My favorite book by Bernard Werber is "The Tree of Possibles." This book consists of eighteen short stories. I want to share one of these 18 stories, which is "Transparent Skin." The story Transparent Skin is about a scientist who studies how to make the skin of living creatures transparent. In his Genetics Institute, he has been able to sequence some fragments of DNA that are responsible for skin transparency. He rearranges DNA that affects skin pigmentation and introduces it into other plants and makes transparent roses and apricot trees. Subsequently he succeeds in making transparent frogs, rats, dogs, and monkeys. The last thing he tries is his own body. His body is too scary to look at; he can literally see his own heart, kidney, liver, muscles- you name it, literally everything. Then he realizes that he doesn't know how to make his skin the way it was again. The housekeeper who sees him in the morning passes out and other people also are not ready to face him. He realizes that he has become a monster.
It was really interesting for me to think about what would happen if our skin became transparent. It was only him in the book whose skin was transparent, but what if we all become transparent? We will not be able to somehow hide our emotions. We will be able to know when to go to the bathroom, when we have digestion problem, etc.
Aside from this novel, I came across an interview video of Bernard Werber. This interview was done by Korean Arirang TV, and this interview made me think about the relationship between anthropology and science fiction. I have never thought about science fiction books being anthropological, but after watching this interview, maybe science fiction books can be anthropological. In the interview, Bernard Werber says that as a writer he is always interested in current global issues and observes the world we live in right now. In order to write a book, he even interviewed countless scientists and closely observed ants in Africa. He also says "my inspiration comes from observing the world and trying to understand where those problems come from, and how we can overcome them." Anthropologists also observe the world, and try to understand where the problems come from, and give us possible solutions. In this sense, isn't a science fiction writer pretty much similar to anthropologist?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNatalie, what a cool post, thanks for sharing about this author! His work sounds really interesting.
ReplyDeleteI have been thinking a lot lately about what ultimately defines one field from another, given that a great many sciences and humanities are all trying to explore and understand the world around us. I ran into a microbiology professor from one of the universities in town (at the dog park) the other day who discussed a sentiment that I have heard from a number of people across various disciplines... that what defines a field is the method of inquiry, not what they are studying. In his example, he talked about immunologists and virologists, that even though they are studying different micro-organisms, in his view, because they are all using the same methods to study they should be considered simply "microbiologists." In the same way, what defines anthropology? Some people would argue that cultural anthropology, for example, is such because of ethnography.
I love that Bernard Werber has derived a lot of his writing from involved empirical study... if his methods mirror anthropology, then I agree, what's the difference? Then again, without a doubt, his write up probably ventured away from ethnography a bit. Personally, I enjoy reading fictional spins on the real world...
Anyrate, just some thoughts...