SF-TH Inc

About the Strugatskys' "Roadside Picnic" (À propos du "Pick-nick au bord de la route" des
frères Strougatsky)
Author(s): Stanislaw Lem, Elsa Schieder and R. M. P.
Source: Science Fiction Studies, Vol. 10, No. 3 (Nov., 1983), pp. 317-332
Published by: SF-TH Inc
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4239570 .
Accessed: 20/06/2014 20:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

SF-TH Inc is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Science Fiction Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUTTHESTRUGATSKYS'
ROADSIDEPICNIC 317

Stanislaw Lem
About the Strugatskys'Roadside Picnic'
Translatedby Elsa Schiederand RMP

There are subjects which cannot be entirely exhausted.For theologians,such a

subjectis God. How can one definitivelyreporton somethingwhichis, by definition,
inexhaustible;how,when the descriptionpresumesa limit,can one describea Being
which,in principle,consistsof infinitequalities?In this case, variousstrategieshave
been used: a multiplicationof general concepts-which, however,generates no
precise picture;compansons- but they necessarilyreduce the divine attributesto
the level of all-too-concrete categories;or a spirallingapproach to the subject
whereby a definitivedeterminationis replaced by an approximation-which for
that reasonis likewiseinadequate.
The optimalstrategyfor theology has proved to be that of maintainingthe
mysteriousnessof God. Yet to rigorouslypreservethatmystery,one would actually
have to remain silent; and a silent theology ceases to be theology.The strategy
thereforeturned(in later-e.g., Christian-versions)into one operatingon obvious
contradictions.God the omniscientknew thatfrommanas He hadmadehimwould
come the Fall. Yet God created him free. If God was awarein advancethat man
would evitablyfall, then man was not free-which neverthelessis exactlywhat the
theologianassertedhe was. In thisway dogmaticallyimposedcontradictionscreate
the verymysterybefore which reasonmust become silent.
An inexhaustibletopic of fantasticliteratureis the reasonable,yet not human,
being. How can a human authordescribe a being which is definitelygifted with
reason, but which, with equally categorical certainty,is not human? The bare
assertionof its reasonablenesswillnot do, since the genremustworkwithfacts.Here
too, fantastshave resortedto variousstrategies.The one which provedthe best in
theology- namely,preservingthe mystery- cannot be appliedin exactlythe same
way: aliens, after all, are not deities but materialbeings like us. The authorwho
describes them with the aid of various readily apparent contradictionsis thus
requiringthe readerto believein somethingabsurd;whereasit is not, afterall, in the
writer'spower to establishno-matter-what dogmas.
Accordingto the simplestavailablestrategy,then,intelligentbeingsdifferfrom
each othercorporeally,and only fromthisareado theirpeculiaritiesarise.Mentally
they are identicalor similarto humanbeings,since there can be only one form of
Reason.H.G. Wellsgaverealityto thisviewalmosta hundredyearsagoin The Warof
the Worlds. His Martianshave a horrifyingappearance,which, however,will some
day be manfs.Their bodieshave deterioratedto such an extent that theirheads are
almostall thatremains;and,accordingto Wells'ssurmise,in the manof the futureas
well, the organism'sviscerawill atrophyand the craniumexpand.The novel says
nothing about Martianculture, as if that too had wasted away and consisted of
nothingbuttechnicalmasteryandthe equationof mightwiththe cosmicjustification
of the state. In Wells the future thus simplifiesboth physiologyand culture. His
Martianshave no interestin anythinghumanexcept humanblood: like vampires,
they nourishthemselveson it. The Martians'technologicalachievementsdo, to be
sure,arouseour admiration,but the povertyof theirculturerepresentsthe fiction's

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
318 SCIENCE-FICTION
STUDIES,VOLUME10 (1983)

greatest weakness. Let us not speak of the loathing the aliens inspire-that can
alwaysbe referredback to their physicalenvironment.Still, is the behaviorof the
Martiansnot an unintentionalcaricatureof an extremerationalism?
The invasionof Wells'sMartiansis certainlyjustified by their situationas
inhabitantsof a dyingplanetthatis turninginto a desert,fromwhichperspectivethe
fruitfulEarthhoversas territory[LebensraumI to be conquered.Whatprovesto be
an exceptionalcase withinthe solarsystemwas none the less thoughtlesslyappropri-
atedas the modelforthe wholeSFgenre.Indeed,the successorsto Wellsmechanically
imitatedthe failingsof the master.The SFwhichfollowedhissickenedon the chronic
monstrosityof stellarinvaders,while leavingbehind the rationaleby which Wells
accountsfor it. Furthermore,laterwriters,wantingat all costs to surpassthe founder
of the genre in theirrenderingof aliens'hideousness,went well beyondthe limitsof
plausibility.By equippingtheir alienswith ever greaterpower,they filled the entire
universewith civilizationswhose desire to expandis whollyirrational.The greater
the powerattributedto the aliens,the moreirrationalis theirinvasionof Earth.In this
phase, SF became a fantasyof impostureand of paranoiddelusions, because it
claimed that the cosmic powers were sharpeningtheir fangs the better to eat
humanity,as if Earthand its treasureswere of incalculablevalue not only for the
inhabitantsof a smalldesertplanetlike Mars,butfor everyimaginablecivilizationin
the galaxy.Yetthe preconceptionthata powerwitharmiesof starshipsat its disposal
couldbe deadset on takingoverourpropertyis as naiveas the assumptionthatone of
the superpowersof Earthwouldmobilizeits armiesin orderto expropriatea grocery
store. The price of the invasionmust alwaysbe higherthan the value of the loot.
Thus invasion-plotscould not be motivated by interest in materialgain.
Instead, the aliens attack Earth because it pleases them to do so; they destroy
because they want to destroy;they enslave humanitybecause it amuses them to
exercise tyrannicalmastery. In this way, SF exchanged Wellsianinterplanetary
Darwinismfor a sadism which became a cosmic constant in intercivilizational
contacts.SF's task of forminghypotheseswas replacedby thatof projection,in the
sense the word has in depth-psychology:the authors projected their fears and
self-generateddelusions onto the universe.They thereby establisheda paranoid
cosmos, in whicheverythinghavingso muchas a hintof life sets aboutthe conquest
of Earth- a cosmos which is a trap set to catch humankind,a cosmos whose
evolutioncomes downto an embodimentof the principleof "Civilization as a wolf to
Civilization" lcp. homo lupushomini].
This "den of thieves"cosmos was later transfiguredmany times over. Its
general unfriendlinesswas mechanicallytransformedinto friendliness.The aliens
attack,but only to rob us of our free will and to preservehumankindby takingus
into protectivecustody (thismotif became especiallypopularduringthe Cold War
years);or they don'tattackimmediately,but hesitateand thusenablehumankindto
unite:in view of the stellarthreat,solidaritywins.
Furtherpermutationsof the invasionscenarioresultedfromthese;yet none of
the variationsinventedstandsup to a thoughtfulexamination.They areincapableof
answeringcertainelementaryquestionswhichWells'snovel- albeitin its own way-
does pertinentlyaddressitselfto. Thereis, forone, the questionof whatthe motiveis
for the star-voyage-somethingwhichcannotbe explainedin termsof "theyfelt like
it"or of a game of cops and robbers;for another,there is the questionof the main
orientationof cultureson a highlevel of materialdevelopment;foryet another,there
is the questionof whatformsystemswhichhaveachieveda highlevelof astrotechnical
accomplishmentwill assume;and so forth.But the most tellingof such questionsis
this: why do actual human culturesshow a tremendousrichnessapproachingthe
trulydiverse,while virtuallyall cosmic culturesin SF are markedby a depressing
uniformitywhich borderson monotony?

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUT THE STRUGATSKYS'ROADSIDEPICNIC 319

To such questionsSF could make no answeras long as it exchangedreflection

on the fate of reason in the cosmos for sensationalstereotypesof interplanetary
adventure.In this way, SF's line of development-and this concerns the subject
underdiscussion- became antitheticalto thatof science. At a time when scientists,
beginningto discussseriouslythe problemof how one mightcommunicatewithother
civilizationsin the universe,were formulatingthe hypotheses that Reason takes
variousformsand that not all possiblemanifestationsof intellectneed assume the
humanform,fantasywasalreadyat the oppositepole fromsuchthinking,drivingthe
lastremnantsof realisticconceptsout of its spherethroughits undisguisedborrowing
fromfairytales. In its desireto furnishthe alienswithevergreaterpower,it already
ascribedproteanabilitiesto them:sucha beingcan,justbywishingit, transformitself
into a tree, into partof a rocket, even into a humanbeing. It can also take over a
humanbodyandcontrolthe humanmind,thusin effectgivingnew life to a subjectof
old myths:possessionby evil spirits.This fantasydestroyedinterculturalbarriersin
shortorder,by ascribingsome sortof telepathicomnipotenceto the aliens;or on the
other hand, it formed the cosmic relationshipsbetween the planetson primitive,
simplisticmodelsof earthlyorigin(those,for example,suggestedby colonialism,by
the exploitsof the conquistators,or by the rulesgoverningthe creationof imperialis-
tic coalitions).Inso doing,it disregardedall possibleobjectionsbothof a sociological
and of a physical nature-objections which are contingent on the tremendous
spatio-temporal distancesin the cosmos.Thathandicapit did awaywithonce andfor
all, by conferringon the star-voyagersthe abilityto move at any desiredspeed. In
short,while in Wells'smodesteffortthe Martians- in accordancewiththe scientific
dataof his time-were at home in the realcosmos, SF now chose to locate its beings
in a totally (i.e., astronomically,physically,sociologically,and-finally-psycho-
logically)falsified cosmos. It practiced a ruthlessexploitation,ransacking,in its
search for inspiration,historytextbooksand the Linneansystemalike, in orderto
provide lizards, cuttlefish with graspingarms, crabs, insects, and so forth with
intelligence.When even that had become threadbareand presentlyboring, the
theme SF had run into the ground was in its teratologicalextremismtaken over
by the third-ratehorrormovie, which is perfectlybareof any thoughtfulcontent.
Americanwritersdeny the validityof such a diagnosisof the facts, and they
find allies in the book-buyers,who have become used to an easily digestible,
sensationalisticliteraturewhich pretends to be science fantasy.Yet the fairy-tale
natureof this "fantasy"is obvious.Nobodyquestionswhy the dragonsin fairytales
are so mischievouslybloodthirstyor why the witches in them prefer to devour
childrenratherthan chickens. These are simple axioms of the fairy tales, whose
worldis fundamentallypartisan:evil appearsin it so thatit can be defeatedby good.
It is thereforeclear that such evil must be powerful;otherwise,the finalvictoryof
good would seem too easily gained. The world of SF, on the contrary,must be
impartial;it must not incubateevil merelyfor the sake of allowingthe unitedinter-
planetaryforces of virtue to overcome it. Nor should it be a partisanworld with
a minussign, an anti-fairy-taleworld in which the beautiful,amiable,and morally
uprightgood is bred in order to give the greatest possible pleasure to an evil
incarnatewhich proceeds to gobble it up with relish. (Such a world, incidentally,
was imaginedby the Marquisde Sade, whomone could hardlytakefor an authorof
science fantasy.)The SF world must be (to put it quite plainly) a real world:
that is, one in which no one is privilegedfrom the start, in which no fate is
predetennined,whether in favor of good or of evil. Since men are not angels,
-there is no need to ascribe angelic traits to the aliens; since men, though they
kill flies, do not exactly travel to the ends of the Earth to do so, similarlythe
aliens, even if they should regard us as flies, should not go out of their way to
seek earthlingsto swat.

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
320 STUDIES,VOLUME10 (1983)
SCIENCE-FICTION

An authorwho describesa life-formor type of intelligencedifferentfromthe

terrestrialvarietyis in an easierpositionthanthe one who depictsa cosmic invasion
of Earth. The former can-as, for example, I did in Solaris-restrict himself or
herselfto portrayingphenomenawhichdifferas muchas desiredfromwhathumans
arefamiliarwith.The latter,proceedingfromthe "interventionist" premise,assumes
that the aliens have come to Earth and that, consequently,somethingor other
musthavedictatedtheirliterallyastronomicalundertaking.Whatcould theirmotive
have been? If it was not an impulse to fight or to steal, it must have been the
urge either to learn or to play (they came in orderto amuse themselvesa bit with
us. ..). There are, as we see, not manyalternatepossibilities.Thus the best strategy
for dealingwith this subject,too, is to preserveforeverthe aliens'mysteriousness.
I would like to stress emphaticallythat this strategyis not founded, either
entirelyor primarily,on aestheticcriteria;that,in otherwords,the narrativemustnot
preserve the aliens'mysteriousnessin order to continuouslypuzzle readers and
hold them spellboundby the great unknown.The strategydoes, of course, incline
to conform to the fundamentaldirectives of conflict theory. Thus, by way of
example, future-strategistsat militaryacademies are required to impute to the
enemy the most threateningintentionsfromthe pointof view of the strategists'own
side. In regard to cosmic aliens, such a dictate has a cognitive, rather than a
military purport. Yet visitors fitted with absolutely inimical intentions do not
representthe worst of all possible eventualities.In this case, the enemy'sattitude
is at least clearlydefined.The situationis worse when we absolutelycannot under-
standthe peculiaritiesof theirstrangebehavior,when we cannot explaintheiralien
proceedings.
The strategyof preservingthe mystery,if it is to be optimal,requiresa precise
concretizing.One cannot manage it in the way that theology does its subject, by
workingwithcontradictions.One cannotascribemutuallyexclusivepurposesto the
visitors- for example, they cannot want to conquer and at the same time not
conquer.Still,one can rouse the appearanceof such a contradiction-for example,
the visitorsmaybelievetheyarehelpingus, thoughwe mayfeel thattheiractionsare
pernicious- and here one enters the realm of what is promisingfrom a drama-
turgicalperspective:misunderstandings occasionedby the drasticdisparitybetween
civilizations.One can find attemptsin thisdirectionin SF,but they are not followed
through:the intercivilizational misunderstandings alwaysstay extraordinarily primi-
tive puerilitieswhich do not merit seriousconsideration.The authormust invest a
certainamountof intellectualeffortin the constructionof the quidpro quo which
perplexesthe meetingof two disparatecultures.The morefactorsfromvariousareas
that contributeto such a misunderstanding, the better.One ought to keep in mind
thatsuch an encounteris not a duel betweentwo heroes, but a very confusedinter-
play in which collective social organizationstake part, organizationswhich differ
radicallyfromeach otherand to each of whichthe structure,meaning,andpurpose
of the other'sactionsare foreign.
The overwhelmingmajorityof SF texts can serve as examplesof how not to
tackle the theme of invasion.It is thereforeall the more gratifyingto come upon a
work which, by and large, knows how to deal with the problem successfully.In
RoadsidePicnic, the Strugatskybrothershave employed the tactic of preserving
the mysteryto excellent effect; indeed, as they surpassthe canon establishedby
Wells,so, too, they transcendthe SF tradition.
RoadsidePicnicrelieson two ideas.The firstwe havealreadydesignatedas the
strategyof preservingthe mysteryof the visitors.One does not knowwhattheylook
like; one does not know what they want;one does not know why they came to this
world,whattheirintentionswere respectinghumankind.Nordoes one knowexactly
whetherit'sabsolutelycertainthattheyhavelandedon Earthat all, and if they have,

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUT THE STRUGATSKYS'ROADSIDE
PICNIC 321

whetherthey have alreadyleft again....

The second idea-and this is what makes Roadside Picnic an anomaly in
SF-pertains to humanity'sreactionto the landing.Forsomethinghaslanded-or, to
put it more circumspectly,somethinghas fallen from the sky. The inhabitantsof
Harmonthave found thatout tragicallyenough.In some areasof the city people go
blind;in others,theyfallvictimto mysteriousillnessesthataregenerallydescribedas
plague;and the depopulatedarea of the city turnsinto the Zone, whose properties,
menacingas they are incomprehensible,abruptlyseparateit fromthe outsideworld.
Yet the actual landingwas no great naturalcatastrophe:it did not cause houses to
toppledown,nordid it makewindowsbreakformilesaround.The bookdoes not tell
us muchaboutwhathappenedin the firstphaseof the creationof the Zone. Still,we
learn enough to understandthat we will not be able to fit the events and their
consequences into any compartmentof already-existingclassificatoryschemes.
Those who escaped fromHarmontin one piece and moved elsewherebecome the
center of incomprehensibleevents, of extremedeviationsfrom the statisticalnorm
(90%of the clients of a hairdresserwho left Harmontdie in the course of a year,
thoughof "ordinary" causes- in a gangsterattack,in trafficaccidents- andwherever
emigrantsfrom the Zone increasinglycongregate,the incidenceof naturalcatastro-
phes rises proportionately,as Dr PilmaninformsNoonan).
We thushave before us an incomprehensibleinfringementon causalconnec-
tions.The narrativeeffect is striking.It has nothingto do withphantasmagoria in the
formof a "visitation" becausenothingsupernatural occurs;andyet we areconfronted
with a mysterywhich is "muchmore terrifyingthan a stampedeof ghosts"'(as Dr
Pilmansays, 3:109).2 Should someone seek for a hypothesiswhich would explain
theseeffects,it mightbe possibleto findone (let us assumethatwhathashappenedis
causedby local disturbancesof certainphysicalconstantsresponsiblefor the normal
probabilitycurves in typical statisticalequations:that is the easiest explanation,
thoughonly, of course, as it indicatesthe directionin which more researchwould
haveto be done, and not in the sense of beinga solutionto the problem).It turnsout,
then,thateven whenone has founda physicalprocesswherebythe mechanicsof the
unusualevents can be explainedrationally,one has not come a hair'sbreadthcloser
to the heart of the problem-viz., to the natureof the visitors.Thus the optimal
strategyconsistsof presentingthe individualactionsof the visitorsas a puzzlewhose
resolutioneitherdoes not throwanylightat all on the natureof the visitorsor makes
thatnatureseem even more unfathomable.This is not, as it mightperhapsappearto
be, somethingmadeup, likea fantasynovel'sad hoc inventions;forourknowledgeof
the world is acquiredin just this way: perceivingsome of its laws and peculiarities
does not lessen the numberof problemsleft to be solved; on the contrary,while
makingthese discoveries,we begin to realize that there are furthermysteriesand
dilemmasof whose existencewe hithertohad no presentiment.Evidently,then, the
scientific learning process can produce from its treasuryeven more "fantastic"
wondersthan the faiiy-talerepertorydoes childishones.
In RoadsidePicnic thingsdo not go as they do in The Warof the Worlds.
Wels'sstoryof the Martianinvasioninvolvesa nightmarish,monumentalbreakdown
of the human world, a dramaticallyheightenedcollapse of civilizedorder under
visiblyinflictedblows.Oneknowswho the opponentis;one knowshismethods;even
his finalgoalsareknown(itwouldbe difficultnot to guessthem!).All thishasnothing
in commonwithRoadsidePicnic.To be sure,the invasionhaspresumablyoccurred;
to be sure,it has left behindineradicabletracesin the formof "Zones"'; and Earthis
incapableof coming to gripswith the consequences.Yet at the same time, the little
worldof humanitycontinuesas before.Ominousmiracles,descendingon six spots
on the planetlike a cosmicrain,become the focalpointsof the various-legal as well
as illegal-human activitiesthat go on around all supposed sources of profit, no

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
322 STUDIES,VOLUME10(1983)
SCIENCE-FICTION

matterhow risky they are. The Strugatskysrealize the strategyof preservingthe

mysterythrough an extremely subversivetactic-through well-nighmicroscopic
bearingson what is going on. We only learn throughhearsaythat experimentsare
beingmadeon the "magnetictraps"discoveredin the Zones, andthatsomewhereor
other institutesfor the studyof extraterrestrial culturesare busy tryingto compre-
hend the natureof the landing.Aboutwhatgovernmentsthinkof the Zones, about
how the Zones' instaurationhas affected world politics, we find out nothing. By
contrast,we witnessevery last detail of some episodesin the life of a "stalker," of a
new breed of smugglerwho, because a demand exists for them, spends nights
retrievingobjectsfromthe Zone. Throughverbalsnapshots,the storyshowshow the
Zone has become surrounded,as a foreignbodydoes whenit has penetrateda living
human organism,only in this case by a tissue of opposed interestgroups: those
connected with the official guardianshipof the Zone (i.e., the UN), but also the
police,the smugglers,the scientists,and-let's not forgetthem-the membersof the
entertainmentindustry.This encirclementof the Zone by a ringof feverishactivityis
depictedwithconsiderablesociologicalinsight.Certainlythe portrayalis one-sided,
butthe authorshadgood reasonto focuson those figureswhoseactivity,in a marked
but also quite naturalway, countersthe typicalSF scheme of things.The sense of
fascinationand depressionwhich the "scenesfromthe life of a treasurehunter"(or
"stalker"),the core of the story,inspirein the readerare the productof a deliberately
restrictedfield of vision. The scientific and extra-scientificliteraturewhich the
landingprecipitatedmust undoubtedlyhave been a locus of bittercontroversy.So,
too, the landingmust inevitablyhave broughtabout the formationof new attitudes
andlinesof thought;and it probablyhas not left eitherartor religionuntouched;yet
our perspectiveon the whole upheavalis perforceconfinedto the excerptsfromthe
life of a poor joe who, in the dramaof two civilizationscolliding,strictlyplaysthe
partof a humanant.
It would neverthelessbe a good idea for us to makeourselvesawareof wider
aspects of the event. Everyonewill agree with Dr Pilman'swordsthat the invasion
representsa decisivestrokein the historyof mankind.Now in thathistorytherehave
been quitea numberof decisivemoments,even thoughtheywere not exactlycaused
by a cosmic invasion;and each was markedby an intensificationof the extremesof
humanbehavior.Each of these decisivemomentshad its larger-than-lifesize figures
andits pitiablevictims.The greaterthe historicevent,the morepronouncedwas the
distancebetweenthe greatand the insignificant,the sublimityand the wretchedness
of human fates. Glorious battles at sea that once decided the destiny of empires
possessedat a distancethe beautyof a paintingof a battle,and close-upa repulsive
gruesomeness.One need only recall that chained to their benches, the rowersof
galleysburnedto death in Greek fire silently,because before the battle they were
obliged to stuff their mouthswith special pears to preventtheir makingany noise.
(Their hellish shrieks,you see, would have had a negative effect on the soldiers'
morale!)Perceptionsof such a battlewoulddifferradically,dependingon whetherit
were seen from the elevated perspectiveof the commanders[FiThrerI with their
imperialaims,or fromthe viewpointof the poordevilsfacedwitha death-struggle-
and yet theirdeath-strugglewas an integralpartof the processof historicalchange.
One could say that even such a beneficialdiscoveryas that of X-rays,for example,
had its horrificside, since the discoverers,unawareof the propertiesof these rays,
had to havelimbsamputatedbecauseof theireffect. So, too, one of the by-products
of the world'sindustrialization is the leukemiawhichchildrenare slowlydyingfrom
today. (We know this to be true, even though the causal connection cannot be
palpablydemonstrated.)The dreadfulfate of the "stalkers"in RoadsidePicnic, I
should add, does not representan extraordinarydeviation broughtabout by the
cosmic landing,but is preciselythe ruleof decisivemomentsin history-a rulethat

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUT THE STRUGATSKYS'ROADSIDE
PICNIC 323

distinctlypoints up the constantand inevitableconnection between "picturesque"

greatnessand horrifyingmisery.
The Strugatskybrothersthusdemonstratethattheyare realistsof the fantastic
inasmuch as realism in fantasy betokens a respect for logical consequence, an
honestyin deducingall conclusionsentirelyfrom the assumedpremises.Even the
uninhibitedentertainmentindustrywhich encircles the Zone has its plausibility-
indeed,I wouldsay its necessity.The principlesof humanbehavioroperatingin the
narrativeare thus the same as they ever are; the authorshave merelydirectedtheir
attention to the "dregs"in the cosmic encounters, so to speak- and the events
therebytakethe concreteformof a miracleintroducedintoa consumersociety.This
is not-what is sometimes meant by the latter term-a society which produces
nothing but those goods to which consumersare immediatelyattracted.On the
contrary,it is a society which considers everythingto be within the scope of its
endeavor:not only cars,refrigerators,andperfumebut also sex, blood,and destruc-
tion it makes items for consumption,in good time seasoningeach of them so that
they become palatable.In the MiddleAges, the Zones woulddoubtlesshavecaused
movementsof panic-strickenflightand migration;and they mightafterwardshave
become centersof new religiousbeliefs,originatingin responseto theirevidencefor
the Apocalypse,and breeding-grounds for propheciesandrevelations.In our world,
however, the Zones succumb to being domesticated;for what one can neither
understandnor ignore,one can at leastconsumepiecemeal.Accordingly,the Zones,
ratherthanbeingthe subjectof eschatologicalthought,arethegoal of bustours.This
admitsof being explainedwith referenceto a lust for phenomenaonce regarded
solely as abhorrentbut these daysenforcingthe popularityof an aestheticwhich in
place of beautyhas set the repulsive.That is the spiritof the times to which in the
Strugatskys'story anythingevincingits complete independencefrom man-as the
mysteriousnessof the visitorsnearlydoes-succumbs. All in all, RoadsidePicnic
impliesthatthe landingpassesover99%of humankindwithouta trace;andprecisely
in this regard,the Strugatskysset themselvesagainstthe entire SF tradition.
Theirs is no banalopposition.Dr Pilman,given to expressinghimselfin the
terminologyof physics,calls mankinda "stationarysystem"(3:100);translatedinto
the languageof the historian,thismeansthatcontactwiththe aliens,insofaras it does
not equate with a global catastrophe,cannot change the course of humanhistory
with one fell swoop, since mankindis not capable of suddenlyleaping out of its
historyand-impelled by a cosmic intervention- steppinginto a completelydiffer-
ent history.Thissupposition- in my view a correctone-is somethingwhichSF has
neglected in its avidityfor the sensational.In Roadside Picnic, by contrast, the
landingis not intendedas somethingstrangeforthe sakeof its strangeness;instead,it
establishesthe startingconditionsfor a thought-experimentin the domain of the
"experimentalphilosophy of history"- and that is exactly what determinesthe
valueof this book.
There is only one pointaboutwhichI wouldfaintake issuewiththe book- a
point havingto do not with humanmatters(these are presentedunobjectionably),
but with the actual natureof the visitors.I mightpremise my discussionon four
propositions.The first is that in the book we are given data, but not necessarily
opinionsabout these data, even when the charactersharboringsuch opinionsare
holdersof the NobelPrize.Thismeansthatwe considerourselvesto haveas muchof
a warrantto postulatetheoriesabout the visitorsas the fictionalpersonageshave.
Second, on all imaginablelevels of knowledge there is given no 100%error-free
course of action. Such infallibilitywould of course require that one possessed
complete informationabout what can occur in the course of makingone's plansa
reality;but the universeis a place in which the attainingof complete Tinformation
aboutanythingwhateveris neverpossible.Accordingto the thirdof mypropositions,

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
324 SCIENCE-FICTION
STUDIES,VOLUME10 (1983)

the principleof freedomfrom contradictionsin thinkingobtainsfor us as for other

beingsin the cosmos.This meansthatof two things,one mustproveto be the case: if
the "visitors" wereawareof the presenceof humanson Earth,thentheycan not at the
sametime havebeen unawareof it; if theyharboredanydesignat all vis-a-vishuman
beings,then they could not at the same time have harboredno design;and so on.
Finally,in explainingunknownphenomena,the simplesthypotheses,as stipulatedby
the principleof Ockham'sRazor,are alwaysto be preferred.If, for example,we live
next door to a famousmagicianand hear dead silence fromhis side of the dividing
wall for a long while, we can explain that in many ways: the neighbormay have
dissolvedinto thin air,or he may have transformedhimselfinto a paperclip, or he
may have gone up to heaven throughhis window.We would tend to take refuge,
however,in the quitecommonplaceexplanation:thathe simplyleft the housequietly
andunperceived.Onlywhen thathypothesisproveswrongarewe compelledto look
for another,and less banal,one.
These are the standpointsfrom which we negotiate the encounterwith the
visitors.3In regardto the landing,a distinctionmustbe madebetweenwhatthe aliens
left in the Zones andthe wayin whichtheydid this.In the opinionof Dr Pilman,who
expressesthe outlook of most specialists,the gap between the civilizationsturned
out to be too greatfor humanbeingsalone to be able to surmountit; the otherside,
however,failed to give its assistance.What the visitorshave left behind human
beingscan deal withonly as fragmentsof a strangetechnologywhose functioningis
incomprehensible.As for the mannerin which the visitorsbequeaththe so-called
objects to men, Dr Pilman'sthesis-which is centralto the story since the title on
the cover alreadyanticipatesit-represents this to us in the formof a parable.Man-
kind finds itself in the situationof animalswhich, havingcrept from their hiding
places to a roadsideor clearing where uncomprehensiblecreatureshave stayed,
rummagearound among the remains of the camp site. This analogy expresses
Pilman'shonest conviction,even thoughin his conversationwith Noonan he enu-
meratesothergoing hypothesesaboutthe landing.Dr Pilmanis not just anyone;he
has finallyreceived the Nobel Prize for his discoveryof the "PilmanRadiant."At
the same time, he is a misanthrope- as outstandingscholarsfrequentlyare. Such
men stronglysense the ambiguityof theirsocietalrole. For civilizedsociety,which
is broughtforthfromthe fruitsof theirthinking,they are indispensable;yet it treats
them quite inconsiderately.The politicalpowers expropriatetheir discoveries,but
public opinion none the less makes the researchersthemselvesanswerablefor the
consequencesof thatexpropriation.An awarenessof thissituationdoes not dispose
one towardskindliness.Insteadit arouseseitherrebellionor cynicism;but whoever
finds rebellionuseless and cynicismrepugnanttries to behave like a stoic. Such a
persongets used to choosingthe lesserevil; and when one triesto cornerhim with
questions,he answersevasivelyor with sarcasm.This is preciselyDr Pilman'satti-
tude, a primarilydefensivestancewhichhe has assumedin the interviewwithwhich
the storybegins.
In hisconversationwithNoonan,Pilmanis certainlylessspitefullylaconicthan
he is withjournalists.Because he is talkingconfidentiallyto someone he knows-
besideswhichhe is somewhatinebriated-he inclinestowardsstraightforwardness.
ThatPilman,as he is psychologicallydelineatedbyhisjudgmentson the landing,is by
the same token not unbiasedis anothermatter.The simileof leftoversfroma picnic
whichhe has availedhimselfof mayaccuratelyreflectthe situationof humanbeings
vis-'a-visthe thingsfoundin the Zone; but in respectto the visitorsit is all too lenient.
The so-called leftovers,objects which are dangerousto all livingbeings,were not
afterall thrownawayin some desertedspot. They were tossed into the middleof a
city. It is a fact that urbanareas do not amount to even one per cent of Earth's
surface.That is why,thoughthe cosmos has been "throwing" meteorsat the Earth

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUTTHESTRUGATSKYS'
ROADSIDE
PICNIC 325

formillenia,so farno meteorhas fallenon a city.It wouldseem, then,thatthe landing

in Harmontwas not the workof chance. One could supposethatthe visitorslanded
in the city because they wantedto. They held theirpicnic not on a roadsideor in a
desertedclearing,butrighton top of ourheads.The eventtherebyappearsin another
light.There is, afterall,a differencebetweensittingdownfor a picnicnearan anthill,
andpouringgasolinefromthe carover the anthillandsettingit on fire.The roadside
picnic of Pilman'sfriendlyanalogypresupposestotal indifferenceto the fate of the
humanants.The pictureof deliberatedestruction,on the otherhand,presupposesa
highlevelof ill will,since one wouldreallyhaveto takethe troubleof comingfromfar
off in order to destroythe anthill.Indifferenceand malevolenceare not the same
thing;andin thisregardit is unfortunatethatthe storyis silentas to whetherevenone
of the other landingstook place in a humansettlement.
As we see, this bears on a paramountquestion, one which is critical for
clarifyingthe visitors'relationshipto man, and hence a question which all the
charactersin the fictionmustsimilarlybe awareof. Onelandingin a citycouldbe the
workof extraordinary chance,buttwo suchlandingscertainlycouldnot. Wearethus
inevitablyled to the followingreflection:if it were the case that the visitorshad also
landedin anothercity apartfromHarmont,a roadsidepicnic wouldmanifestlybe a
falseimage.Butsince Pilmanhas chosenthisanalogy,we assumethatwe aredealing
with an isolatedfact. That is very importantfor our furtherconsiderations.
Dr Pilmandetailsvarioushypothesesconcerningthe natureof the landing.He
omitsonly one whichcommandsour attention.This we willintroduceafterwe have
gathered(as follows)the conclusiveevidence in its favor....
(1) Firstof all, two characteristics-unrelatedto one another-of almostall
the objects found in the Zone attractour notice. One is that these objects have
retaineda measureof functionability:theyarenot passive,lifeless,deactivatedwaste
or rubbish.The second is thattheyare commensurablein size (andweight)withthe
human body. This can be inferredfrom the fact that one man can lug objects
well-nighintactfrom the Zone on his back withouthavingto take them apartfirst.
None of the largerunits needs to be dismantledor brokenup-which is why the
equipmentof the treasurehuntersincludesno tools. These objectslie looselystrewn
about.Now supposewe were to dumpa considerableamountof the industrialdebris
of ourcivilization(wreckedcars,industrialequipment,scrapmetal,old bridges,used
machines)here andthereon the Samoanislands:the nativeswouldin thatcase come
uponfarmore objectsincommensurablewiththeirbulkthancorrespondingto it. If,
on the contrary,a numberof strangeobjectsfoundscatteredin a givenplace wereof
an orderof magnitudeaccordingwiththatof the humanbody,it wouldbe an apriori
probable hypothesis that these things had been destined for their discoverers.
Naturallyone can still claim that pure chance is answerablefor the fact that the
objectsfoundin the Zone areproportionateto humanbulk.Butit appearsotherwise
when many "purecoincidences"begin to come togetherin a meaningfulpattern.
(2) Next, it is notable among the Zone's numerouscharacteristicsthat its
boundariesare rigidlyand sharplyfixed. Neither flyingobjects such as the "hairy
stuff"(1:19)norotherZone phenomena(the"jelly"[2:561,thermalshocks,etc.) ever
crossover the demarcationline betweenthe Zone and its environs.One couldonce
more claim thatthis "self-containment" of the Zone, whichsets its own strictlimits,
is the resultof a further"purecoincidence."However,it is a priori a more probable
hypothesisthatthisis not the case, butthatthe Zone "holdsitselfin check"becauseit
contains somethingwhich, accordingto the visitors'plan and intent, meritssuch
enclosure.
(3) Then again,entireobjectslie scatteredchaoticallyin the Zone. It is prob-
ablythiswhichhas put Dr Pilmanin mindof a roadsidepicnic,wheregarbageis left
behind.It thusreallydoes appearas if these thingswere carelesslythrownaway.But

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
326 STUDIES,VOLUME10 (1983)
SCIENCE-FICTION

one can also defend the view that nobody threw them away,that they scattered
themselveschaoticallywhen the containersthey were broughtin burst.
(4) Furthermore,the objects in the Zone frequentlyhave the characterof
extremelydangerouspitfallsor booby-traps.Comparedto dealingwiththem,defusing
bombs or mines is sheer child'splay.Again one cannot exclude the possibilitythat
they were carelesslydiscardedby visitorsindifferentto humanwelfare,or even the
other possibiity that the visitorstreatedpeople in the way that an assassintreats
children when he passes out poisoned candies in a kindergarten.But another
explanationis also permissible:that the objects do not function in the way they
shouldbecause they were damagedduringthe landing.
(5) Finally,it is worthremarkingthatamongthe forcesat workin the Zone are
those which producean effect of "resurrectionfrom the grave."Under theirinflu-
ence, humancorpsesrise up and begin to move about.This is treatedas a resurrec-
tion not of the dead,who aretherebyreturnedto theirnormalstateof living,but- to
use the term from the story-of "moulages-...dummies" (3:109), whose newly-
formedtissueis not identicalwith normallivingtissue.To quote Pilman:"ifyou cut
off some part... [fromthese livingcorpses],the partwilllive on. Separately.Without
any physiologicalsolutions to nourishit" (3:109). (Dr Pilman claims that such a
quasi-resurrection would violate the second law of thermodynamics;this is not a
necessarilyvalidconclusion,but we do not want to quarrelwith the learnedman at
this point, because doing so would take us too far off our track.)The "pseudo-
resurrection" of the "zombies,"or "moulages"-theirreconstructionfroma skeletal
basis-is an effect which is very importantfor understandingthe nature of the
landing.Their "resurrection" seems to be more probableas a consequenceof pur-
posive ratherthan undirectedactivities;and by the same token, it would certainly
appeareasier to resurrectreal, concrete life-forms(i.e., terrestrialones, consisting
of albumen)than "omnipossible"(and hypothetical)forms of life in the cosmos.
Wedo not knowif thatis correct,justas we do not knowif the effect not be directed
exclusivelyat the visitorsthemselves(it might be a "remedyin their first-aidkit").
But whateveris the case, the resurrection-effect suggeststhat the visitorsknew a lot
about the physiologyof terrestriallife forms.
All of thisconstitutesthe evidencefor our hypothesis.We maintainthat there
has been no landingafterall. Ourhypothesis,indeed,runsotherwise.... A spaceship
filled with containers that held samples of the products of a highly developed
civilizationcame into the vicinityof the Earth.It was not a manned ship, but an
automaticallypiloted space-probe.That is the simplestexplanationof why no one
managesto observea singlevisitor.Everyotherhypothesishas to assumeeitherthat
the visitorsare invisibleto humansor that they deliberatelyhide from them. In the
approachto Earth,the vessel sustaineddamageand brokeinto six parts,whichone
afteranotherplungedfrom their orbitto Earth.
This seems to contradictwhat is said about the radiantsdiscoveredby and
namedafterDr Pilman;theyostensiblyconfirmthatSomeonefiredat Earthsix times
from Alpha Centauriin the Cygnusconstellation.Nevertheless,betweenour inter-
pretationand the radiantsthere stands no contradiction.In astronomythe term
radiant refers to a likely place in the heavens from which a meteor swarm is
approaching.The determinationof a radiantin astronomyis not synonymouswith
taking a fix on the place from which the meteors actually originate.They may
approach on an elliptical or parabolic curve; the radiant is a tangent which a
terrestrialobserverplots on such a curve,and it extendsbackwards(in the opposite
directionfrom the meteors'fall) until it reaches the place in the heavenswhere a
specificclusterof starsis located. Thuswhen one namesmeteorsaccordingto their
radiants,this by no meanssignifiesthat the meteorsare in fact emanatingfrom that
star cluster after which astronomershave named them. Consequently,the Pilman

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUT THE STRUGATSKYS'ROADSIDEPICNIC 327

Radiantoffers us no clue at all as to whether what descended in the Zones was

actuallysent from the principalstarof the Cygnusconstellation.As to wherethe six
flyingobjectsor probescame from,the PilmanRadiantcan tell us nothing,albeitthe
story directly encourages the impressionthat it can. That is a false impression,
occasioned by Dr Pilman'sinsufficientlyprecise manner of expressinghimself in
respondingto journalists'queriesat the outsetof the story.Thatwhathasarrivedhere
actuallyflew directlyfromAlphaCentaurito Earthis out of the question.Traversing
such a distance on a perfect flight-pathborderson an astronauticalimpossibility,
since on the way innumerableinterferences(aboveall, those of gravitationalforces)
mustinfluencethe trajectory.In addition,it is mathematicallydemonstrablethatthe
curvewhichsix shots wouldproduceon the surfaceof a sphere(whilethe sphereis
rotating,as the Earthdoes) cannotbe distinguishedfromthe curveresultingfromthe
projectionof a segment in the orbital trajectoryonto the surface of the sphere.
Pilman'sradiant does not altogether exclude the hypothesis of a disintegrated
spaceshipcrashingin six separatesections,one after the other.Once one knows a
meteor'sradiantand its finalvelocity,one can computethe orbitalpathfromwhich
it actuallyapproached,becausea meteor,being an inanimateobject subjectto the
lawsof celestialmechanics,cannotalterits courseat will.Froma spaceship'sradiant,
on the other hand, one can make out nothingabout its place of origin,its course,
its travelspeed, etc., because a spaceshipis a navigable,mechanizedbody and can
execute maneuvers,make course corrections,change its speed, and so forth. In
short,from the so-calledPilmanRadiantnothingfollowsin favorof any one of the
hypothesesabout the landing.
Of coursewe cannotknow forsurethatthe spaceshipwasindeedthe victimof
a catastrophe.None the less, our hypothesisaccountsfor everythingthathappened,
and does so in the most economicalmanner.Why shouldone not properlyassume
that the landinghas miscarried?To suppose that the unusualnatureof the objects
found in the Zone demonstratesthe high level of the visitors'ingenuityand thus
precludes a calamity'sbefallingtheir ship were a logically false inference. The
visitors'perfection,in consequence of which no harm could come to theirship, is
neithera fact nor a rationallydefensiblehypothesis,but merelyan articleof faith.
Perfectionto the point of infallibilityis, in our judgment,reservedsolely for those
entitieswith which theology concerns itself-which is to say, there is no infallible
appliedscience. We are not assertingthat an accident definitelyoccurred,merely
thata breakdownwould,in one fell swoop,accountfor everythingthathappenedby
referenceto a common single cause.
Besides,the facts thatwe mentionedin point (1) above aboutthe characteris-
ticsof the objectsfoundin the Zone makeplausiblethe conjecturethatsomeonesent
containersof technologicalspecimensin Earth'sdirection.Ourpoint(2) (concerning
the Zone's "self-containment") further increases the likelihood of (1), that the
senders, unable to be absolutely certain that no catastrophewould befall their
spaceshipduringits landing,must at least have providedfor a minimizingof the
consequences, and have done so precisely by installingon board a safety device
which would not allow the effects of the catastropheto spread,but would almost
hermeticallyconfine them to one place. This must naturallyhave been a device
meant to survivethe aftermathof the catastrophe.Somehowit has survived.The
fact mentionedabove undermy thirdpoint heightensthe probabilitythat an acci-
denthasoccurred,becausenothingis morenaturalthanthatthe containers'contents
shouldbe chaoticallyscatteredby the force of the impactwithEarth.Even the fact
cited as my fourthpoint(i.e., the perilsthe objectspresent-becomesunderstandable
as a consequenceof the same cause. Not only did the containersburstuponimpact,
but most of their contents was damagedin variousways. The same thing would
happenif someone were to dropcontainerswithfood stuffs,medicines,insecticides,

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
328 STUDIES,VOLUME10 (1983)
SCIENCE-FICTION

etc. down to the Samoanislandsin what turnout to be defectiveparachutes.These

crashto earthand the containersrupture- in consequenceof which,the chocolates
are full of hexachlorides,the gingerbreadfull of emetics, and so on. It is possible
for the Samoansto conclude that someone has made a very maliciousattempton
theirlives; yet in the Samoans place scientistsought not to jump to the same con-
clusion.Whatwe aregettingat is thatthe intentionof the "Others" does not manifest
itselfin the perniciouscharacterof the cosmic offerings:it is not the case that they
took pleasurein peltingus with deadlydebris,but ratherthat an unfortunateacci-
dent- the defect in theirspaceship-transformedtheir well-intendedconsignment
into scrap-metal.(Wedo not wantto go into furtherspecificsof ourhypothesishere;
but in generalterms,they would run as follows:since the ship left no trace behind,
it must certainlynot have landed but simplyaccomplishedthe droppingoff of the
containers.The containers,moreover,need not necessarilyhave taken the formof
materialvessels;the objectsmay havebeen "packaged,"held together,by a type of
force field,whose failureat a crucialmomentcausedthe contentsof the "packages"
to raindown on Earth.)
The Strugatskysmighttell us thatthe hypothesisof "samples" is likewisetaken
into account in their book. After all, in his conversationwith Noonan, Dr Pilman
makes mentionof the possibilitythat "[al highlyrationalculturethrew containers
withartifactsof its civilizationonto Earth.They expectus to studythe artifacts,make
a giant technologicalleap, and send a signalin responseto show we are readyfor
contact"(3:103). However,this version-which, by the way, does not admit the
possibilitythatthe consignmentshavearrivedin a disastrouslydamagedcondition-
the storythroughan ironicundertoneutterlydiscredits.Indeed,how could objects
which are more dangerousthan explosivesand which are dispatchedto unknown
addresseesas giftsbe supposedto invitethe recipientsto makecontact?That would
be like sending someone an invitationto a ball, but enclosing the invitationin a
letter-bomb.In the story'spresentationof it, this hypothesisis thereforethe one
which is most self-compromisedin view of the Zone'smacabrecharacteristics.
The hypothesisof an accident, on the other hand, not only explainsevents
quitenaturally,but also rehabilitatesat once the "others"as Sendersand the human
beings as Recipientsof a "Danaicgift"from the stars.The senders,far from being
guiltyof wrongdoing,have even-as was theirduty-foreseen the worstpossibility
and providedthe shipmentwith a safety device, thanksto which all of the Zone's
effects are confinedto a particularlocation. Accordingly,the Zone'speculiarityis
most simplyexplainedby the foresightof the senders,who, unableto eliminatethe
possibilityof an accident, thereforetook care that its consequenceswould be kept
withinbounds.The hypothesisof an accidentlikewiseexonerateshumankind,and
especially the learned, whose perplexityabout the gift becomes understandable,
given the additionaldifficultiesthey have to overcome because they do not know
whichof the propertiesof the objectsin the Zone wereintendedby the designersand
which are the resultof the damageincurredduringthe catastrophe.
It does not take long to explainwhy the authorssilentlypassedour versionof
the landingby.It couldnot pleasethembecauseit detractsfromthe work'smenacing
and hence mysteriousatmosphere.Still,theirerrorlies in just this silence about the
possibilityof an accident.We understandquite well why they chose this course. In
the meetingof the civilizations,both sides were meantto be discredited.Men agree
on usingthe gift only in baseand self-destructivewaysbecausethatis humannature;
and the Sendersprove theirmurderousindifferenceto humanitybecause beingsof
high intelligencedo not give a damnabout theirintellectualinferiors.So extremea
versionof the invasiontheme would have deservedliteraryrepresentation,all the
moresince it surpasseseverythingwhichSF has so faraccomplishedin thisdirection.
But in that case the narrativewould have had to rule out our hypothesisabout the

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUT THE STRUGATSKYS'ROADSIDEPICNIC 329

damagedgift; it would havehad to bringit to grieffromthe outset-that is, it ought

to have discreditedit. Silence about it, on the other hand, thoughintendedto con-
sign our versionto oblivion,constituteda mistakenauthorialtactic.
From what has been said, conclusionsof a more general nature arise with
regardto the optimalstrategyfor dealingwith the invasiontheme.4In orderto carry
out the strategyof preservingthe mystery,two requirementshave to be rigorously
fulfilled.Firstof all, the authormust not arousethe suspicionthat certainfacts are
being hiddenfrom the reader,facts beknownto the fictive heroes (all of Roadside
Picnic'sprotagonistsmustknow,forexample,whetheranotherZone, asidefromthe
one in Harmont,also lies withina city'slimits).The readermust remainconvinced
that the informationthe authorimpartsis, withinthe limitsof possibility,complete.
The mysterythen will be kept hiddenby the very unfoldingand presentationof the
depictedevents,whichcreate,as it were,an impenetrablemaskbehindwhichno one
can see. Otherwisethiseffect can be achievedonly througha veryprecisebalancing
of the facts. They may neitherpoint in one directiontoo unequivocally,nor over-
whelm us by being all too chaoticallydiffuse. What they attest to must remain
undecided,on the divide,as it were,betweendivergingaltematives,withoutinclining
definitivelytowardsany one side.
Now our excellentauthorshavedefeatedtheirown purposesby maligningthe
visitorsat the end of theirstory.That the Golden Ballis supposedto fulfillwishesis,
of course, a naive belief,one of those popularlegendswhichrose up in the wakeof
the visit.It was clearto the authorsthattheycould not makean infernalmachineout
of this Ball, since that wouldhave been an exaggerationwhichwouldhavechanged
the meaningof their book: it would have transformedthe Zone from something
ambiguous,albeitdismal,into an unequivocaltrapfor humankind.Thereforethey
made the Golden Ballinto an almostneutralobjectandlet deathstandnot in it, but
right beside it, as a "transparentemptinessthat was lurkingin the shadow of the
excavator'sbucket"(4:143), a nothingnessthat throttlesArthurbefore Redrick's
eyes.Comparingthe firstexpeditionintothe Zone thatRedrickundertakes(together
withPanov)withthe last(which,in the companyof Arthur,leadsto the GoldenBall),
one recognizesthatthe latteradventurehas the structureof a "blackfairytale."The
fairy-talequalityis not difficultto spot: like a valiantknight-errant
seekingthe elixir
of life or a magic ring,the heroes mustovercomedreadfuland dangerousobstacles
whilestrivingtowarda highlyvaluedtreasure.Furthermore,Redrickknowsthatthe
approachto the Golden Ball is barredby a mysterious"grinder" (4:130)whichone
must"satiate"by bringingit a humansacrifice.That is whyhe lets Arthurbe the first
to approachthe sphere-and in fact Arthurdies before his eyes, and his death
momentarilybreaks the evil spell, so that Redrickin his turn can then reach the
GoldenBall.At thatpoint,the authorsbreakoff the taleandsubscribethe wordfinis.
This, however,is a way out which merely attenuatesthe shape of thingswithout
alteringit.
The authors claim-and I have discussed this point with them-that the
convergencein the GoldenBallof fairy-talemotifandthe Horrificoriginatessolelyin
the humanmind and is a productof chance and humanphantasy.Yet as we have
previouslystated,one mustnot arrangeall too many"coincidences" whichall point
in one andthe samedirection;forit thenbecomesincrediblethattheycameaboutby
chance. Besides, the last expedition into the Zone does not have the generic
attributesof SE The realisticframefor the eventstransformsitselfinto thatof a fairy
tale,5becausethe "coincidences" followingthe one uponthe nextamount,as we have
alreadyobserved, to the stereotypicquest for the accursed treasure,though they
oughtnot be identicalwithanystereotype.The mysteryis not consistentlypreserved
to the very end; behindit, the truthkeeps shimmeringthrough,since we no doubt
have an idea about who the visitors are: they are, once more, monsters,albeit

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
330 STUDIES,VOLUME10 (1983)
SCIENCE-FICTION

invisiblemonsters.
The authorsattempt to distractthe reader from this thought, which flatly
forces itself upon us. They stress, for example, that the Golden Ball seen from a
distancegives the impressionthat an unknowngiant has accidentallylost it. That,
however,is not the correct tactic. It is not the authors'commentarywhich should
divertus from the structurallyobtrusivesolution,but the events themselvesin their
objective unfolding.Then, too, the strong impact the epilogue makes spoils the
outstandingimpressionthe book makesoverall.
Max Frischtransposedthe Oedipusmythinto our contemporaryrealityin his
novel Homo Faber, wherein the fatheras unknowinglyenters into an incestuous
relationshipwith his daughteras Oedipusdid with his mother.Frischmanagedthe
eventsof the novelin sucha waythateach possessesa normal,realisticverisimilitude,
while together they structurallycorrespondto the Oedipusmyth. The difference
betweenHomo Faber'saffinityfor mythandRoadsidePicnic'sfor the fairytale lies
herein:that Frischhad in mind the achievedsimilaritywhile the Strugatskysby no
meansdesiredit. That is the veryreasonwhyI say thatthey"havedefeatedtheirown
purposes,"becauseonly discretionin the arrangementof eventscould haveguarded
the end of the storyagainstan unwantedconnectionwith the main plot and hence
with the ethos of a fairytale.
A theologianwouldhavehad no difficultypreservingthe mysteryin Roadside
Picnic, for he can employ contradictions.But since science does not have such a
recourse,it is not an exaggerationfor me to say thatthe difficultiesof a fantasywriter
who sideswithscience aregenerallygreaterthanthoseof a theologianwho acknowl-
edges the perfectionof God....

NOTES
1. The foregoingessay,subscribed"July1975"in the Polishoriginal,has been
translated fromthetextthatappearedas theAfterwordto ArkadyandBorisStrugatsky's
Picknickam Wegesrand (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp,1981),pp. 189-215.The essayfirstcame
out as an appendixto the Polishtranslation Piknicna obocine:Piknik
of the Strugatskysg
naskrajudrogi(Krakow:Wydawnictwo Literackie,1977),pp.265-88.Forthislastbitof
information, andfor his generousassistancein checkingour renderingof Lem,we are
indebtedto Dr FranzRottensteiner, who,however,is not to be heldaccountableforour
errors.We are equallygratefulto ElizabethKwasniewskifor her help and patiencein
correctingthe Englishtranslation againstthe originalPolish.[RMPJ
2. Parentheticalreferences(whichthe translators havesupplied)are to Roadside
Picnic,trans.AntoninaW.Bouis(NY:Macmillan,1977).ThisvolumealsoincludesTale
of the Troika.IRMPI
3. Our entire explanation,which providesa new interpretationof the riddle
presentedbythelandinginRoadsidePicnic,mayseemto be anaberration broughton by
excessivepedantry, allthemoreso since,afterall,we arenotanalyzinga realevent,buta
literaryfiction.Buttrulyscientificfantasyis distinguished byjustthis:thatone cansubject
the eventsdescribedin it andtheirrationaldepictionto the sameproofof coherenceas
phenomenathatoccurin the extraliterary world.Sucha workmaystartwitha fictive,
evenanextremelyfictive,premise.Yetthisauthorizesonlyaninitialpoeticlicense,which
losesitsvaliditywithinthestoryitself.Thismeansthatthestory-teller maynot,withinthe
story,continueto help himselfalong by the ad hoc inventionof whateverthingsor
phenomenastrikehisfancy.Fairytalesmayoperatewithsuchad hoc inventions; forthey
arenotat allrequiredto explainlogicallyor empirically themiraculous occurrencesthey
depict.An SFstorywhichmakesthisfairy-tale licenseitsownleavestherealmof thereal
worldandputsitselfin thepositionof thefairytale,in whicheverythingwhichis thought
of or saidfor thatveryreasoninstantlybecomespossibleandmustbe unquestioningly
acceptedastruecoinbythereader.Inshort,thoughthefactsinanSFstorymaybe fictive,

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 ABOUTTHESTRUGATSKYS'
ROADSIDE
PICNIC 331

the way in which science in the fiction interpretsthese facts may not. Scientific theories
change; but what does not change is the method of discoverywhich characterizesscience,
and it is precisely this methodology which dictates a certain type of hypothesis-formation
in SE Accordingly, our polemic, as an example of how criticism of SF should typically
proceed, can be applied mutatismutandisto every work which fulfillsthe main criteriaof
this genre.
4. We are presenting the hypothesis of the calamity in its simplest, which does not
mean its most probable, version. For example, an unmanned spaceship with containers
might have been sent forth without any fixed addressee in mind; it might have been
outfitted with sensors which would recognize the planet to be "gifted"by virtue of
predeterminedparameters(such as its averagetemperature;its atmosphericcomposition,
particularlythe presence of free oxygen and water; an orbit favorable to ecological
development; etc.). Such an automatically-pilotedvehicle could have approachedvarious
starson a scouting mission. However, because it is physicallyimpossible to manufacture
technological products to survive undamaged over a journey of indeterminate length
(which may take millions of earth-years),such a vehicle must have been provided with a
device which would automaticallydestroy the contents when their "shelf-life"had ended.
Such a vehicle could have entered our solar system as the "shelf-life'of the articles was
nearing the expiry date. After all, it could also have been that the self-destructiondid not
occur only because the ship's surveillance system discovered Earth and dispersed the
containers with their "partiallyspoiled" contents. The degree of damage to individual
surveillance,steering, and control systems is uncertain;only the statisticalprobabilityof
damage can be determined-i.e., the one thing absolutely certain is that the probability
of defects occurring in the programs and their execution system increases with the
passage of time. I should emphasize this point: the more complicated a device, the more
inevitable are breakdowns over the course of time; this is a universal law which is
independent of where in the cosmos the technology was produced or how. Therefore,
the enterprise of learning about the aliens-what the Strugatskyscall xenology-must
take the statisticalprobabilityaspect of intercivilizationalcontact into account as some-
thing crucial for interpretingsuch visits.
5. The degree to which the authors followed the fairy tale's structuralpattern in
their epilogue can, for example, be seen in the passage in which "blacktwisted stalactites
that looked like fat candles"(4:141) are mentioned. These are all that is left of the people
the Golden Ball has killed-that is, all that is left of Redrick'sand Arthur'spredecessorsin
the quest for the accursed treasure.In fairy tales such remains- the bones of daredevils
who ranout of luck- usuallylie at the entrance of the dragon'scave, at the foot of the glass
mountain, etc.

Stanislav Lem. A propos du Pick-nick au bord de la route des frdres Strougatsky.-

La strategie que les theologiens appliquent ordinairement'aleur PrincipalSujet n'estpas
de celles qui s'offrent'al'rcivain de SE Le myste~rede l'extraterrestre,a la difference du
mystelrede Dieu, ne peut etre preserve par le recours 'ades contradictionsdogmatique-
ment imposees: ce serait trahir la nature de la science-fiction.... La pre'sentationde
lIextraterrestren'estpas sans probleme toutefois. Wells,en faisant de ses Martiens des
etres physiquement hideux, les laisse intellectuellement et socialement indetermines;
leurs motifspour envahir notre planletedemeure de trop reconnaissablescaricaturesde
motivationshumaineset compromet leur etrangete. La legion d'imitateursqui ont repris
Wellset cherche 'asurpasser le "monstrueux"des Martiens de Guerre des mondes ont
regle les problemes en privant les Envahisseurscosmiques de toute motivationintelligible
et n'ontproduit qu'une sorte de conte de fee inverse au lieu d'une auithentiqueSE:
Lesfreres Strougatskyont trouve une excellente manierede s'en tirerqui consiste 'a
ne pas depeindre les extraterrestresdu tout. Pas le moindre aperqusur les Visiteurs,rien

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
332 SCIENCE-FICTION
STUDIES,VOLUME10 (1983)

que les resultatsconcrets de leurpassage. Ici, enormement de details, qui, vus de fa,on
microscopique si l'on peut dire, demeurent tout juste cela: des details. En ce qui
concerne la source et la significationdes terriblesobjets construits'aHarmont Zone, on
n'enfinit pas de theoriser,mais le Dr Pilmanfavorise une explication ultime: il s'agitdes
detritusd'unpick-nick extraterrestreau bord de la route. Les 'pillards"quiselivrenta des
incursions dans la Zone en vue d'en tirerprofit semblent inventes pour discrediter les
deux parties dans cette rencontre de deux civilisations.Les humains se conduisent de
fa,on basse et auto-destructive;les Visiteurs ne montrent 'a l'humanitequ'une indiffe-
rence meurtriere.Le recit n'exclutpas la possibilite, qui detruiraitla significationsuggeree
ici: celle que les objetse'taientcontenus dans un engin d'explorationqui se seraitbrisepres
de notre planete et dont les elements seraient amrvessur terre en mauvais e'tat. Cette
hypothese ne correspondpas 'al'analogiesuggeree par le titre cependant.
A cette faiblesse, la fa,con de conclure des freres S. en ajoute une autre. Avec la
qu'te de la Balle d'Ormenee parArthuretRedrick, le recits'acheve en conte defee, effet
discordant et fdcheux par rapport au reste du livre. De telles faiblesses montrent les
difficult&squ'ily a 'avouloirpreserverle mystere de la SF'a traversle deroulement meme
de l'intrigueet la presentation des evenements. (RMP)

Abstract.- The strategy theologians apply to their principal subject is not properly
available to the writer of SE. The mystery of the Alien, unlike that of God, cannot be
preserved by resortingto dogmaticallyimposed contradictionswithoutbetrayingthe true
natureof science fiction. Yetpresenting the Alien has itsproblems. H. G. Wells' approach
in makinghis Martiansphysicallyhideousleft them mentallyand socially unreconstructed;
their motivesfor invadingEarth remain recognizable caricaturesof human thinkingand
hence compromise their Otherness.However, the legion of imitators who have debased
the example of The War of the Worldsin trying to outdo it in the realm of monstrosity
have disposed of that problem by neglecting to furnish their Cosmic Invaders with any
motive whatever only to supply themselves with another; by substituting a malign,
invertedfairy-tale universefor the real world that SF should model itself after
The best way out of such difficultieslies with the method the Strugatskysadopt in
RoadsidePicnic:of not-depicting the Alien. They never allow us a sight of thg Visitors,
only the concrete resultsof their "landing."About the latter the authors offer us plenty of
details, which viewed microscopically,as it were, remainexactly that:details. Concerning
the source and significance of the deadly objects that have constituted themselves as
Harnont's Zone there is no end of theorizing; but the explanationfinally favored, Dr
Pilman's,is the one the title anticipates:that we are dealing with the debrisfrom an Alien
roadsidepicnic.
Withinthe context of such a hypothesis, the Strugatskys'focuson the lives of the
"stalkers,"who makeperilousforays into the Zone inpursuit ofprofit, seems designed to
discreditboth sides in the meeting of two civilizations.The humanbeings behave solely in
base and self-destructiveways, while the Visitorsprove their murderousindifference to
humanity. Unfortunately,however, the fiction does not exclude a possibility that under-
mines this intended meaning: that the objects were contained in a space-probe vehicle
which broke apart upon nearing our planet; that consequently raining down on Earth,
they arrivedin damaged condition. Thisaccident would account in the most economical
wayfor all the 'fictifacts,"but it does not comport with the authors'title analogy.
If their oversight in failing to rule out the hypothesis of a "damagedgift" is one
defect of RoadsidePicnic, the Strugatskys'manner of concluding their narrative is
another With Arthur and Redrick's quest for the Golden Ball, the fiction becomes
fairy-tale-like-an unintended effect at odds with the book's overall impression. That so
highlycommendable an attempt to treatthe theme of CosmicInvasionshould sufferfrom
these weaknesses underscoresthe difficultiesto be encountered in tryingto carryout the
optimal strategy of preserving the SF mystery through the very unfoldingand presenta-
tion of the fictional events. (RMP)

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.227 on Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:00:39 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions