Technology & Progress.
Sources will be provided by link or by PDF (if available). Please engage with each literature review at least four distinct times.
This paper should be a total of 8 – 14 pages of writing, double-spaced, with standard margins.
Provided is also a PowerPoint with ideas to use and a breakdown of what the literature review should be about. This includes the Research Question, sources, and notes on what else can be added. Please focus on and include some of the ideas in the notes under the Research Question.
At its core, this literature review should, hopefully, show that science fiction is influenced by the technology and information available at the time it is written as it pushes what is thought to be possible at the time to its limits. This is seen clearly by focusing on the Biopunk subgenre.
(Frankenstein put organs in a cadaver and electrocuted it to make life VS now genome sequencing and alterations are available and modern SF shows things like mutant viruses)
It typically also carries the tone of the values of the era it is from, as well.
(Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein warns against playing God in a time where God is revered more than modernly) (Modern fiction like the Resident Evil franchise warns against the overreach of major operations and their lack of accountability in a time where that is prevalent)
In doing so, science fiction, as seen most clearly in the Biopunk subgenre, clearly verbalizes the concerns of progress and can even reveal new ones to the populace, warning against unchecked innovation. It can also encourage progress by uplifting the benefits.
(Captain America and the Flash are created by science (bio) messing around, and they do great things!)
In the PowerPoint, five sources are set apart from the others (3 one one slide, 2 one another). These sources are the most important to incorporate. The three put together must be engaged explicitly at least four times, please. (those being lasch, Andreesson, and Graeber & Wendgrow)
Sources (you can find more but please include these for sure)
– https://www.depauw.edu/sfs/backissues/27/jameson.html (could not be made PDF but publicly available)
– https://archive.org/details/biologicalthemes00park/mode/2up (no PDF available)
