Webliography

Science fiction is a genre that imagines our future. Within this future, representations of gender and race are depicted as being free of social limitations, ever-changing and evolving to reflect new ideas within the sphere of technology and biology.


Source One:
Nama,Adilifu “R is for Race, Not Rocket: Black Representation in American Science Fiction Cinema,” (2009), (accessed 6/9/10).

Adilifu Nama reasons that although this genre imagines our future, the depiction of races, or lack thereof, remains inextricably linked to the social contexts of the period. This is evident in his criticism of Star Wars and The Matrix, two films that present future imaginations of race very differently. Although Nama examines science fiction cinema which is American written and produced, it still parallels racial tension towards Aborigines and other ethnicities of different periods in Australia. The original 1970s Star Wars depicts a future, homogenous white race, similar to popular 1970 attitudes, where white was the dominant race, considered superior. Nama argues that the film presents a future, free of racial issues, because there is only one race depicted. An alternative representation of race is seen in sequels following, with the introduction of black characters in leading roles. Here, evidence of “racial diversity and cooperation” presents real future possibilities of eliminating racial divisions. Nama argues that science fiction films of the 1990s indicate that “racial inclusion is the normative convention of the present and the ideal condition imagined in the future”. The Matrix highlights this shift, representing the future as racially diverse, with racial issues dissolving and increase focus on harmony and unity in the fight of another “other,” the Matrix. Nama reasons that science fiction provides imaginations for the possibilities of changing attitudes towards race, the development of a multiracial society, free from oppression.


Source Two:
Kirby, David, “Extrapolating Race in GATTACA: Genetic Passing, Identity, and the Science of Race,” (2004), (accessed 6/9/10).

Advances in technology allow science fiction cinema to create futuristic societies in which race as we see it today, is no longer an issue. David Kirby evaluates this idea, critiquing the 1997 science fiction film, GATTACA. Kirby reasons that the futuristic world depicted in GATTACA no longer views race as “a barrier separating people in this society.” It becomes a “postracist” world, in which equal work opportunities are available to people of all ethnicities and gender, and people are no longer discriminated against based on the colour of their skin. However, Kirby argues that although future representations of race in science fiction present a postracial society, this is often far from the case. Kirby argues against Nama’s idea for future harmony between the races, when he attacks the idea represented in this science fiction film, that race is genetic, and futuristic societies can eliminate racial inequality by manipulating “human genetics” to remove “defective elements.” He reasons that advances in technology may very well create a racially blind society, but access to these benefits may only become available to those who can afford it, and therefore future racial issues are not eliminated, but merely evolving. Rather than eliminating race issues, GATTACA highlights the emergence of a new form of “race,” in a world where social constructions cease to exist and technologies allow for new, biological discriminations “against the genetically unmodified.” This genetic discrimination reflects the way people were racially discriminated against in the past, how they are today, and how they will continue to be in the future.


Source Three:
Kaye Mitchell, “Bodies That Matter: Science Fiction, Technoculture, and the Gendered Body,” (2006), (accessed 6/9/10).

Kaye Mitchell argues that literary science fiction has a role “in exploring the ramifications of our evolving understanding of sex, gender and the body.” She discusses science fiction’s exploration of gendered bodies in cyborgs, as representing future possibilities in blurring the boundaries between different types of gender; male, female, “hermaphrodites, genderless and new sexes”. She questions whether this is the answer to reaching equality between genders. Mitchell goes on to discuss whether being male or female continues to be important when the future “body” in science fiction literature becomes a “data body,” “one that is constructed and not the result of biology.” Mitchell believes our bodies are the result of “nature, culture and social effects.” The “data body” is likened to a machine, as it can be programmed to hold information. In its construction phase it is genderless. The question therefore arises, what makes us male or female in the future? Future gender is determined by a preconceived program of what it means to be a “gender.” In this instance the “data body” is determined female as “the forged is part machine, has tailfins and absorbs fuel but still bleeds,” a ‘female trait.’ Mitchell argues that it is our appearance that determines others’ perception of our gender. However, science fiction blurs this process, making gender identification ambiguous. Literature often projects gender and sex boundaries as ceasing to exist in future worlds.


Source Four:
Kim Edwards, “Deifying Androgyny and Bending Gender: The Matrix,” (2008), (accessed 6/9/10).

The science fiction film The Matrix, continues with Mitchell’s theme, reflecting on the fluidity of gender and thus rejecting “superficial stereotypes.” Kim Edwards argues that the future represented within The Matrix values “androgyny” and the idea of gender identity is no longer considered important. Edwards suggests that gender ambiguity within the film is arguably its main purpose, presenting “androgynous possibilities as a symbol of humanity’s freedom of choice and creative expression,” an ideal future. The reflection of traditional gender stereotypes seen in the ‘bad guys’ are representative of the “flawed view” in current society; restrictive, old fashioned and undesirable. If science fiction is a genre that imagines the future of gender, can it not only reflect changes in gender relations and identity, but also encourage these changes itself? Gender in a science fiction future is continuously changing, often becoming unrecognisable in its future form.


Source Five:
Schwartzman, “The Mechanics of Engenderneering,” (2008), p.1 (accessed 6/9/10).

Roy Schwartzman examines the role of “engenderneering,” where in science fiction futures, genders are being assigned to nonhuman forms that have been deemed genderless. He argues that it is necessary in science fiction texts for all “beings” to have some type of gender basis. “Gender markers serve as necessary or sufficient determinants of an entity’s value.” But why does he believe gender to be a necessary component to give value to an existence? He argues when gender can be identified, assumptions and expectations can be formed based on previous perceptions of gendered behaviour. Schwartzman challenges science fiction’s notion that by removing gender, emphasis on equality between male and female can be achieved in the future. He argues that the removal of gender in science fiction texts has not altered “the struggle for dominance”. He also explores science fiction’s creation of androgynous beings, where neither male nor female components are dominant. Schwartzman acknowledges that this ambiguity of gender for identification purposes creates possibilities where there are no behaviour expectations and allows freedom for individuality.
Science fiction’s representation of race and gender in the future imagines a very different reality than the one in which we live today. The future breaks down racial and gender boundaries, and forms a world where discrimination based on these traits is no longer a concern. Fluid, androgynous genders combined with the emergence of new forms of “race” present both positive and negative possibilities of a future world.