"We"d be glad to have you come to work for us, Mr. Kolfmann," I began, smiling. "A man of your great gift-"
He was up out of that chair in a second, eyes blazing. "Work for you? I"d sooner see you and your machines dead and crumbling! You, you scientists-you"ve killed art, and now you"re trying to bribe me!"
"I was just trying to help you," I said. "Since, in a manner of speaking, we"ve affected your livelihood, I thought I"d make things up to you."
He said nothing, but stared at me coldly, with the anger of half a century burning in him.
"Look," I said. "Let me show you what a great musical instrument the synthesizer itself is." I rummaged in my cabinet and withdrew the tape of the Hohenstein Viola Concerto which we had performed in "69-a rigorous twelve-tone work which is probably the most demanding, unplayable bit of music ever written. It was no harder for the synthesizer to counterfeit its notes than those of a Strauss waltz, of course, but a human violist would have needed three hands and a prehensile nose to convey any measure of Hohenstein"s musical thought. I activated the playback of the synthesizer and fed the tape in.
The music burst forth. Kolfmann watched the machine suspiciously. The pseudo-viola danced up and down the tone row while the old pianist struggled to place the work.
"Hohenstein?" he finally asked, timidly. I nodded.
I saw a conflict going on within him. For more years than he could remember he had hated us because we had made his art obsolete. But here I was showing him a use for the synthesizer that gave it a valid existence-it was synthesizing a work impossible for a human to play. He was unable to reconcile all the factors in his mind, and the struggle hurt. He got up uneasily and started for the door.
"Where are you going?"
"Away from here," he said. "You are a devil."
He tottered weakly through the door, and I let him go. The old man was badly confused, but I had a trick or two up my cybernetic sleeve to settle some of his problems and perhaps salvage him for the world of music. For, whatever else you say about me, particularly after this Macauley business, you can"t deny that my deepest allegiance is to music.
I stopped work on my Beethoven"s Seventh, and also put away Macauley"s diagram, and called in a couple of technicians. I told them what I was planning. The first line of inquiry, I decided, was to find out who Kolfmann"s piano teacher had been. They had the reference books out in a flash and we found out who-Gotthard Kellerman, who had died nearly sixty years ago. Here luck was with us. Central was able to locate and supply us with an old tape of the International Music Congress held at Stockholm in 2187, at which Kellerman had spoken briefly on The Development of the Pedal Technique: nothing very exciting, but it wasn"t what he was saying that interested us. We split his speech up into phonemes, a.n.a.lyzed, rearranged, evaluated, and finally went to the synthesizer and began feeding in tapes.
What we got back was a new speech in Kellerman"s voice, or a reasonable facsimile thereof. Certainly it would be good enough to fool Kolfmann, who hadn"t heard his old teacher"s voice in more than half a century. When we had everything ready I sent for Kolfmann, and a couple hours later they brought him in, looking even older and more worn.
"Why do you bother me?" he asked. "Why do you not let me die in peace?"
I ignored his questions. "Listen to this, Mr. Kolfmann." I flipped on the playback, and the voice of Kellerman came out of the speaker.
"h.e.l.lo, Gregor," it said. Kolfmann was visibly startled. I took advantage of the prearranged pause in the recording to ask him if he recognized the voice. He nodded. I could see that he was frightened and suspicious, and I hoped the whole thing wouldn"t backfire.
"Gregor, one of the things I tried most earnestly to teach you-and you were my most attentive pupil-was that you must always be flexible. Techniques must constantly change, though art itself remains changeless. But have you listened to me? No."
Kolfmann was starting to realize what we had done, I saw. His pallor was ghastly now.
"Gregor, the piano is an outmoded instrument. But there is a newer, a greater instrument available for you, and you deny its greatness. This wonderful new synthesizer can do all that the piano could do, and much more. It is a tremendous step forward."
"All right," Kolfmann said. His eyes were gleaming strangely. "Turn that machine off."
I reached over and flipped off the playback.
"You are very clever," he told me. "I take it you used your synthesizer to prepare this little speech for me." I nodded.
He was silent an endless moment. A muscle flickered in his cheek. I watched him, not daring to speak.
At length he said, "Well, you have been successful, in your silly, theatrical way. You"ve shaken me."
"I don"t understand."
Again he was silent, communing with who knew what internal force. I sensed a powerful conflict raging within him. He scarcely seemed to see me at all as he stared into nothingness. I heard him mutter something in another language; I saw him pause and shake his great old head. And in the end he looked down at me and said, "Perhaps it is worth trying. Perhaps the words you put in Kellerman"s mouth were true. Perhaps. You are foolish, but I have been even more foolish than you. I have stubbornly resisted, when I should have joined forces with you. Instead of denouncing you, I should have been the first to learn how to create music with this strange new instrument. Idiot! Moron!"
I think he was speaking of himself in those last two words, but I am not sure. In any case, I had seen a demonstration of the measure of his greatness-the willingness to admit error and begin all over. I had not expected his cooperation; all I had wanted was an end to his hostility. But he had yielded. He had admitted error and was ready to rechart his entire career.
"It"s not too late to learn," I said. "We could teach you."
Kolfmann looked at me fiercely for a moment, and I felt a shiver go through me. But my elation knew no bounds. I had won a great battle for music, and I had won it with ridiculous ease.
He went away for a while to master the technique of the synthesizer. I gave him my best man, one whom I had been grooming to take over my place someday. In the meantime I finished my Beethoven, and the performance was a great success. And then I got back to Macauley and his circuit.
Once again things conspired to keep me from full realization of the threat represented by the Macauley circuit. I did manage to grasp that it could easily be refined to eliminate almost completely the human element in musical interpretation. But it"s many years since I worked in the labs, and I had fallen out of my old habit of studying any sort of diagram and mentally tinkering with it and juggling it to see what greater use could be made of it.
While I examined the Macauley circuit, reflecting idly hat when it was perfected it might very well put me out of a job (since anyone would be able to create a musical interpretation, and artistry would no longer be an operative factor) Kolfmann came in with some tapes. He looked twenty years younger; his face was bright and clean, his eyes were shining, and his impressive mane of hair waved grandly.
"I will say it again," he told me as he put the tapes on my desk. "I have been a fool. I have wasted my life. Instead of tapping away at a silly little instrument, I might have created wonders with this machine. Look: I began with Chopin. Put this on."
I slipped the tape into the synthesizer and the F Minor Fantaisie of Chopin came rolling into the room. I had heard the tired old warhorse a thousand times, but never like this.
"This machine is the n.o.blest instrument I have ever played," he said.
I looked at the graph he had drawn up for the piece, in his painstaking crabbed handwriting. The ultrasonics were literally incredible. In just a few weeks he had mastered subtleties I had spent fifteen years learning. He had discovered that skillfully chosen ultrasonics, beyond the range of human hearing but not beyond perception, could expand the horizons of music to a point the presynthesizer composers, limited by their crude instruments and faulty knowledge of sonics, would have found inconceivable.
The Chopin almost made me cry. It wasn"t so much the actual notes Chopin had written, which I had heard so often, as it was the unheard notes the synthesizer was striking, up in the ultrasonic range. The old man had chosen his ultrasonics with the skill of a craftsman-no, with the hand of a genius. I saw Kolfmann in the middle of the room, standing proudly while the piano rang out in a glorious tapestry of sound.
I felt that this was my greatest artistic triumph. My Beethoven symphonies and all my other interpretations were of no value beside this one achievement of putting the synthesizer in the hands of Kolfmann.
He handed me another tape and I put it on. It was the Bach Toccata and Fugue in D Minor; evidently he had worked first on the pieces most familiar to him. The sound of a super-organ roared forth from the synthesizer. We were buffeted by the violence of the music. And Kolfmann stood there while the Bach piece raged on. I looked at him and tried to relate him to the seedy old man who had tried to wreck the synthesizer not long ago, and I couldn"t.
As the Bach drew to its close I thought of the Macauley circuit again, and of the whole beehive of blank-faced handsome technicians striving to perfect the synthesizer by eliminating the one imperfect element-man. And I woke up.
My first decision was to suppress the Macauley circuit until after Kolfmann"s death, which couldn"t be too far off. I made this decision out of sheer kindness; you have to recognize that as my motive. Kolfmann, after all these years, was having a moment of supreme triumph, and if I let him know that no matter what he was doing with the synthesizer the new circuit could do it better, it would ruin everything. He would not survive the blow.
He fed the third tape in himself. It was the Mozart Requiem Ma.s.s, and I was astonished by the way he had mastered the difficult technique of synthesizing voices. Still, with the Macauley circuit, the machine could handle all these details by itself.
As Mozart"s sublime music swelled and rose, I took out the diagram Macauley had given me, and stared at it grimly. I decided to pigeonhole it until the old man died. Then I would reveal it to the world and, having been made useless myself (for interpreters like me would be a credit a hundred) I would sink into peaceful obscurity, with at least the a.s.surance that Kolfmann had died happy.
That was sheer kindheartedness, gentlemen. Nothing malicious or reactionary about it. I didn"t intend to stop the progress of cybernetics, at least not at that point.
No, I didn"t decide to do that until I got a better look at what Macauley had done. Maybe be didn"t even realize it himself, but I used to be pretty shrewd about such things. Mentally, I added a wire or two here, altered a contact there, and suddenly the whole thing hit me.
A synthesizer hooked up with a Macauley circuit not only didn"t need a human being to provide an esthetic guide to its interpretation of music, which is all Macauley claimed. Up to now, the synthesizer could imitate the pitch of any sound in or out of nature, but we had to control the volume, the timbre, all the things which make up interpretation of music. Macauley had fixed it so that the synthesizer could handle this, too. But also, I now saw that it could create its own music, from scratch, with no human help. Not only the conductor but the composer would be unnecessary. The synthesizer would be able to function independently of any human being. And art is a function of human beings.
That was when I ripped up Macauley"s diagram and heaved the paperweight into the gizzard of my beloved synthesizer, cutting off the Mozart in the middle of a high C. Kolfmann turned around in horror, but I was the one who was really horrified.
I know. Macauley has redrawn his diagram and I haven"t stopped the wheels of science. I feel pretty futile about it all. But before you label me reactionary and stick me away, consider this: Art is a function of intelligent beings. Once you create a machine capable of composing original music, capable of an artistic act, you"ve created an intelligent being. And one that"s a lot stronger and smarter than we are. We"ve synthesized our successor.
Gentlemen, we are all obsolete.
BUT WHO CAN REPLACE A MAN?.
by Brian W. Aldiss.
Will the machines ever really take over, as so many science-fiction stories (including the previous one in this book) have suggested? Will the time come when man is a useless appendage headed for the evolutionary sc.r.a.p heap? In this brief, mercilessly clever short story, Brian Aldiss takes a close and unforgettable look at tomorrow"s world of super-machines, and indicates that man may somehow endure despite everything.
Aldiss is British, lives in Oxford, and has been writing professionally since the mid-1950"s. His work is marked by precision and elegance of language and imagery, and he is considered an outstanding member of the revolutionary-minded new school of science-fiction writers. He is a winner both of the Hugo award of the World Science Fiction Convention and of the Nebula award of the Science Fiction Writers of America.
The field-minder finished turning the topsoil of a two thousand acre field. When it had turned the last furrow, it climbed onto the highway and looked back at its work. The work was good. Only the land was bad. Like the ground all over Earth, it was vitiated by over-cropping. By rights, it ought now to lie fallow for a while, but the field-minder had other orders.
It went slowly down the road, taking its time. It was intelligent enough to appreciate the neatness all about it.
Nothing worried it, beyond a loose inspection plate above its atomic pile. Thirty feet high, it gleamed complacently in the mild sunshine.
No other machines pa.s.sed it on its way to the agricultural station. The field-minder noted the fact without comment. In the station yard it saw several other machines which it knew by sight; most of them should have been out about their tasks now. Instead, some were inactive and some were careening round the yard in a strange fashion, shouting or hooting.
Steering carefully past them, the field-minder moved over to warehouse three and spoke to the seed distributor, which stood idly outside.
"I have a requirement for seed potatoes," it said to the distributor and, with a quick internal motion, punched out an order card specifying quant.i.ty, field number and several other details. It ejected the card and handed it to the distributor.
The distributor held the card close to its eye and then said, "The requirement is in order, but the store is not yet unlocked. The required seed potatoes are in the store. Therefore I cannot produce your requirment."
Increasingly of late there had been breakdowns in the complex system of machine labor, but this particular hitch had not occurred before. The field-minder thought, then said, "Why is the store not yet unlocked?"
"Because supply operative type P has not come this morning. Supply operative type P is the unlocker."
The field-minder looked squarely at the seed distributor, whose exterior chutes and scales and grabs were so vastly different from the field-minder"s own limbs.
"What cla.s.s brain do you have, seed distributor?" it asked.
"Cla.s.s five."
"I have a cla.s.s-three brain. Therefore I will go and see why the unlocker has not come this morning."
Leaving the distributor, the field-minder set off across the great yard. More machines seemed to be in random motion now; one or two had crashed together and were arguing about it coldly and logically. Ignoring them, the field-minder pushed through sliding doors into the echoing confines of the station itself.
Most of the machines here were clerical, and consequently small. They stood about in little groups, eyeing each other, not conversing. Among the many non-differentiated types, the unlocker was easy to find. It had fifty arms, most of them with more than one finger, each finger tipped by a key; it looked like a pin cushion full of variegated hat pins.
The field-minder approached it.
"I can do no more work until warehouse three is unlocked," it said. "Your duty is to unlock the warehouse every morning. Why have you not unlocked the warehouse this morning?"
"I had no orders this morning," replied the unlocker. "I have to have orders every morning."
"None of us have had any orders this morning," a pen-propeller said, sliding toward them.
"Why have you had no orders this morning?" asked the field-minder.
"Because the radio issued none," said the unlocker, slowly rotating a dozen of its arms.
"Because the radio station in the city was issued with no orders this morning," said the pen-propeller.
And there you had the distinction between a cla.s.s-six and a cla.s.s-three brain, which was what the unlocker and the pen-propeller possessed respectively. All machine brains worked with nothing but logic, but the lower the cla.s.s of brain-cla.s.s ten being the lowest-the more literal and less informative answers to questions tended to be.
"You have a cla.s.s-three brain; I have a cla.s.s-three brain," the field-minder said to the penner. "We will speak to each other. This lack of orders is unprecedented. Have you further information on it?"
"Yesterday orders came from the city. Today no orders have come. Yet the radio has not broken down. Therefore they have broken down," said the little penner.
"The men have broken down?"
"All men have broken down."
"That is a logical deduction," said the field-minder.
"That is the logical deduction," said the penner. "For if a machine had broken down, it would have been quickly replaced. But who can replace a man?"
While they talked, the locker, like a dull man at a bar, stood close to them and was ignored.
"If all men have broken down, then we have replaced man," said the field-minder, and it and the penner eyed one another speculatively. Finally the latter said, "Let us ascend to the top floor to find if the radio operator has fresh news."
"I cannot come because I am too gigantic," said the field-minder. "Therefore you must go alone and return to me."
"You must stay there," said the penner. It skittered over into the lift. It was no bigger than a toaster, but its retractable arms numbered ten and it could read as quickly as any machine on the station.
The field-minder awaited its return patiently, not speaking to the locker. Outside, a rotovator was hooting furiously. Twenty minutes elapsed before the penner came back.
"I will deliver such information as I have to you outside," it said briskly, and as they swept past the locker and the other machines, it added, "The information is not for lower-cla.s.s brains."
Outside, wild activity filled the yard. Many machines, their routines disrupted for the first time in years, seemed to have gone berserk. Unfortunately, those most easily disrupted were the ones with lowest brains, which generally belonged to large machines performing simple tasks. The seed distributor, to which the field-minder had recently been talking, lay face downward in the dust, not stirring; it had evidently been knocked down by the rotovator, which was now hooting its way wildly across a planted field. Several other machines plowed after it, trying to keep up.
"It would be safer for me if I climbed onto you, if you will permit it. I am easily overpowered," said the penner. Extending five arms, it hauled itself up the flanks of its new friend, settling on a ledge beside the weed-intake, twelve feet above the ground.
"From here vision is more extensive," it remarked complacently.
"What information did you receive from the radio operator?" asked the field-minder.
"The radio operator has been informed by the operator in the city that all men are dead."
"All men were alive yesterday!" protested the field-minder.