We extend this call for papers to all those writers, historians, cultural studies, film studies and literary critics who are interested in pursuing the theme of history and science-fiction, or science-fiction and history.

H.G. Wells wrote both ‘The Time Machine’ and An Outline of History. History and science-fiction – the study of the past and the dreams of the future – are closely interlinked. Both involve a fascination with the effects of time; both are interested in the causes of change; both raise questions about what it means to be human. And, arguably, both works of SF and works of history tell us as much about the times in which they were written as the periods they depict.

In both cases, our definitions are comfortably broad: ‘history’ can cover any period, both academic and popular authors, and indeed non-written forms of media. Science-fiction in books, on television, as movies, or radio shows – all is welcome, and the boundaries defining SF are (in the first instance) up to you. Papers can focus on particular texts or case studies, or range more broadly across a theme.

We are interested in papers that address: the direct influence of historical theory (Spengler, Toynbee, Hegel, Marx, whoever) on SF; why ‘cyclical’ theories of history no longer excite SF writers; the differences between historical, archaeological, and anthropological conceptions of time, change and causation, and how they are played out in SF arenas; whether SF modes of emplotment, imagery or conceptualisation have influenced historians and history; why the middle ages belong to Fantasy whilst the early modern period has recently been plundered by SF (eg Peter Hamilton, Ken MacLeod); whether historical ‘accuracy’ matters in any way in relation to SF; the differences between SF that ‘replays’ historical events (eg Babylon 5) and SF that rewrites them (eg The Difference Engine); science-fictional ‘theories’ of history (eg Asimov’s psychohistory) and SF’s emplotment of future histories (eg Iain M. Banks’ Culture novels); the mechanics and purpose of alternate histories, whether as background context (Jon Courtenay Grimwood) or plot engine (Kim Stanley Robinson); the differences between near future (eg David Foster Wallace’s Infinite Jest) and far future (eg Walter Miller’s A Canticle for Leibowitz) histories; whether there are differences between American and British SF attitudes towards history and change, whether these are bound up with their respective national pasts, and how these relate to non-AngloAmerican SF/history. Above all else, what are the politics of SF’s relationship to history – its theories of social organization, its concepts of ‘progress’, its understanding of change and causation?

If you are interested in contributing to the planned volume, please submit a c. 300 word proposal to either of the editors, by 31st January 2003, at the addresses below:

John H. Arnold is a medieval historian at Birkbeck College, University of London, and author of History: A Very Short Introduction (2000) and Inquisition and Power (2001), as well as essays on horror movies and science fiction.

Karen Sayer is a modern historian at Trinity and All Saints College, Leeds, and author of Women of the Fields (1995), Country Cottages: A Cultural History (2000) and co-editor of Science Fiction, Critical Frontiers (2000).