What an Amazing Future There Will Be*

If you think about it there are all kinds of scientific inventions we use every day that we couldn’t have imagined just a couple of decades ago. It’s actually pretty amazing. For instance a lot of people have given up their landlines entirely and now communicate exclusively on mobile telephones. I’ll get to other examples in just a bit; for now, just think of the difference mobile and satellite technology has made in our lives. It’s true in real life and we certainly see it in crime fiction.

For instance in Martin Edwards’ The Serpent Pool, DCI Hannah Scarlett and her team investigate the six-year-old drowning death of Bethany Friend. It turns out that her death may be related to two other, more recent, deaths. So Scarlett works with her friend and colleague Fern Larter, who is in charge of those investigations, to find out how the murders are connected and who is responsible for them. At one point in the novel Scarlett arranges to meet with Oxford historian Daniel Kind to discuss the case with him. Kind’s running late but it’s not a huge problem; all he has to do is send a text message to Scarlett telling her he’s delayed in traffic. That couldn’t have happened fifteen years ago.

We see a similar advance in C.J. Box’s Below Zero. In that novel Wyoming game warden Joe Pickett is up against the Mad Archer, an unknown hunter who’s illegally shooting game and leaving them to die. Pickett rushes home when his daughter Sheridan begins to receive eerie text messages from the Pickett family’s step-daughter April Keeley, whom everyone thinks was tragically killed six years ago. Pickett wants to find April if she is still alive. If she has died he wants to know who knew so much about April that it was possible to feign her identity. Neither this mystery nor its solution would have been possible just ten or twelve years ago.

And what about the joystick? Val McDermid’s video-game-loving sleuth Tony Hill would probably find it quite difficult to get along without this scientific invention. Hill is a profiler who works most frequently with DCI Carol Jordan and sometimes his work is both dangerous and difficult. It takes quite a toll on Hill so it makes sense that he’d want something to help him relax. Video games are his choice. Without the invention of the joystick his whole character would be different. Fans of Tony Hill will likely agree that part of what makes him unique is his attachment to gaming.

In Lindy Cameron’s Redback, the joystick takes on a more sinister purpose. In that novel, a crack Australian team of retrieval specialists have earned a reputation as experts in getting people out of extremely dangerous situations. This time they’re up against one of the most dangerous enemies they’ve ever faced. Several horrible terrorist attacks and a murder have occurred in different parts of the world. When Team Redback finds out they track down the threads that tie these terrorist acts together. They discover that a behind-the-scenes group of terrorists is using a video game called Global WarTek to recruit new members and give them instructions. Joystick technology isn’t mentioned specifically in this novel, but it’s an essential part of modern gaming.

And what about the modern microchip? We can all think of dozens and dozens of crime novels in which computer technology is critical. I’ll just mention two examples. Stieg Larsson’s Millennium trilogy features computer wizard Lisbeth Salander. In those novels, Salander proves herself a master of the microchip as she tracks down information, hacks others’ computers and manipulates all sorts of financial transactions.

There’s also Kerry Greenwood’s Heavenly Pleasures. In that novel, Greenwood’s sleuth Corinna Chapman and her lover Daniel Cohen investigate a few mysteries, one of which is a bomb in the building in which Chapman lives and works. The bomb may be related to a case Cohen’s been investigating – a self-proclaimed messiah who’s been luring young people away from their homes. Or it could be related to a case of poisoned chocolates at Heavenly Pleasures, a confectionary located in the same building. Or it could have something to do with a mysterious new resident in the building. The key to the bombing turns out to be information that’s stored digitally – something that couldn’t be done before the advent of the microchip.

Oh, and then there’s enhanced photography. Photographs prove essential in Maj Sjöwall and Per Wahlöö’s Roseanna. In that novel Stockholm police detective Martin Beck and his team solve the murder of twenty-seven-year-old Roseanna McGraw. She’s an American who’s murdered during a holiday cruise in Sweden. What makes this case challenging is that when the victim’s body is discovered there is no identification with it. At the time this novel was written there was no DNA testing so it takes weeks for the body to be identified. Finally Roseanna McGraw is identified but communicating with Nebraska police lieutenant Elmer Kafka is challenging. At the time this novel was written there was no satellite technology that would have made a transatlantic telephone call easy. A break in the case finally comes when the police start paying attention to photographs that other tourists took of the cruise. That phase of the investigation takes a long time too because developing the ‘photos takes time. Besides, they’re not high-resolution quality. All in all it takes months for Martin Beck and his team to track down Roseanna McGraw’s killer. Can you imagine how much more quickly the team could have cracked this case if they’d had satellite technology and digital imaging?

So where did all of these great developments I’ve mentioned here come from? That’s right. Scientific research. Science, the scientific method and the scientific approach to inquiry has led to more advances than I could ever mention in a year of posting. Suffice it to say that the decades of research that so many scientists have engaged in have revolutionised the way we live. And that, to me, is a good thing.

 

ps. Want an example of what I mean? Today’s post, including the ‘photo, was planned, written and posted to my blog using a tablet computer that fits in a medium-sized handbag. Ain’t science amazing?
 

Oh, and at the risk of going on too long on this topic, tomorrow I’ll be taking a look at some crime fiction that features scientists. Here’s to ‘em!

 
 
In Memoriam…

 


 

This post is dedicated to the memory of Neil Armstrong. Not only was he a noted astronaut but also, he was a dedicated scientist. All of the developments I’ve mentioned in today’s post came about because of the space program that took Armstrong and his colleagues to the moon. He was one of those who boldly went…

 
 
 

Note: The title of this post is a line from Billy Joel’s Two Thousand Years.

About these ads

23 Comments

Filed under C.J. Box, Kerry Greenwood, Lindy Cameron, Maj Sjöwall, Martin Edwards, Per Wahlöö, Val McDermid

23 Responses to What an Amazing Future There Will Be*

  1. Yes, science is amazing, I agree, Margot, and Neil Armstrong was a wonderful inspiration to many, including me as a young teenager. Looking forward to your next post – I do hope you find a few nice ones as scientists in fiction are usually not very pleasant people – unlike real life ;-)

    (PS I think you may mean C J Box rather than Craig Johnson?)

    • Maxine – First, right you are indeed about C.J. Box! How very embarrasing and my sincere apologies to Mr. Box. I’ll change the post right away *blush.* Never post to a blog wthout having had enough coffee… Neil Armstrong was indeed an inspiration. I still remember watching that lunar landing and thinking how wonderful it must be. And you’re right that we need more sympathetic fictional scientists. It’s a pity as scientists really are good people as a rule. OK, now to fix my blunder… *another blush.*

  2. kathy d.

    This is a good point. Our beloved Signorina Elettra Zorzi wouldn’t be able to search data bases and get information for Commissario Brunetti, without the high-tech world involving the Internet and whatever super-computer skills (um, “hacking” — do we dare say it?) and intelligence she has. Without the advances in computer hard-ware and soft-ward, Brunetti would be sending subordinates to various governmental agencies to look through huge files, books, stacks of papers, bookshelves. A nightmare!
    Footwork, visiting the crime scene, interviewing relatives, friends and suspects in person is still needed –and where would we readers be without them, but scientific development has certainly aided investigations.

    • Kathy – You make two really important points here. One is that characters such as Elettra Zorzi couldn’t do their jobs and be the kinds of characters they are if it weren’t for the kind of technological developments that scientific research has made possible. As you say, that would leave both fictional and real cops with no choice but to leaf through rooms full of paper. Who has time for that? Not to mention the greater accuracy of technology such as DNA testing. At the same time though, there is a critical place in criminal investigation for interviews, following up leads, looking for clues and so on. That’s what makes, as Peter Lovesey’s would say, a real detective.

  3. If you compare Casino Royale, the first book James Bond appeared, written by Ian Fleming, to the last James Bond movie, how science has exploded. I remember seeing the earlier movies and thinking wow! Then I saw the latest and was really impressed with their gadgets. Or in Stephen Temp’s book “Breakthrough”, where wormholes are used to travel around and commit murders. Science is amazing!

    • Judy- Oh, that’s a good example of exactly the kind of thing I mean! Thank you. The developments over the decades in high-tech gadgets for James Bond and other thriller series is pretty amazing isn’t it?

  4. No need to blush, Margot – we all make mistakes (me many more than you do). Just wanted to add – the Parlympic Games starts tonight here in London (well, the opening ceremony is tonight) and there was an apt letter in the Times today (not avail online) making the good point that we should also be honouring the engineers and scientists who have developed all these amazing prosthetic limbs, wheelchairs, etc. I agree, that these kinds of aids have evolved tremendously (even though not available on our NHS, sadly!).

    • Maxine – Pity that letter isn’t available online. I think it makes a very well-taken point and I appreciate your mentioning it. Those with disabilities have more options now than ever and quite a lot the reason for that is the developments in technology to assist them. You put me in mind of a dear friend of mine whose nearly-11-year-old son has autism. He’s got an iPad with special communication apps that allow him to engage in conversation with people in ways that were not imaginable just fifteen years ago. Thanks for bringing this up.

  5. An interesting spin off from the speed of technological change is the way it forces authors to think very carefully about chronological setting. To be credible, the writer may have to consider what gadgets, channels etc the characters might employ at an increasingly specific time. Would the victim be using Facebook is an obvious example…

    • Philip – That’s quite true. One can’t have a believable story if the author makes reference to technology that’s not available at the time the story takes place. Or if the author doesn’t make reference to technology that is. I like your Facebook example as good instance of this. Many novels are deliberately vague on the subject of technology for that reason and they stick to generalities. I can’t blame the authors for taking that decision either; too much focus on technology can date a book and means the author has to be particularly painstaking in research on the topic.

  6. Funny to see this because yesterday the five-year old grandson asked us if there was anything scientists couldn’t fix. If only.

  7. My daughter would love to be a scientist. :) And Armstrong will be missed…an amazing man. Thanks for this look at science in mysteries!

    • Elizabeth – I’m happy for both you and your daughter that she has an interest in science. I wish her well on her quest, but with a mom like you, she’ll do fine. :-) – And yes indeed, Armstrong was amazing.

  8. I’m such a Luddite I don’t even own a cell phone but I keep up to date on all such new devices through the mysteries I read. At least I know what others can do with them, but I don’t feel the need (yet) to own them for myself. :)

    • Barbara – I’ll bet you have a lot fewer distractions and annoyances because you aren’t “wired in.” Science is amazing but that doesn’t mean it’s without its problems…

  9. Pingback: Armed With the Faith and the Will That Even the Darkest Ages Couldn’t Kill* | Confessions of a Mystery Novelist…

  10. I think the advance of computer technology is amazing and at the moment, the benefits seem to outweigh the disadvantages. I think crime fiction books have to be careful sometimes to make sure references don’t become too dated. However, I like the fact that Sue Grafton has left Kinsey in the 1980s. It makes the plots so much more interesting without those cell phones.

    • Sarah – You make two very good points here. One is that crime fiction books can seem dated if the references to technology are so specific as to date the novels when the next big advance is available. I’ve read books like that and that dated-ness does pull one of the story. The other well-taken point you make is that authors such as Grafton can solve this problem neatly by setting their series at a certain historical point. It’s an effective way to cope with the issue I think.

  11. kathy d.

    I’m definitely a confirmed, unequivocal Luddite — and proud of it. Of course, I’m glad of the scientific and technological developments, especially with regard to medicine, but also communication. I mean, we can access so many wonderful blogs, read news, look up medical discoveries, learn so much every day.
    However, I have not caved and bought a Kindle, although sometime I might so that if I’m somewhere waiting for someone, I can read. Or if I really cannot access an enticing book any other way. I love paper books and I won’t give them up unless it’s absolutely necessary.
    I’m for everyone who wants various gadgets, if they help them, then get it (although I worry about people who must have the next new thing, if it’s expensive and really not needed.). I’d hate to be the parent of children who want new gadgets, if they don’t need them. What a pull on them through advertising.

    • Kathy – No doubt about it; there’s something about an actual paper book. I love ‘em too even though I do richly enjoy having my Kindle too. You make an interesting point too about the power that advertisers can have over people. Just as an example, at the moment, if you go to Amazon’s US Kindle store you’ll find that the Kindle Fire isn’t available new. I read an article suggesting that that’s because Amazon is launching a new version of the Kindle Fire and wants to whet people’s appetites for it.
       
      And as far as I’m concerned, preferring paper books to ebooks doesn’t make you a Luddite. I think lots of people prefer books the old-fashioned way.

  12. Oh. I replied to this post, the day you put it up, but it’s not here. I did it on the wordpress app on my phone, so it probably went wrong somewhere.

    Technological advancement is amazing. I read somewhere the other day, and I don’t know if it is true or not, but it probably is considering the amount of time that has passed, that the computers that worked the space shuttle that went to the moon had less power than the ones that run our home computers nowadays! That is some scary information. Neil Armstrong and crew were amazing men doing what they did. He will forever be remembered.

    • Rebecca – Sorry to hear the WordPress app didn’t work. That is really annoying. You make such a well-taken point about the moon landing too. I’ve read (and like you I don’t know how completely true this is) that the computers used for the moon landing had less functionality than today’s mobile ‘phone does. That really is scary isn’t it? But that’s part of why I so much admired Armstrong and his colleagues. They took so many risks and a big part of the reason was that they wanted to know what’s out there. Now that is scientific inquiry…

What's your view? I'd love to hear it.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s