Babel Again and Again
A Look at E. M. Forster's Short Story, The Machine Stops
In C.S. Lewis’s novel, That Hideous Strength, Lewis accurately imagines the attitude of modern scientists as they seek technological nirvana. The novel’s main character, Mark Studdock, is at a dinner at the N.I.C.E. (National Institute of Co-ordinated Experiments) and listening to a conversation between some of the other members. Filostrato, an Italian scientist, has just given orders for some trees to be removed from the grounds.
After explaining his distaste for forest trees, referring to them as weeds, he goes on to imagine artificial, aluminum trees. But he goes further than that:
“At present, I allow, we must have forests, for the atmosphere. Presently we find a chemical substitute. And then, why any natural trees? I foresee nothing but the art tree all over the Earth. In fact, we clean the planet.”1
Then, he reaches his main point after someone objects that getting rid of all organisms is concerning since we are, after all, organisms ourselves. Filostrato replies,
That is the point. In us organic life has produced Mind. It has done its work. After that, we want no more of it. We do not want the world any longer furred over with organic life, like what you call the blue mould—all sprouting and budding and breeding and decaying. We must get rid of it. By little and little, of course. Slowly, we learn how. Learn to make our brains live with less and less body: learn to build our bodies directly with chemicals, no longer have to stuff them full of dead roots and weeds. Learn how to reproduce ourselves without copulation.2
This could almost be the transcript of a Yuval Horari or a World Economic Forum talk.
I’m not here to write about Lewis’s prescience, though; not this time, at least. I open with that section from That Hideous Strength to set the stage for the story I am writing about: The Machine Stops, by E.M. Forster.
The Machine Stops
Imagine a world where Lewis’s Filostrato has had his way. Humanity is secluded underground, living in a massive machine. This machine acts as an artificial, regulated environment. Each person lives in a pod where every convenience imaginable is afforded them. They can speak with anyone else in a pod instantaneously, they can regulate the temperature, have meals made and served to them, adjust the light in their room, etc. The Machine’s atmosphere is artificial, the air being filtered and the pressure regulated. All of these conveniences are controlled by buttons and switches all constantly within reach.
In Forster’s (imagined?) world, normal residents of the Machine spend their days giving and listening to lectures on everything; history, music, biology, etc. Although, these lectures are sterile, made suitable and understandable to the residents of the Machine. They even include some accounts of people who have been to the surface, with the necessary equipment of course. To exit the Machine and go to the surface, one needs special gear, like breathing masks and suits, and permission from the Central Committee.
The Central Committee publishes a manual to the Machine, explaining how it works and what to do in every situation. Everything is taken care of by the Central Committee, made up of different departments which manage different aspects of the Machine. Airships take someone from one part of the Machine to another and are necessary because the Machine spans the globe. But, people rarely use the airships by the time in which Forster sets his story. Why would they? They have all they need in their pod.
Therein lies the beginning of the story and the introduction of its conflict: someone asks the main character, a woman named Vashti, to meet face-to-face.
Takeaways
I won’t go into much more detail about the story itself; it’s so short, to say anything more would be too much. However, let me draw some takeaways from the story’s premise laid out above.
Much like Lewis’s That Hideous Strength, Forster’s story asks how far we’ll let our technological advances go before we set boundaries on them or are set back by our “progress.” Forster was certainly not bringing a Christian ethic to this story in the way Lewis was to his. That said, they’re both seeing the same thing.
Lewis’s title is a reference to a poem about the Tower of Babel and, throughout the novel, there is Babel imagery.3 Forster’s story brought to mind the same ideas. Humanity has built another Babel, a Machine that could replace man’s dependence on nature, thereby eliminating dependence on God. The Machine becomes their god, sustaining them, providing for them, and connecting them to one another. But, doing it all according to the desires of the Committee. It is their Tower; they’ve attempted to climb to heaven and become gods themselves.
I wonder if this is not how we use our technology today, if not personally then as a society. Particularly, things like genetic manipulation, attempting to manipulate weather patterns, and mediating more and more previously personal interactions through touch screens. I’m no Luddite; clearly, as I type these words on my laptop and they’ll be delivered to you via the internet. However, we need to keep technology in its proper place, which is as a tool to help us better do what God made us to do, to better be human.
Conclusion
It’s clear that our technological advancement has outpaced our wisdom. Especially for those of us who work computer-based jobs, it’s easy for our conception of reality to be filtered through social media, computer software, and keyboards. Constant convenience has caused us to be irritable and impatient at the slightest hiccup in the system. “If we could just get those people out of the way, things would run smoother, and my life would be more convenient,” we seem to say.
That’s what Forster and Lewis saw coming in their day. Although we don’t live inside of a physical machine, how many of us live in a technology-induced bubble? How many of our efforts are focused on sterilizing our lives to try and rid us of the annoying reminders of our finite bodies and all that comes with them?
For Christians, our reminder to ourselves, first, then to others, must be that God gave us bodies and said it was good that He did so. It is wrong, then, to try and transcend our bodies or to grasp after power and authority that is not ours. Even after death comes the resurrection of our bodies, either to eternal life or to eternal death.
Forster’s story was a great reminder to me of the good limitations God has given us, to not give in to the temptation that comes with technology, especially modern technology, to think that we can transcend all limitations. On the positive side, the story was also a reminder of the importance of face-to-face conversations, of things like letter writing, and of caring for our bodies so that we can move capably in the world God made.
So if you can spare an hour or so, sit down and take a look at this sobering short story. Somewhat ironically, if you want an electronic copy, one can be found here. If you do read it, let me know what you think in the comments below.
In Him and For His Glory
Lewis, C.S., That Hideous Strength (New York, NY: Scribner, 2003), 169.
Ibid, 170.
Ibid., title page.
Nice. Love the connections to Hideous Strength.
Very good insights!