Jenn Carlson
Soon to infamous director, former NU Cadet, actress, director, sci fi afficienado
Norwich University: The Military College of Vermont Class of 1999
https://www.angelfire.com/vt/asimovchild
https://www.angelfire.com/vt/asimovchild
jenn@lloyddoblereffect.com
Well my page is a reflection of me, a contradiction. Shakespeare and Asimov are my favorite authors, Star Trek: TNG, X-Files, Law and Order, Buffy, Angel and the Dead Zone, my favorite shows.
I will add to the insanity in my own way... just give me time. In the meantime those like my favorite band, and damn good buddies the Lloyd Dobler Effect are stirring the pot. Check them out if you like a band who is intense and not preprocessed for your listening enjoyment...
I have spent the last five years at Norwich University: The Military College of Vermont . While I was there I spent most of the time with my friends, the Air Hooch , or my theater group Pegasus Players .
I also have a passion for the movies, so in tribute I include my Movie page with quotes and reviews to follow... You can also get into my poetry if you think you can handle it. Welcome to my world...
A LETTER TO THE NEXT GENERATION
VON ISAAC ASIMOV
America´s Futurologist and Most Prolific Writer
I can only plead for understanding. It was probably difficult, looking back from your position in the future, to understand how hard it was to step away from the old shibboleth of the phrase "national security." It was hard to do so, even when the reasoning was simple. Suppose that back in 1989 the mayor of a large American city proposed to take action that woluld clearly harm the nation, and he defended that action by saying it was for the good of the city; it was necessary for "city security." He would be told at once that the good of the city could not be advanced at the cost of harm to the nation. National security took clear precedence over city security, because if the nation went down, then the city would go down with it. If, on the other hand, the nation were secure and prospered, the city would, in the end, prosper, too, even if there were short-term inconveniences. Now raise that one step. What if the national security of United Satates (or any other nation) were advanced at the expence of the general security of the human species? Would not the same arguments hold? Could the nation take precedence over humanity? If humanity perished, would not the nation perish with it? If humanity flourished, would not the nation do so, too, even if there were some short-term inconveniences?
" Waiting for a crisis to force us to act globally runs the risk of making us wait too long. " If a nation cut down a large tropical forest, thus deleteriously affecting the Earth´s atmosphere, did it have the right to do what it wished? If a nation has poorly designed nuclear power stations that could accidentally spread radioactivity beyond its borders, is the nation´s need for energy sufficient excuse? It was not hard to understand that 1989. The human ability to affect the environment for the worse had grown to such a pitch that no nation had the right to do as it pleased without regard for other nations, and no nation could solve any important problem without the cooperation of other nations. All problems that were of any importance were global problems. All solutions that had any chance of working were global solutions. But how were we to get away from the outmoded 19th century, pre-nuclear notion of "national security" that kept us focused entirely on ourselves to the exelusion of humanity? How could we put an end to suspicions and hatreds of nation against nation, the antagonism a group naturally feels toward other languages, other ways, other appearances? As the crises deepened - the greenhouse effect grew more pronounced, pollution intensified, the globe´s hungry mouths continued to multiply - one hope for us was that fear of destruction would drive us together. That, however, is a negative solution. Waiting for a crisis to force us to act globally runs the risk of making us wait too long.
Some of us in 1989 felt the need for something positive and vital to do that would draw all the nations together to accomplish something that would offer magnificent returns. Was there an indication somewhere in history that this would work - that a positive solution was possible? Consider the United States in 1865. Four years of bloody civil war had cost us close to a million deaths. The southern states of the Confederacy, despite a gallant fight, were finally bludgeoned down by the superior resources of the North and were soon treated as a conquered nation to be looted at will. Would the southern states ever forgive? Would they ever return wholeheartedly to the Union? They did. There are other places on Earth, however, where old quarrels are not forgotten. There are ancient feuds in Northern Ireland, Sri Lanka, the Basque country and a dozen other places. How is it then that the, United States, despite the damage it inflicted upon itself, healed marvelously and left scarcely a scar behind? My feeling is that this came about because immediately after the Civil War came the "winning of the West." The western half of the American nation was settled and built up and made rich and prosperous by people arriving from every state, north and south. In the great common task of building an ever powerful and more prosperous nation, old feuds grew to seem little and unimportant.
How could we do that again? Easily. Out there, just beyond the atmosphere, is another frontier, much vaster, and incomprehensibly richer, than the American West. Even by 1989, the nations had accomplished much separately. Both the United States and the Soviet Union had completed great tasks. But to go farther, we needed more than the resources of any one nation. We needed global cooperation. This required the united effort of humanity. We imagined that nuclear power stations could be established in orbit through international labor. Such stations could absorb solar energy and beam it to Earth, where it could he converted to electricity. lt would be energy independent of geography. lf the power stations were built by all nations, the energy would belong to all nations, and there would be enough for all too. The stations would require regular maintenance, so that international cooperation would not be a one-time thing to fall apart once the project was done. lt would have to continue indefinitely, or the energy supply would falter. Any serious disorders on Earth would interfere with the energy supply. In short, energy would be available only if we continued to cooperate and take the global view. We would have a mining station on the Moon, automated factories in space, scientific laboratories and observatories in orbit, and settlements wheeling about Earth that house many thousands of people. In short, the winning of space by all nations, like the winning of the American West by all the states, would give us a great goal, would fill our hearts and minds with glory and satisfaction, and make narrow suspicions and hatreds seem small and unimportant. It has happened before and it could happen again. You of the future know this, because cooperation has happened again. But please try to understand how hard it was for us to understand all of this before it actually happened.
CURTAIN CALL
--by Jenn Carlson
A player walks the stage
Stalks it
Like a preying animal.
The lights go up
And as a mercenary born
He plays his part.
The words are scripted
The actions resolute.
And again he disappears into the wings.
The audience.
The audience of one
Does not understand
Remains before the dark stage.
Questions rebuffed by the black
Turns away.
The play finished and the player gone
The world again descends.
Her fear realized, she cries out.
"It's over damn you! Drop the curtain!"
Walks out between the rows
Alone.
And then there was silence
Save for the slamming door
Curtain call.
