“Horrer Howce” by Margaret St. Clair

First appeared in Galaxy, printed and reprinted by Horace L. Gold in one of his magazine’s retrospective anthologies. Also reprinted in major retrospectives by Frederik Pohl, Martin H. Greenberg, and Isaac Asimov.

Summary:

Freeman sells machines that create a realistic horror-house experience. He tries to sell his wares to Dickson-Hawes. Freeman has a creature that lives deep in a well and an unusual highway, hid behind padlocked doors, that looks normal until a black car speeds after another, caroming off the other until it’s forced off the road.

Commentary with Spoilers:

Arms from the black stretch out and reach into the other, ripping the arm off its victim. Freeman had made a big deal about Dickson-Hawes not yelling. He doesn’t and they manage to escape. However, the Voom, the driver of the black car, drives through the wall invading the presumed safety of the room, nabbing Dickson-Hawes. Freeman is disappointed that all of his buyers had been killed. He decides to sell his horror house ideas to the Voom.

It’s hard to say whether this complex tale was fully thought out. Freeman has created creatures and even Earth-like worlds with the help of unnamed higher beings—creatures that exhibit life-like qualities. He says—of course, he may be lying—that these creatures aren’t real, and that those who die aren’t real. Are they machines? Yet he treats them as if they had some sort of natural drive, requiring Dickson-Hawes to be quiet, which he does, but for some reason the Voom still want to kill him. Why him and not Freeman? The text doesn’t say. 

Despite their lack of reality (true? untrue?), Freeman decides he has exhausted all human buyers in a haunted house and decides to go to the Voom. Are the Voom stand-ins for humanity? They are violent, seemingly nonsensically. This is something beyond road rage. Yet do they also desire to be frightened by a horror house? Perhaps they deserve it. But did these horror house buyers deserve their fate, for simply wanting to give to humanity safe thrills, to approach impending death without dying? Perhaps we are all fools, courting death, standing so close to the guard rail that keeps us from tumbling off the Empire State Building.

The misspelling, as seen in the title, is effective when it first appears in the story since it suggests a childlike mind that is nonetheless interested in the macabre. Can a childlike mind safely create a horror house? But it may also suggest either under-education or a different society from a different universe where spellings have altered.

Put this in the maybe column for St. Clair classics. We readers do need to assume that writers meant to do what they do. You also have to admire how much she can cram into a short story that other writers would be hard-pressed to sneak into a novelette. This one does, like “Rocket to Limbo”, beg for a sequel as this ends just as it became most intriguing.

The Mad Scientist's Guide to World Domination: Original Short Fiction for the Modern Evil Genius, edited by John Joseph Adams

In preparing to review this John Joseph Adams anthology, I grappled with what it means to be a "mad scientist." The quintessential anthology was Stuart David Schiff's Mad Scientists. From these and from scientific ethics (at least that was why the subgenre originally arose), I distilled the quintessential elements of the sub-genre--that is, a scientist believes himself working for the greater good though he may not be. It seems that now, at least in reading the anthology under review, we have lost sight of the original point of the trope, which is both good and bad: good, in that we trust scientific endeavors (no questions asked); bad in that science, to be rigorous, requires that we ask questions, not just to challenge our assumptions bound to be behind any study but also to probe our own ethics.

I pointed to this story as the basis of the Mad Scientist trope. (I have other thoughts on the use of the trope here). Some stories just have a scientist doing something crazy, like Arthur C. Clarke's "Big Game Hunt" which has a scientist try to control a giant squid, but it lacks the dynamo that makes the sub-field fascinating.

Most famously, we have Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, the scientist who wanted to create life. What was his motivation: to bring back loved ones? to spawn new creatures? to play God? Whatever his motive, I think we can understand it at least to an extent, so long as we isolate his original motive from the outcome. Frankenstein's sin may be his lack of follow-through, or maybe just the attempt itself if you believe the movie versions. Whatever his motive and whatever his sin, it is their contrast that powers Shelley's famed novel. Otherwise, the mad-scientist tale comes off flat.

Some narratives contrast two ethical stances, one or both of which may be problematic (who is the mad or madder scientist?) Sometimes the mad one isn't even the ostensible mad scientist. While the narrator isn't always "mad" or a scientist, the ones who aren't problematic is some fundamental manner dull the narrative.

Many feature unreliable narrators, but that need not necessarily be as we witness in Frankenstein. As you can tell by the title of this anthology, the stories can run from humorous to the serious, but still a contrast between one's goal and ethical outcome make stronger stories. If it's just a gag, the story will fall flat.

• Professor Incognito Apologizes: An Itemized List • short story by Austin Grossman

This is an apology told in the mad scientist's voice, which is this story's primary strength. It feigns at the mad scientist trope to talk as a metaphor for the failure of relationships.

• Father of the Groom • short story by Harry Turtledove

This literalizes a common joke about bad brides. 

• Laughter at the Academy: A Field Study in the Genesis of Schizotypal Creative Genius Personality Disorder (SCGPD) • short story by Seanan McGuire

Interesting thought-piece on the creation of mad scientists.

• Letter to the Editor • short story by David D. Levine

This is a kind of tour-de-force critique of Superman (or Ultimate man) with a call to action. What makes this succeed is the switch on whom we should root for. The ending doesn't carry the same weight, but as a letter-to-an-editor format, it's still impressive for those limitations. 

• Instead of a Loving Heart • short story by Jeremiah Tolbert

A robot, who serves a mad scientist, has to contemplate his existence against the impending arrival of something more intelligent and more powerful than anything that has existed before.

• The Executor • short story by Daniel H. Wilson

A mad scientist has set up a legacy for his descendants, but in order to get it, someone has to answer the riddle within five seconds.

• The Angel of Death Has a Business Plan • short story by Heather Lindsley

The protagonist works with mad scientists on their monologue. Cute.

• Homo Perfectus • short story by Dave Farland

Damien uses pheromones to get in with Asia, but as he approaches what he thinks he wants, he recognizes a subtler and more accurate approach.

• Ancient Equations • short story by L. A. Banks

A mad scientist need not use science but call up Kali, for more than one reason.

• Rural Singularity • short story by Alan Dean Foster

A reporter finds a young girl capable of miracles--scientific ones--but he doesn't quite buy into what he's told. Interesting but ends still questing for significance.

• Captain Justice Saves the Day • short story by Genevieve Valentine

A good secretary is needed to keep these guys in line--not that they'll ever notice.

• The Mad Scientist's Daughter • novelette by Theodora Goss

This was a runner-up for the Locus award. It has inherent drama just from the scenario: a bunch of mad scientists' daughters gather to tell their stories. They are neglected and abused but from so great a remove that the narrative gears are absent. Interesting concept, though.

• The Space Between • novella by Diana Gabaldon

While this sounded interesting, it may require knowledge of the series, which I have yet to explore. It seems interesting, but probably not a good entry point into the series.

• Harry and Marlowe Meet the Founder of the Aetherian Revolution • short story by Carrie Vaughn

Carrie Vaughn gives a thrilling episode in her series with. Although the story can be appreciated alone, it would help the reader to be versed in the background of this dynamic duo. Their relationship seems to be developed elsewhere.

• Blood & Stardust • short story by Laird Barron

Laird Barron has an ugly henchwoman who was been raised as the mad scientist's child but steps out (see also Goss's work, albeit a bit more dynamic)

• A More Perfect Union • short story by L. E. Modesitt, Jr.

L. E. Modesitt, Jr., more than most of the writers here, really works on the trope in "A More Perfect Union" and takes it into an interesting direction: political science. Unfortunately, the writer must have had constraints for the tale isn't as engagingly told as it could be.

• Rocks Fall • short story by Naomi Novik

Naomi Novik's "Rock Fall is more of superhero comic-book villain, but the scenario is the setup is unique. The follow-through didn't fully click.

• We Interrupt This Broadcast • short story by Mary Robinette Kowal

Mary Robinette Kowal's place us empathetically in the mind of a true mad scientist who makes devastating miscalculation. Solid work.

• The Last Dignity of Man • novelette by Marjorie M. Liu

Marjory M Liu's "The Last Dignity of Man" has a similar slipstream which flips Ford's situation (opening and development are fascinating, the closing not so much). 

• The Pittsburgh Technology • short story by Jeffrey Ford

A handful of works don't really engage the trope but still provoke thought. Jeffrey Ford's "The Pittsburgh Technology" tackles a familiar set-up: a loser looks for a better life and is given the opportunity (arguably slipstream--the opening isn't strong, but that ending zings).

• Mofongo Knows • short story by Grady Hendrix

Grady Hendrix's "Mofongo Knows" is really the highlight of the anthology. It takes you inside the decline and "fall" of a dynamic superhero Steve Savage and his foe, the "Gorilla of the Mind, Mofongo," who can influence people and things through the power of his mind. However, Mofongo has been captured by Savage and they've been a sideshow ever since. Mofongo seems to exist merely to have someone to taunt and be taunted by. When Savage passes, the course of Mofongo's life will change--for good or for ill. It starts humorous and becomes surprisingly moving.

• The Food Taster's Boy • short story by Ben H. Winters

The collection closes with strong work by Ben H Winters. A mad scientist conducts a cruel experiment just to witness cinematic results that don't quite pan out as he expected. Interesting (since it's intentionally problematic) thought piece.

Cassandra Rose Clarke: The Mad Scientist's Daughter

The Mad Scientist's Daughter 

by Cassandra Rose Clarke 

Angry Robot

In a post-ecological-disaster world, Cat has been her own teacher, wandering nature. But her dad, a cyberneticist, brings home Finn, a being Cat initially took for a ghost. Finn becomes her teacher, a great resource for stories, math and science. At a party it becomes clear Finn is a robot although Cat remains convinced of his being a ghost until he admits what he is.

As she gets older, she becomes more and more fond of Finn. She gets in a fight at school with a kid who calls Finn an "it." She dates other boys, but they are all dis-satisfactory. One night she kisses Finn with disastrous consequences. Her father doesn't seem to buy her excuses but also doesn't seem to mind, either.

She goes to college. Her mother dies, and there is a see-saw between Finn and human lovers.

While it isn't heavily science fiction, it is SF--hypnotically told. Although Clarke's exploration of tropes is limited, she can tell a good tale. Because of the romantic nature and the serious treatment of romancing an AI, the novel doesn't seem well named except for her father's reaction to her kiss (not that he knows for certain what happened--or does he?). What's fascinating is what remains unstated but holds Cat's riveted to Finn. It must be unquestioning devotion. Even when she takes on other lovers, he does not. He remains faithful and hurries to her side when he's needed.

The narrator voice opens wonderfully childlike, aging as the narrator ages, and the detail is precise and evocative. The story title is predated by one written by Theodora Goss (I reviewed it as part of this JJ Adams' Mad Scientist anthology). They seem to have little overlap, and this has a stronger narrative thread, perhaps due to focusing on one character and being a novel.

I don't read many love stories as I don't find them realistic. Strange then that I was taken in by this one with an automaton. The ending did push character credibility, but still recommended if you're in the mood for a good storyteller.

“The Growth of the House of Usher” by Brian Stableford

First appeared in Interzone. It was up for the Interzone Readers Poll, reprinted in genre retrospectives by Gardner R. Dozois and  John Clute, David Pringle and Simon Ounsley. From the collection, Sexual Chemistry and Other Tales of the Biotech Revolution.

Summary:

The faceless narrator visits Rowland Usher on the Orinoco Delta. They had been civil engineers together in college where they worked with engineered bacteria that rebuilt raw materials into various architectures.
Now the narrator finds Rowland and his father have built a house in memory of his sister, whom they loved dearly--in multiple senses. All of the Ushers have been dying of the same genetic malady

Commentary with Spoilers:

Rowland kicks the bucket, and the narrator spots worm-like creatures who bear resemblance to the sister. They crawl out to cuddle/be cuddled and die.

This follows the "plot" of Edgar Allan Poe's “The Fall of the House of Usher” if it can be said to have a plot. This story departs enough, twisting so that it maintains reader interest.

Genius title.

Does it comment on where we're headed with societal mores? Although a case could be made (even that genetic monkeying leads to decadent moral decay), the other tales don't support the sudden land change. This tale wallows less in moral decay than in a futuristic Poe. Perhaps that's two sides of the same coin.

Rather, the pivotal final image may have been the seed that the author lacquered around, building backwards logically to create a society in which this might have happened.

“The Engineer and the Executioner” by Brian Stableford

First appeared in Amazing. Reprinted in genre retrospectives by Donald A. Wollheim, Mike Ashley, and Josh Pachter. From the collection, Sexual Chemistry and Other Tales of the Biotech Revolution.

Summary:

Here's a story that improves the more one ponders it.

A robot has sentenced Gabriel Samarra to deportation and his life's work to death as they endanger earth. On the hollow asteroid Lamark, Gabriel has created an ecosystem that evolves new species generation to generation. The plants take over and absorb their environment; therefore, should these creatures happen to fall upon Earth, its creatures would soon fall prey like rabid invasive species. The robot will allow Gabriel a last moment to gather his things in order...

Commentary with Spoilers:

As you might have guessed, the prisoner kills his captor (although escaping seems another likely scenario). A ricocheting bullet grazes his own leg and dooms himself. He breaks the glass sealing his creatures inside crawls out to join them. While the robot's ship still tips the asteroid into the sun, plants take over the engineer's compartment and eventually eats its way to the outside, creating a panspermia event.

Although the inital scenario feels dated, the evolution and the structure intimated in the title should make the story worth reading. Gabriel is the presumed good-guy engineer, preserving life, and the robot the baddie executioner. But by the story's end, the roles and the reader's sympathies actually reverse.

Real Mad Scientists from the 1940s

Aside 1 (pointless gender battles): This propaganda presumably came from a guy who was tired of hearing from women that they have to give birth to babies (though it is possible that a woman, tired of hearing about other women's birth pains, wrote this). Birth pains may be a badge of pride or shame depending on which woman said it. So the guy came back with this.

He captions the picture: "No right to moan about child birth." The guy and the people he's arguing with must be teenagers or in their early twenties. Who cares if someone moans about pain, whatever kind?

Aside 2 (impressive photoshop):  I am impressed with how well they matched colors in this photo. The black and white probably helps. Here's the original:

Mad Scientists

I did some fact-checking: A pain unit of measurement does exist, they're apparently called dol (for dolores) -- not del. I have no idea where this guy gets his numbers or how they should be used (I've had broken bones worse than kick to the nether region). One friend said giving birth wasn't bad, others hated it. In med school they said the worst pain was kidney stones, followed by childbirth, but who knows? The guy who said it was a urologist. Was it a badge of pride for his profession? Pain is hard to measure because people are different. Surely, scientists noticed this phenomenon before undertaking an experiment of dubious ethics. Can't you hear scientists mu-ah-ah-ah and rubbing their hands?

"Casting the Runes" by M. R. James -- Will the real mad scientist please stand up?

First appeared in Astounding. Reprinted by V. H. Collins, Alexander Laing, Herbert A. Wise, Phyllis Fraser, Alfred Hitchcock, Edward Gorey, John Keir Cross, Don Ward, Stephen P. Sutton, Vic Ghidalia, Barbara H. Wolf, Jack C. Wolf, Stuart David Schiff, Frank D. McSherry, Jr., Martin H. Greenberg, Charles G. Waugh, Peter Haining, Robert Silverberg, Brad Leithauser, David Sandner, Jacob Weisman, Chad Arment, John Pelan, Jeff VanderMeer, Ann VanderMeer.

Summary:

Scientists have thoroughly drubbed an occult scientist, Karswell trying to publish about alchemy and such phenomena. One scientist dies, having fled up a tree and fallen off a dead branch--his face locked in horror. Another scientist realizes he may be next.

Commentary & Spoilers:

The scientists figure out that the problem is a piece of paper with cryptic runes on it. It had happened to Harrington's brother. With only so much time, they manage to pawn the paper off back on Karswell who died from a fallen stone off a church though there'd been no workers at the time.

An interesting use of the mad-scientist trope. In this case, the sane scientists are the unethical ones. They've denied the occult without proof and even with proof don't support Karswell's findings. So in a sense, they, too, represent mad scientists. Further, they're not even sure that Karswell is behind the runes. Although it seems likely, they can't be sure.

"Had they been justified in sending a man to his death, as they believed they had? Ought they not to warn him, at least? 'No,' said Harrington; 'if he is the murderer I think him, we have done no more than is just.' "

If Karswell is out for revenge, most readers probably feel his end is justified. He is the primary mad scientist. But what if he isn't? Then Harrington and Dunning are the only true mad scientists, a fact which may escape some readers. Perhaps that is the true horror here: Those, whom we assume to be sane and good, are actually the evil-doers.

Notes:

1. What do the rune victims actually see or are visited by? A demon?

"One was a woodcut of Bewick's, roughly torn out of the page: one which shows a moonlit road and a man walking along it, followed by an awful demon creature. Under it were written the lines out of the 'Ancient Mariner' (which I suppose the cut illustrates) about one who, having once looked round--

                  walks on,
  And turns no more his head,
  Because he knows a frightful fiend
  Doth close behind him tread.

Dog or human?

"he got a dog with him, or what? Funny thing: I could 'a' swore 'e wasn't alone."

2. The translation of runes is unknown; therefore, they have a mystery about them and are thought by some to be magical, inhabiting that great realm of the unknown/unknowable. No doubt, this is why James employs them.

"The Weapon" by Fredric Brown

 

 First appeared in Astounding. Reprinted by Groff Conklin, Michael Sissons, Isaac Asimov, Terry Carr, James Sallis, William F. Goodykoontz, Theodore W. Hipple, Robert G. Wright, J. E. Pournelle, Martin H. Greenberg, and Gregory Benford.

Summary:

A stranger named Niemand enters Mr. Graham's house. Niemand has come to get Graham to rethink his weapon, but Graham is uninterested, not to mention annoyed, wondering how to rid himself of the stranger. When Graham fetches a drink, Niemand visits Graham's mentally handicapped son, Harry. He gives Harry a gift. When Graham sees what it is, he sweats.

Commentary & Spoilers:

"only a madman would give a loaded revolver to an idiot."

What Niemand has done is paralleled Graham's action in a cruel way. The gun, of course, is a nuclear weapon, and the idiots whoever is in charge of them. Depending on your perspective, you may or may not agree that the metaphor is perfect, but it provokes thought.

Brown signals immediately what he's up to:

"The room was quiet in the dimness of early evening."

Earth, too--this room we inhabit--is ultimately a limited space. When discharging something so sweeping as a nuclear bomb, the effects spread, making the Earth feel smaller. The dimness also presents a problem in limiting our ability to see. And it is evening, or the death of day, should a grand nuclear war occur.

Like M.R. James' "Casting of the Runes," we can't be certain who the madman or mad scientist is in this case. Possibly both. Niemand made his point, but his ethics are dubious at best. The same could be said of Graham.

This is not only one of my favorite Fredric Brown stories but also a favorite in SF. Brilliant execution. Go forth and read.

Notes:

1. Niemand means "nobody" in German.
2. Graham means "gray home."
3. Harry means "persistently harass." 
4. Chicken Little -- the chicken who said "The sky is falling" although it was not. Niemand hopes this story is always true.

"The King of the Beasts" by Philip José Farmer

First appeared in Frederik Pohl's Galaxy. Reprinted by Tom Boardman, Jr., Frederik Pohl, Jane Yolen, Edmund J. Farrell, Thomas E. Gage, John Pfordresher, Raymond J. Rodrigues, Robert R. Potter, Joseph D. Olander, Martin Harry Greenberg, Isaac Asimov, Charles G. Waugh, Robert Weinberg, Stefan Dziemianowicz.

Summary:

Zoo of extinct Earth beasts reconstructed from bones, including the most dangerous...

Spoiler & Commentary:

Drum roll. "Man!" That seems to be the punchline for many of these short shorts. It must have been potent in its day: Look at all of its reprints. Isaac Asimov writes in his usual dry wit, "That's going too far."

Asimov collected this as a mad scientist tale. Farmer hid from us who the speakers were in a sort of POV cheat so that we might guess the character were human. Instead, they must be alien.

UPDATE: Due to the popularity of this post and to a comment below asking for a more explicit discussion of theme, I finally expanded the commentary on this story here.

"Heading Home" by Ramsey Campbell

First appeared in Whispers. Reprinted by Gerald W. Page, Stuart David Schiff, Al Sarrantonio, and Martin H. Greenberg.

Summary:

A scientist discovers not only has he been cuckolded but he's also had his muscles cut by her literally butcher boyfriend. He struggles for every inch up the stairs. The boyfriend hears something and says he's going to investigate.

Spoilers & Commentary:

What a perfectly horrid title pun, and what a perfectly executed mad scientist tale.

The scientist has killed kids in order to make himself immortal. Of course, that doesn't negate what the lovers have done, but Campbell has beautifully switched our loyalties. The boyfriend is called back, and the scientist makes it back to the lab, where his body is. He'll sew himself back together.

I'm a little dubious about the head's propulsion system, though.

The mad-scientist perfection is how he justifies his misdeeds and allies our sympathies until we truly learn what sort of man he is.

"The Facts in the Case of M. Valdemar" by Edgar Allan Poe

First appeared in The American Review. Reprinted by J. Walker McSpadden, Hugo Gernsback, V. H. Collins, Dennis Wheatley, Herbert A. Wise, Phyllis Fraser, John L. Hardie, Judith Merril, Elizabeth Lee, Charles Higham, Herbert van Thal, Noah D. Fabricant, M.D., Groff Conklin, H. Bruce Franklin, Robert Aickman, Lee Wright, Richard G. Sheehan, Leo P. Kell, ey, Peter Haining, Kurt Singer, Eric S. Rabkin, Mary Danby, Stuart David Schiff, J. A. Cuddon, Tim Haydock, Al Sarrantonio, Martin H. Greenberg, Stephen Jones, Mary Hill, Rebecca K. Rizzo, Gary Crew, Aaron Polson, Jean M. Goldstrom, Andrew Barger, and Otto Penzler. 

Summary:

Doctors hypnotize a dying man and prolong his life.

Commentary & spoilers:

The dying/dead man begs to be killed. He dies as soon as the hypnotism is removed.

This is actually a problem that continues into the present although less so than it once was. Doctors prolong life to what end? I can't find the article now, but a doctor, who often prolonged life with cancer treatments, chose no therapy for himself. It is an assumption that people should live and keep wanting to live. We don't necessarily consider this scientist mad. Unless we hate our fathers, most of us like Dylan Thomas want our fathers to "rage against the dying of the light."


In this case, Poe pushed the case further. The man is dead. The doctor has exceeded his jurisdiction over life. For an instant, the doctor is mad and joins the ranks of mad scientists, but he does let the man die.

There might also be a case for the tale discussing about the letting-go of loved ones.

"Cool Air" by H. P. Lovecraft

First appeared in Tales of Magic and Mystery. Reprinted by Farnsworth Wright, Elizabeth Lee, Alden H. Norton, Seon Manley, Gogo Lewis, Don Ward, Gerry Goldberg, Stephen Storoschuk, Fred Corbett, Stuart David Schiff, Helen Hoke, Carol Serling, Charles G. Waugh, Martin H. Greenberg, Robert Weinberg, Stefan R. Dziemianowicz, and Stephen Jones.

Summary:

The plot is simple. A man seeks lodging, finds it and visits his mad-scientist upstairs neighbor, who does not mind mixing science with the occult. The scientist or "benevolent fanatic" keeps his room cool. Nonetheless, the narrator feels repulsion.

Commentary & Spoilers

The cooler breaks down and the man dies. In fact, the man had died long ago, and only keeping himself cool extended his "life."

This scientist does seem mad--strange inventions, quirky personality, and general creepiness. But he isn't without human scruples--as far as we see, anyway. We do not see experiments with little to no ethical structure.

Lovecraft, like Poe, depends almost solely on effect--a deranged creepy, horror with its potent final image--as opposed to plot or character.

Notes: (from S.T. Joshi and Peter Canon)

1. Apparently, Lovecraft couldn't write below 73 degrees, fainted at 20 degrees. He loathed the cold.
2. Air conditioners only occurred in factories, not homes until WWII.
3. The above editors point out that the ending letter written by a dying man is a common technique for Lovecraft.

"At the Bottom of the Garden" by David Campton

First appeared in Whispers. Reprinted by Gerald W. Page and Stuart David Schiff.

Summary:

Mrs. Williams, a mother, preoccupied with being a good housewife and cook, neglects to understand her daughter, her needs, and her daughter's friend, Ineed. She mentions Ineed's furry teeth, but Mrs. Williams ignores this as her daughter's imagination.

She thinks she sees her daughter dismantled with another, unknown child but suspects her vision's wonky. The daughter shows up without braces and with straightened teeth.

Commentary & spoilers:

The parents catch Ineed, the ugly "child," who appears quite aged amid their dismantled daughter. We leap out of Mrs. Williams' POV to an omniscient narrator to see the daughter's breathlessly begging that the parents allow her friend Ineed to do her thing. She dies that way.

Despite the semi-gruesome ending, I don't read this as horror. It's more like SF--the alien out to help the hapless humans, but the humans misunderstand to their own detriment.

Although Schiff collected this among various mad-scientist tales, his reasoning may simply be the strangeness of the being and its unorthodox healing. Also, it probably provided variety to his collection. It doesn't really show us the madness and/or problematic ethics of our scientist. It really doesn't touch on the issues that bringing up mad scientists delves into.

But perhaps it does show how people can misunderstand someone perceived to be a mad scientist, to their own detriment. The parents are perhaps too oblivious. It would have been nice if Mrs. Williams were a little more observant. We can, however, safely project ahead in time to discover that Mr. and Mrs. Williams went to their grave believing they just missed saving their daughter's, rather than being instrumental in its destruction. Perhaps limited understanding carries its own madness and problematic ethics.

I tried to show above that the name Ineed may simply be I-need. The mother keeps changing the name to Enid, which effectively wipes out not only the friend but also the child's various needs--ultimately to the child's demise.

Fringe: Surrounded by Madness

After returning from Honduras, I wanted to fill in the gaps of my pop culture. So far, Fringe and Orphan Black are the two programs I've found worth watching.

A while back, I reviewed Fringe's science book without having seen the program (I did hunt down the pilot). I rather like the program. It has a quirky combination of unlikely science, real science, SF, fantasy, mystery, suspense, horror, and humor.

It has a thing for madness, too. Whenever our protag experiences something paranormal, she has to tell her boss and friends that she's not crazy but... The kind of thing likely to get you committed in real life. Instead, they reassure her what a good agent she is.

Most intriguingly is how it pits mad scientists vs. mad scientists, making the good ones a little bad (Walter) and the bad ones questionable and sometimes helpful (evil? corporate Massive Dynamics vs. nebulous opponents to Massive Dynamics). Each week they shuffle the baddies to keep viewers uncertain.

They do and don't glorify science of dubious merit: Do: The imagery and ideas are outlandishly cool. Don't: They assess and reassess the damage scientists have wrecked on others--usually unwilling victims.

There is some outrageously bad science, too. One episode had the common-cold virus become a gigantic slug that zips along the floor. The problem is that viruses don't move and require cells to reproduce. So if you're a product, say, a million times larger than your warehouse, how do you build and release it? How does the thing coordinate itself and give itself a large protective covering? If you're a virus, doesn't it make sense to stay where the cells are, then release when there's a bunch of you?

I'm still watching it, so the bad science hasn't impaired my enjoyment of the program.

The Story that Explains the Mad Scientist Trope: "The Doctor's Heroism" by Villiers de l'Isle-Adam

First appeared in Contes Cruels. Reprinted by Robert K. Brunner and Stuart David Schiff (also in 75 World Masterpieces).

The point of the mad-scientist trope has been lost. Some readers reject it as ridiculous. But it wasn't that long ago that scientists had a different frame of mind (see Nazi human experimentation and Tuskegee experiment): That scientific knowledge trumped the individual human.

Now we have medical research boards that check that human subjects are ethically treated. But the question remains: Are there areas where we still treat the individual human as unimportant, for whatever grandiose reason--for social, political, financial gain?

Of the mad-scientist tales I've read, this seems the quintessential work of its type. Mary Shelley and Nathaniel Hawthorne took on the trope memorably, but this one confronts the trope head-on, speaking more directly than others before it.

It's a simple story, so read it. I'm going to reveal "spoilers."

Dr. Hallidonhill is treating several patients for consumption. He tells one patient, who looks terminal, that the patient won't live and the doctor won't do anything.

"What do you think I am--a coroner?"

Apparently, bedside manner had yet to be invented. But the good doctor has a thought, possibly due to the valet:

"Are you rich?"

As a matter of fact...

So the doctor reveals a supposed cure he heard about but doesn't believe in: Go to Nice and only eat watercress for six months, prepared in multiple ways.

Spoilers: When the man returns--healthy as an ox--the doctor doesn't recognize the man. The man wants to honor the doctor. But the doctor shoots him in order to do an autopsy: What made this formerly sick man survive? When the doctor is about to go before the British Assizes, the narrator and some unnamed group find on behalf of the doctor:

"[T]he exclusive love of the Humanity of the Future without any regard for the individual of the Present is, in our time, the one sole motive that ought to justify the acquittal under any circumstances of the magnanimous Extremists of science."

Now I've suggested one interpretation above that goes against reading this statement as straight. I suspect some readers in the past agreed with this last statement, or else some experiments now regarded as criminal would not have taken place.

Essentially, this is a battle between the two Star Trek themes: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." (Star Trek II when Spock sacrifices his own life to save the Enterprise.) vs. "The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many." (Star Trek III when the crew put their lives and careers in danger to save Spock.).

The difference, though, is that one man offered his life as a sacrifice where those in experiments did not. Moreover, the sacrifice in "The Doctor's Heroism" was likely pointless. Better to study watercress and its components than the man. You could say, "Look at all these people dying of consumption." If you had a relative or relatives dead due to consumption, you might agree with the story's last paragraph.

A few phrases ought to clue us in, however:

1. "exclusive love of the Humanity of the Future" -- Great, you care about the future. When will the future arrive? Why exclusive?
2. "without any regard for the individual of the Present" -- When will we care for those around us? How can one care about Humanity without caring for the individuals that compose it?
3. "under any circumstances" -- Any? Is anyone willing to accept every circumstance brought under the banner of saving the future?
4. "the magnanimous Extremists" -- the author is complimenting then slapping (or at least sugar coating a bitter pill). Magnanimous defined: "very generous or forgiving, especially toward a rival or someone less powerful than oneself." (Merriam Webster). Monetarily, the victim may be more powerful, but the doctor is medicinally in the position of power here. In no sense is the doctor generous or forgiving to his patient whom the doctor doomed to die without hope. You could say that the doctor was generous toward the future, but we aren't given any proofs that the doctor actually found anything worthwhile.

Incidentally, the doctor's name may refer to this famous battle where the Scotsmen were defeated in an impossible-to-win battle, Halidon Hill. The Scots had to endure arrows as they crossed a swamp and climb up a hill to attack the Brits.

"Conversation Piece" by Richard Christian Matheson

First appeared in Whispers II, reprinted by Stuart David Schiff. 

Summary: A reporter interviews man who sells himself off piece by piece to make money.

Spoiler and Analysis: He sells every last piece until he's dead (even parts of wife and daughter). Reporter decides he's not so different in how he sells off his own morals, bit by bit. Great connection adding more dimension to a disturbing piece, although we probably need more character background to make it resonate.

Scars, Matheson's collection, is a favorite of mine, largely for his style and voice. Dystopia is his collected works.