I did read one or two Singularity genre books and also Altered Carbon which is CyberPunk.
What section does Ramez Naam go under?
Very thoughtful analysis. But, perhaps the purpose was not to solve, perhaps it was to self-distinguish.
Additionally, reading through most other comments lends credence to your hypothesis. Well done.
The problem with solarpunk is right there in its name: Nearly everything that gets labeled solarpunk is simply not punk.
Punk music was born as an expression of the cultural and economic alienation of youth in Thatcher's UK. Cyberpunk was the extrapolation of this into a world defined by the trends of the 1980s: accelerating technology that dehumanizes, unchecked globalization, runaway capitalism that leaves a permanent underclass to make do with the castoffs of the elite. Its enduring popularity is no doubt due to the fact that these trends are very much with us today.
Offshoots adapted this to the fears of other eras: Steampunk replaced accelerating solid-state technology with industrial-revolution mechanical technology. Dieselpunk traded it for the terrifying innovations in mechanized warfare of the early 20th Century.
Egalitarian societies living in clean cities powered by sustainable energy are not punk; they are worlds that would lack the need for a punk subculture. They are hopeful, utopian visions – and just as dystopias warn, the value of utopias is to inspire.
Maybe "solar utopianism" doesn't sound as cool as "solarpunk." But calling it what it is will let us appreciate it for what it is.
Punk music was born as an expression of the cultural and economic alienation of youth in Thatcher's UK. Cyberpunk was the extrapolation of this into a world defined by the trends of the 1980s: accelerating technology that dehumanizes, unchecked globalization, runaway capitalism that leaves a permanent underclass to make do with the castoffs of the elite. Its enduring popularity is no doubt due to the fact that these trends are very much with us today.
Offshoots adapted this to the fears of other eras: Steampunk replaced accelerating solid-state technology with industrial-revolution mechanical technology. Dieselpunk traded it for the terrifying innovations in mechanized warfare of the early 20th Century.
Egalitarian societies living in clean cities powered by sustainable energy are not punk; they are worlds that would lack the need for a punk subculture. They are hopeful, utopian visions – and just as dystopias warn, the value of utopias is to inspire.
Maybe "solar utopianism" doesn't sound as cool as "solarpunk." But calling it what it is will let us appreciate it for what it is.
I think the article is working with an extremely wide and weak definition of the term, which indeed runs into that problem. But I think that's a problem with the term being applied to anything "green and hopeful".
The point of the -punk label is that actively working towards a solarpunk world is pretty much punk because it's not where the powers in society want to go. E.g. a lot of it has an anarchist tendency because of self-reliance and independence ideas, it emphasizes slow down/simplicity vs corporate green high-tech projects, ...
The cliche solarpunk story is IMHO more "groups of people that break out in small eco-friendly communities" than "Singapore with more green".
The point of the -punk label is that actively working towards a solarpunk world is pretty much punk because it's not where the powers in society want to go. E.g. a lot of it has an anarchist tendency because of self-reliance and independence ideas, it emphasizes slow down/simplicity vs corporate green high-tech projects, ...
The cliche solarpunk story is IMHO more "groups of people that break out in small eco-friendly communities" than "Singapore with more green".
I would put Solarpunk rather in the accelerate/anti-auth corner of a chart with axes for (anti)authoritarian-iness and pro-/contra-progress as I saw it on Twitter once.
Slow-down/anti-auth is primitivism (think: subsistence farming, no computers, ... ).
Cyberpunk is definitely accelerate/auth (like it or not but we seem to be heading into this direction).
Slow-down/anti-auth is primitivism (think: subsistence farming, no computers, ... ).
Cyberpunk is definitely accelerate/auth (like it or not but we seem to be heading into this direction).
technologically yes (although not as fast), but I think at the same time the assumption often is that the anti-authoritarian move also leads to an intentional "enlightened" slow-down of society (compared to the capitalist rat-race of cyberpunk), reduced nature impact that way, ...
> alienation of youth in Thatcher's UK.
For you, growing up there and then. For us in the US in the 80s, it was similar. But both showed other cultures it was ok to say No to growing up to be part of the machine your parents accepted. And it is just as much punk to now give you the finger as it was when we did too. No one owns it and trying to do so is very much gatekeeping and Not Punk.
Do I want to puke when some teenager wears a Dead Kennedys shirt they bought at Hot Topic? Sure. But it may be they’re a better person than me, kinder or nicer or harder or whatever. Let them be punks too. Because god knows we need them.
For you, growing up there and then. For us in the US in the 80s, it was similar. But both showed other cultures it was ok to say No to growing up to be part of the machine your parents accepted. And it is just as much punk to now give you the finger as it was when we did too. No one owns it and trying to do so is very much gatekeeping and Not Punk.
Do I want to puke when some teenager wears a Dead Kennedys shirt they bought at Hot Topic? Sure. But it may be they’re a better person than me, kinder or nicer or harder or whatever. Let them be punks too. Because god knows we need them.
punk also has forever been an alternative and largely self propelled culture, from zines to food not bombs if the solar punk is sustainable societies built separate from mainstream destructive society i don't see how it isn't punk.
Punk music predates thatcher and was born in NYC (even if political punk did originate the year thatcher took over the Conservative party.) It was inherently a rejection of the artists of the British Invasion (in the case of the Ramones, the first true punk band) and how corporate music in America had become. Also proto-punk goes back to the 60s.
> Punk music predates thatcher and was born in NYC
Los Saicos would disagree[1] ;) Punk means different things to different people. Lets not get hung up on it.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haVaaDLwWvI
Los Saicos would disagree[1] ;) Punk means different things to different people. Lets not get hung up on it.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haVaaDLwWvI
I feel like that boat already sailed: steampunk, as best I can tell, already divorced 'punk' from any negative consequences of progress and replaced it with whimsy.
It's yet another word for libertarian communism / anarcho-communism / anarchism / communalism in the tradition of Bakunin, Kropotkin, Bookchin and Graeber. Obviously it has a long and interesting intellectual tradition. The basic principles are rejection of all forms of social hierarchy and inequality (nobody can give orders, and all work is voluntary), and rejection of private property (you get access to what you currently need from the shared resources of the community). Perhaps the only law needed would be to prohibit doing harm, or risking harm, to others, at least without their consent. The few practical implementations (in a Western, developed context) have generally succumbed to outside forces, such as Catalonia in the 1930s, and perhaps Rojava today.
Punk and the anarchy movements are orthogonal to Libertarianism. They require you to get over yourself enough to both talk to, and care about, your neighbors.
The word libertarianism was originally used in the communist context, and was also called anarchism, and was opposed to authoritarian communism. It was later hijacked (in the US context) by property-worshipping followers of John Locke and the like.
Which is wonderful, but less than likely the context your typical HN galaxy brain means when he mentions it.
Cyberpunk or Solarpunk , be resilience in holding on to your beliefs and not be a sheep just because will always remains the best direction for younger generations
I'd love a solarpunk MUD installed under a solar powered rpi, but I am no
English native. On that MUD you would fight oil corporations and mafias
with solar technology such as solar powered graphene computers and weapons,
along with high-tech cannons converting solar radiation energy into a behemoth ray.
Regardless of the ideas the word and 'movement' will just become another brand ... I love William Gibson (Neuromancer), Blade Runner, Ghost in the Shell. Do I love cyberpunk? Ehhh ....
I love all of the comments happening in this post.
I'm still trying to find an RTX 3080 for Cyberpunk and people are already talking about Solarpunk? WTF
So many tropes I couldn’t finish the article, I wanted to like it based on the headline but blegh
I'm a big fan of this newsletter.
Solarpunk is to solar technology as steampunk is to the industrial revolution. I mean that pejoratively. These x-punks are generally an aesthetic set-dressed with anachronistic and impossible developments that don't mesh together. (Though I suppose I would also say that of most cyberpunk written this century.)
I would like more SF authors working mostly within the constraints of known physics and considering how ecosystems work as well as considering the engineering details of their fictional spacecraft. Kim Stanley Robinson, cited in this article, is one of the finest authors currently doing that. But I don't think that he has described his own work as solarpunk. Most of his novels feature cooperation and institutions on a large scale, along with a more sophisticated and larger technological base than Earth currently has. If his novels are solarpunk, most of them are incompatible with this exhortation to solarpunk in the article:
Solarpunk should move quietly and plant things. Don’t ask permission from a state beholden to oligarchs, and definitely don’t expect those oligarchs to do any of this for you. Guerilla gardening is the model, but look further. Guerilla solar panel installation. Guerilla water treatment facility restoration. Guerilla magnificent temple to the human spirit construction. Guerilla carbon sequestration megastructure creation.
...
When Andrew Dana Hudson talks of guerilla solar panel installation he’s not joking. These things are real. The reason you don’t know about them is because these are things you build, not buy. Daniel Connell has tutorials for all kinds of tech. He has a $30 1Kw Wind Turbine, a $5 water filter and a $5 combustion stove built almost entirely from recycled parts.
You can't guerilla garden your way to a solar panel factory, megastructures, or space colonies. The solutions to the vast lingering hangover of 20th century problems, like global warming, are going to be vast as well if they are to be solutions at all. Just dodging The Man and doing your own thing when he's not looking is not a hopeful vision of the future. It's an admission of defeat. It's saying that institutions suck and will continue to suck, so we might as well spend our lives LARPing.
I think that some of this failure of vision is because English speaking readers and writers of SF imagine that the corruptions specific to their local institutions are global. They suppose that every country has a local oil lobby, a local copyright lobby, a local pharma lobby. Therefore the failure of American institutions to take climate change seriously, or to really balance copyright for the long term best interests of the public, is insoluble everywhere. But this is not true! Other countries are not free of special interests but their institutions favor different special interests. There are countries where fossil fuels are nothing more than an irritating import dependency, and there's no domestic lobbying to burn fossils longer than technically necessary. But since the UK, US, Canada, and Australia all produce large quantities of fossil fuels, it feels like the political sway of those industries is more universal than it actually is.
I would like more SF authors working mostly within the constraints of known physics and considering how ecosystems work as well as considering the engineering details of their fictional spacecraft. Kim Stanley Robinson, cited in this article, is one of the finest authors currently doing that. But I don't think that he has described his own work as solarpunk. Most of his novels feature cooperation and institutions on a large scale, along with a more sophisticated and larger technological base than Earth currently has. If his novels are solarpunk, most of them are incompatible with this exhortation to solarpunk in the article:
Solarpunk should move quietly and plant things. Don’t ask permission from a state beholden to oligarchs, and definitely don’t expect those oligarchs to do any of this for you. Guerilla gardening is the model, but look further. Guerilla solar panel installation. Guerilla water treatment facility restoration. Guerilla magnificent temple to the human spirit construction. Guerilla carbon sequestration megastructure creation.
...
When Andrew Dana Hudson talks of guerilla solar panel installation he’s not joking. These things are real. The reason you don’t know about them is because these are things you build, not buy. Daniel Connell has tutorials for all kinds of tech. He has a $30 1Kw Wind Turbine, a $5 water filter and a $5 combustion stove built almost entirely from recycled parts.
You can't guerilla garden your way to a solar panel factory, megastructures, or space colonies. The solutions to the vast lingering hangover of 20th century problems, like global warming, are going to be vast as well if they are to be solutions at all. Just dodging The Man and doing your own thing when he's not looking is not a hopeful vision of the future. It's an admission of defeat. It's saying that institutions suck and will continue to suck, so we might as well spend our lives LARPing.
I think that some of this failure of vision is because English speaking readers and writers of SF imagine that the corruptions specific to their local institutions are global. They suppose that every country has a local oil lobby, a local copyright lobby, a local pharma lobby. Therefore the failure of American institutions to take climate change seriously, or to really balance copyright for the long term best interests of the public, is insoluble everywhere. But this is not true! Other countries are not free of special interests but their institutions favor different special interests. There are countries where fossil fuels are nothing more than an irritating import dependency, and there's no domestic lobbying to burn fossils longer than technically necessary. But since the UK, US, Canada, and Australia all produce large quantities of fossil fuels, it feels like the political sway of those industries is more universal than it actually is.
punk isn't nihilistic lamentation, it's nihilistic resistance. it's punk to fight. it's building anything from nothing, because there is nothing to lose. punk cultures appear within dystopia as an alternative, punk aesthetic is amateur and diy-accessible, and punk attitudes are critical and creative.
we have enough dystopic warnings. everyone knows where we're headed. alienation and addiction are here, at the beginning of the plot. now we have the conflict, the departure from weakness, and eventually a resolution. solarpunk aesthetically charts a clear course through the narrative arc, it is mid-plot resourceful strength and a possible budding victory beyond the climax of struggle.