Skip to main content

11-22-63



I just recently finished the novel 11-22-63 by Stephen King. The date in the title is the day that President Kennedy was assassinated. It is a date that anyone who lived through that time would recognize. I suppose it would be equivalent of September 11th, 2001 for anyone who was alive on that date, or December 7th, 1941 for anyone who was alive then. This is a book about time travel. Our protagonist (Jake) is shown a portal that leads him back to 1958. Al, the man who shows him this portal,  wanted to use it to prevent the assassination but Al came down with cancer and is unable to do the job so he encourages Jake to do it. Jake is reluctant to do this because he doesn’t know what the consequences would be.

Right on Jake. The whole thing sounded like a really bad idea to me. You can imagine how even small changes in the past can mushroom into larger changes to history over time. But to alter a seminal event like the assassination of a president would have to have enormous consequences. Al tells Jake that things would change for the better without the assassination. He states that Kennedy would probably not have gotten us mired down in Viet Nam, leading to the saving of thousands of American and Vietnamese soldiers (and civilians). Other things reliant on the Viet Nam war would also not have happened, the disruptions of the later 1960’s, the Martin Luther King assassination etc.

He convinces Jake to do it (of course, or there would be no story). But I was just going “No. Don’t do it Jake.” Characters in books so rarely listen to me. All I could think of was the complete unpredictability of the consequences. We know for a fact that between the Kennedy assassination and now, the earth was not destroyed by nuclear war. But you make a major change like that and all bets are off.

But even if he made little changes. Jake goes back in time to live there for five years. How many subtle changes would be made by the very fact of his being there? The character of Jake was not born until the 1970’s. He could easily make a change that would insure that he was never born. All it takes is the slightest alteration of timing. His parents conceive on a different night and a different child is born instead of Jake. But if Jake wasn’t born how did he go back and change history? It is the big paradox about time travel. Does reality cease to exist? Does the universe wink out? Does God say “Oh no, not again?” This is one of the things that make time travel impossible (just one of the things). This is what should place time travel stories more in the realm of fantasy rather than science fiction.

But hey, I am willing to suspend my disbelief if the story is well written and the rest of the science is valid (like Connie Willis's time travel novels, which I highly recommend). In the case of 11-22-63, it is well written. He sets the stage well. I had forgotten what it was like to live in a world where cigarette smoke was everywhere, a world without cell phones or personal computers, yet a world where the food tasted better. There were good things and bad things about living in the early 1960’s and King lets us explore a good many of them.

Whatever time period people live in, they are still people. They live; they die; they love; they strive. The same things that brought heartache to the people of 1963, bring heartache to the people of today. The same things that bring joy to the people of today, brought joy to the people of 1963. Some things are universal, with or without the paradox.

(My novel Star Liner, is now available as an e-book through Amazon, or the other usual online sources. For those who like to turn physical pages, the paperback will be out soon).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Iron Fist in a Velvet Glove

  Despite both of us having science backgrounds, my wife and I share a leaning toward the artistic, though we may express it in different ways. In her life, my wife has been a painter, a poet, a singer, an actor, and a fiction writer. Not to mention a mother. I don’t remember what precipitated this event, but my wife, my son, and I were at home in the front room. My wife was responding to something my son said. She said, “remember, you get half your brains from me. If it wasn’t for me, you’d be a complete idiot.” To which my son started howling with laughter and said to me,” I think you have just been insulted.” Sometimes I feel like Rodney Dangerfield. I get no respect. But that is not an uncommon state of affairs for fatherhood. When my son was going to middle school and high school, my wife was always the one to go in with him to get him registered for classes. One time she was unable to go and I had to be the one to get him registered. “Ugh,” he said. “why can’t Mama do i...
1 comment
Read more

Empathy

  Websters defines Empathy as: “the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another.” Empathy is what makes us human, though lord knows there are many humans who don’t seem to have any. A person without empathy is like a caveman, only concerned for himself. Selfish. It is a lack of community and by extension, a lack of the need for civilization. The person who lacks empathy can have a bit of community, but only with others exactly like himself. It seems like societies go through cycles of empathy and less empathy. Sometimes a single event can change the course of society. Prior to America’s involvement in WWII, the general feeling in America was not very empathetic. We had our own problems. We were still dealing with the lingering effects of the Great Depression, and had been for years. That kind of stress makes it hard to think of others. Hitler was slashing through Europe. He and his fol...
1 comment
Read more

A Deception

  I have a secret. I deceived my mother. Okay, it was like 50 years ago and she is gone now, but still . . .  I was generally a good boy. I did as I was told. My family lived a pretty strait-laced, middle-class, fairly conservative life. We were a G-rated family, well, until my older siblings broke the mold, but at this time, I was still in the mold. My friend Rich and I made a plan. Rich had asked me if I wanted to see Cabaret . He said he didn’t think much of Liza Minnelli, but he wouldn’t mind seeing her take her clothes off. We were like 13 years old and sex was ever-present on our minds as much as it was absent in our households. Cabaret was not rated R. It was rated PG. The ratings system has changed since that time. There was no PG-13; there was just the choice of G, PG, and R  (X was not an official rating).  Apparently the makers of Cabaret satisfied the ratings commission enough to escape an R rating, so it was PG.   There was therefore no law or ...
Post a Comment
Read more