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

A Child of the . . .

  What was it like to grow up as a child in the 90s? How about the 1940’s? Thinking about a child growing up in each different decade, conjures up images in my mind. But that is all they are: images. I was a child in the 1960’s. I can tell you what it felt like to be growing up in the 60’s and 70’s, but what it felt like to me is not what the history books remember. History will tell you the 60’s was about the Viet Nam War, civil rights, and the space race. The 70’s was Disco and Watergate. I remember being aware of all of those things, but to me this era was about finding time to play with my friends, something I probably share with a child of any decade. It was about navigating the social intricacies of school.   It was about the Beatles, Three Dog Night, The Moody Blues, The Animals, Jefferson Airplane. It was Bullwinkle, the Wonderful World of Color, and Ed Sullivan. There are things that a kid pays attention to that the grown-ups don’t. Then there are things the adults ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Bureaucrats

  I am one of those nameless, faceless bureaucrats. Yes, that is my job. Though I actually have a name; I even am rumored to have a face. Bureau is the French word for desk, so you could say bureaucrats are “desk people.” In short, I work for the government. I sometimes have to deliver unpleasant news to a taxpayer. I sometimes have to tell them that the deed they recorded won’t work and they will have to record another one with corrections. Or we can’t process their deed until they pay their taxes. I can understand why some of these things upset people. The thing is, we don’t decide these things. It is not the bureaucrats that make the laws. The legislature writes the laws. We are required to follow the law.   If you are going to get mad at someone, get mad at the legislature. Or maybe get mad at the voters who voted the legislature in (That’s you, by the way). The same thing happens when the voters vote in a new district, or vote for a bond, or a new operating levy for an ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Telephonicus domesticus

Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone from 1877 bears about as much similarity to the modern smart phone as an abacus bears to a PC or Mac. There are just about as many leaps in technology in both cases. It’s funny how a major jump in technology happens (like the actual invention of the phone). Then there are some refinements over a few years or decades until it gets to a useful stable form. Then it stays virtually the same for many years with only minor innovations. The telephone was virtually unchanged from sometime before I was born until I was about forty. Push-buttons were replacing the rotary dial, but that was about it. (Isn’t it interesting though that when we call someone, we still call it “dialing?” I have never seen a dial on a cell phone.) Cell phones were introduced and (once they became cheap enough) they changed the way we phone each other. New advancements followed soon after, texting and then smart phones. Personal computers were also becoming commonplace and wer...
Post a Comment
Read more