The most important thing to know about this book is that it is not about real spacecraft, but about the imaginary ones in science fiction movies and television shows. Likewise, when the author philosophizes about hyperspace, it’s not about the possibility or impossibility of space vehicles traveling faster than the speed of light. The space vehicle used as the prime example is the Millennium Falcon from the Star Wars movies and also Doctor Who’s TARDIS, the starship Enterprise, and others are used as examples.

Since this is part of the series Object Lessons which use the technique of phenomenology to philosophize about objects this point is made right away on page eight of the essay.

This book uses the insight that “ideas” and “images” are objects in their own right. Spacecraft aren’t just symptoms of our brains, figments of our imaginations. They are autonomous beings. They have something to tell us. I’m also going to argue that the very concept of phenomenology has ever so much in common with the idea of spacetime, which Einstein discovered roughly around the same time, the very early twentieth century.

From this starting point Morton takes the reader on a roller coaster ride of ideas and imaginings. Some of them are delightful such as his image of space travel and hyperspace as a luminous inviting environment. I think of them as LLI (Liquid Luminous Images) moments, unfortunately there are some serious gaffes that I can only describes as WTF (What the Fudge) moments that brings the reader to slam on the brakes and come to a screeching halt. It’s quite a deceleration from faster than light speed. The first follows right after the quote above on page eight, containing an equivalence of cosmic proportion:

"The medium spacecraft travel within, the scintillating ocean we call hyperspace, is good old outer space, but imagined as a substance, a thing, an object!"

Except it isn’t a physical object; it’s an imaginary idea. Outer space or spacetime, the place where we live along with the sun, the stars, and the planets in their courses, is not hyperspace! It is true that both can be thought of as objects in the mind, but there is an immense difference. Spacetime is a scientific fact. Hyperspace is a fantasy it exists only in the mind.

Hyperspace originated in the relatively new genre of fantasy literature called science fiction. And it has been a common been a common motif in the genre ever since. I mean, how can you have a galactic empire when it takes several human lifetimes to get from place to place? Look what happened to the European empires in the last two centuries, when people in faraway places decided to run things for themselves. An eager and enthusiastic group of writers and readers have been working on this since the late nineteenth century. The theater, radio, motion pictures, and television have added their skills to the idea and the last two have given us the arresting visual images discussed in the book.

While it is true that the possibility of a shortcut to other stars and planets, is an idea in minds that belong to physicists and engineers who are working hard to figure out a way to beat the cosmic speed limit and get somewhere faster by either bending spacetime or finding some useful tunnels (wormholes) through it, it has not happened yet. I question the author’s misleading equation of the two.

Morton’s puzzling classification of the types of imaginary spacecraft and their qualities is entertaining as are the thought that these hold the promise of exhilarating freedom, adventure, and comfort. But my second WTF moment that tumbled me out of the “spiritual sensual liquid” of Morton’s feminist philosophy is the sentence on page 44 where it states: “…both capitalism and Marxism rely on the labor theory of value.”

Once again, this is a statement that really is not true. It would be true, but only if it were stated in the past tense. At the time (1867-1894) when Das Kapital: Kritik der politischen Ökonomie was published Marx stated that the labor theory of value was what distinguished Adam Smith and himself as “classical economists.” Das Kapital, or Capital in the English traslation is Marx’s view of capitalism. This was his theory of how capitalism worked in the 19th century. I doubt that there is a capitalist enconomist today that believes in, or relies upon, the labor theory of value. While ecomomists have debated for centuries over the source of value, capitalists themselves operate their businesses and factories based on the price of goods and services as determined by supply and demand, not by the amount of human labor that went into making the goods or services.

This isn’t to say that I didn’t enjoy this intellectual romp through science fiction. It was a somewhat challenging, but fascinating journey where others have gone before. But please don’t confuse or conflate science fiction with science fact! There is another fictional journey that could serve as cautionary tale: El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha= Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra. I mention this because I wonder if Morton did not attack a few windmills along the way, mistaking them for giants. ( )

Spacecraft by Timothy Morton is perhaps the most abstract of the Object Lessons series that I have read so far. While I think it works I also think many of the readers who want something with fewer meanings and more just about the object in question will be unhappy.

I think readers who have read at least one of Morton's other books will better appreciate what is attempted here. While I found the connections to the Millennium Falcon, and spacecraft in general, sufficient for inclusion in the series I also understand that those unfamiliar with Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) may find some of the connections abstract at best and tenuous at worst.

I would carefully recommend this to readers who might want both an excursion into spacecraft as well as into OOO. Also readers who don't mind being challenged with ways of thinking about and viewing the world that may seem alien. If you simply want a factoid filled book about spacecraft, well, this ain't it, though there are plenty of factoids.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley. ( )

I normally love books like this one. However, Morton's book was a bit too abstract for my tastes. In speaking about an object, I expect it to be tethered to reality in some way. This book bounced all over the place, flirting between different philosophical modalities.

The book wasn't my cup of tea, but it was extremely well written. ( )