This year, I read 166 books for pleasure. (My definition of ‘pleasure’ here includes background reading for new modules, research projects, reader’s reports, reviews, blurbs, etc, as well as ploughing through books that have been cluttering up the house for years – or decades – before donating them to the local charity shop; hence I am surprised to find four of my top twenty were actually published in 2015).
Portnoy compliance data: All of the world except… = 87
…straight white men writing in English = 74
plus multi-authored in ways too complex to divide = 5
(but only about 40 by women)
Comics Tony Puryear and Erika Alexander, Concrete Park: You Send Me (2014)
–. Concrete Park: R.E.S.P.E.C.T. (2015)
Gene Luen Yang, Boxers (2013)
Biography Isaac Deutscher, The Prophet Armed: Trotsky 1879-1921 (1954) — The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsky 1921-29 (1959)
— The Prophet Outcast: Trotsky 1929-40 (1963)
The full list of books I read this year Brian Aldiss, Bury My Heart at WH Smith’s — Helliconia Summer — The Twinkling of an Eye Michelle Alexander and Jeanne Long, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days: The Universal Don’ts of Dating Monica Ali, Brick Lane Nelson Algren, A Walk on the Wild Side Grant Allen, The Woman Who Did Margery Allingham, The Tiger in the Smoke Guillermo Arriaga, The Guillotine Squad Isaac Asimov and Martin Greenberg, eds, Cosmic Critiques: How and Why Ten Science Fiction Stories Work Marc Augé, The Future
JG Ballard, HighRise (film reviewed) — The Drowned World Lynne Reid Banks, The L-Shaped Room René Barjavel, Ashes, Ashes Steven Barnes, Streetlethal Walter Besant, The Revolt of Man Calixthe Beyala, How to Cook Your Husband the African Way David Bischoff, Young Sun Ra and the Strange Celestial Roads Andy Boot, Fragments of Fear: An Illustrated History of British Horror Films Elizabeth Bowen, The Heat of the Day Dennis Broe, Maverick Michael Bronski, Pulp Friction: Uncovering the Golden Age of Gay Male Pulps Keith Brooke, ed., Strange Divisions and Alien Territories: The Sub-Genres of Science Fiction Octavia Butler, Dawn — Adulthood Rites — Imago
Brian Chikwava, Harare North Agatha Christie, The Moving Finger Teju Cole, Open City Warwick Collins, Gents Joseph Conrad, The Secret Agent Richard Cowper, The Custodians, and Other Stories — The Twilight of Briareus
Chris Darke, La jetée Isaac Deutscher, The Prophet Armed: Trotsky 1879-1921 — The Prophet Unarmed: Trotsksy 1921-29 — The Prophet Outcast: Trotsky 1929-40 Bernard F Dick, The Merchant Prince of Poverty Row: Harry Cohn of Columbia Pictures Joan Didion, Where I Was From Dilman Dila, A Killing in the Sun Brian Dooley, Black and Green: The Fight for Civil Rights in Northern Ireland and Black America Nerine Dorman, ed, Terra Incognita: New Speculative Fiction from Africa Fyodor Dostoevksy, Notes from Underground Arthur Conan Doyle, The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes –. Uncle Bernac: A Memory of the Empire David Duffy, Losing the Head of Philip K Dick Alexandre Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo Nell Dunn, Up the Junction
Caroline Edwards and Tony Venezia, eds, China Miéville: Critical Essays George Alec Effinger, When Gravity Fails David Eggers, A Hologram for the King Bernardine Evaristo, Blonde Roots Allen Eyles, House of Horror: The Complete Hammer Films Story
Michael Fabre, Under the Skin Hans Fallada, Tales from the Underworld Leslie Feinberg, Stone Butch Blues Eric Flint, Gorg Huff and Paula Goodlett, 1636: The Kremlin Games Karen Joy Fowler and Debbie Norton, 80! Memories and Reflections on Ursula K Le Guin Carl Freedman, Art and Idea in the Novels ofChina Miéville
Elizabeth Gaskell, Mary Barton Stella Gibbons, Cold Comfort Farm William Gibson, The Peripheral Jeremy Gilbert, Common Ground: Democracy and Collectivity in an Age of Individualism Robert SC Gordon, Bicycle Thieves Joe Gores, Hammett Graham Greene, Brighton Rock Karl Taro Greenfield, Speed Tribes: Children of the Japanese Bubble Sam Greenlee, Ammunition! Walter Greenwood, Love on the Dole John Grindrod, Concretopia: A Journey Around the Rebuilding of Postwar Britain
Joe Haldeman, The Long Habit of Living Sarah Hall, The Carhullan Army Knut Hamsun, Hunger Elizabeth Hardwick, Sleepless Nights Mark Harris, Scenes from a Revolution: The Birth of the New Hollywood Ivor W Hartmann, ed., AfroSF, volume 2
Brett Harvey, The Fifties: A Woman’s Oral History Mary Higgs, Glimpses into the Abyss Patricia Highsmith, The Price of Salt Andrew Holleran, Dancer from the Dance Tendai Huchu, The Maestro, the Magician and the Mathematician Fergus Hume, The Mystery of a Hansom Cab
CLR James, Letters from London James Joyce, Dubliners
Anton Kaes, M Sue Kaufman, The Diary of a Mad Housewife Gerald Kersh, Night and the City (here and here)
Abdelfattah Kilito, The Clash of Images Stephen King, Doctor Sleep — The Shining Cyril M Kornbluth, Not this August Sigizmund Krzhizhanovsky, Memories of the Future Hanif Kureishi, The Buddha of Suburbia Andrei Kurkov, Death and the Penguin Henry Kuttner, Elak of Atlantis
George Lamming, The Emigrants Andrea Levy, Small Island Marina Lewycka, Two Caravans Megan Lindholm, Wizard of the Pigeons Kelly Link, Magic for Beginners Jack London, The People of the Abyss
Neil McAleer, Odyssey: The Authorised Biography of Arthur C Clarke Arthur Machen, The Great God Pan — The Three Impostors — The Terror Colin Macinnes, Absolute Beginners — City of Spades Katherine Mansfield, In a German Pension Richard Marsh, The Chase of the Ruby — The Datchet Diamonds Guy de Maupassant, Bel Ami, or the Secret History of a Scoundrel Quentin Meillassoux, Science Fiction and Extro-Science Fiction China Miéville, This Census Taker — Three Moments of An Explosion Rick Moody, The Ice Storm Alan Moore and Kevin O’Neill, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, volume one
Susanna Moore, In the Cut
VS Naipaul, The Mimic Men Frank Norris, Blix — Moran of the Lady Letty Sarah Nuttall and Achille Mbembe, eds, Johannesburg: The Elusive Metropolis
Félix J Palma, The Map of Time Richard Powers, Generosity Tony Puryear and Erika Alexander, Concrete Park: You Send Me –. Concrete Park: R.E.S.P.E.C.T.
Raymond Queneau, Zazie in the Metro
Alain Robbe-Grillet, The Erasers Jackie Robinson, I Never Had It Made David S. Roh, Betsey Huang and Greta A. Niu, eds, Techno-Orientalism: Imaging Asia in Speculative Fiction, History, and Media Satyajit Ray, The Diary of a Space Traveller and Other Stories Sharifa Rhodes-Pitts, Harlem is Nowhere: A Journey to the Mecca of Black America Jean Rhys, Voyage in the Dark
Sunjeev Sahota, Ours are the Streets Sapphire, Push Sam Selvon, The Lonely Londoners –. Ways of Sunlight Khairy Shalaby, The Time-Travels of the Man Who Sold Pickles and Sweets Patrick Sheeran, The Informer Anne River Siddons, The House Next Door Sister Souljah, The Coldest Winter Ever Muriel Spark, The Ballad of Peckham Rye — The Girls of Slender Means Colin Spencer, Homosexuality: A History Bruce Sterling, Islands in the Net Herbert Strang, Round the World in Seven Days — The Old Man of the Mountain Mrs Herbert Strang, The Girl Crusoes Neil Strauss, ed., Radiotext(e) Boris and Arkaday Strugatsky, Hard to Be a God (film reviewed)
Preston and Sandy Sturges, Preston Sturges on Preston Sturges
Rose Tremain, The Road Home
Jeff Vandermeer, Annihilation — Authority — Acceptance Dai Vaughan, Odd Man Out Jules Verne, The Sphinx of the Ice Realm
HG Wells, The Autocracy of Mr Parham — The Time Machine Brian Willems, Shooting the Moon Jeanette Winterson, The Stone Gods Virginia Woolf, Mrs Dalloway
Gene Luen Yang, Boxers Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road
Yevgeny Zamyatin, We Benjamin Zephaniah, Refugee Boy
This statue stands on the spot where the guillotine was erected to execute Louis XVI in January 1793. Somewhere near these gates, the guillotine was erected to execute Marie-Antoinette in October 1793. Jean Sylvain Bailly was an early leader of the French Revolution and the first mayor of Paris. He was guillotined during the Reign of Terror. In April 1834, a workers uprising broke out against new laws limiting the activities of Republican organisations such as the Society of the Rights of Man. 13,000 police took four days to quell the uprising. On the Rue Transnonain, police massacred all the residents of one apartment building. Not even a fucking plaque. Honoré Daumier’s lithograph Rue Transnonain, le 15 Avril 1834 appeared in the journal La Caricature. When the original was discovered, he was imprisoned for six months. In the the Musée d’Orsay, we found Maximilien Luce’s Une rue de Paris en mai 1871. We also, I kid you not, saw a hipster find a portrait of a 19th century man with a similar beard to his own and take a selfie in front of it. The whole city groaned. In spring 1871, the last of the communards hid out in the Père Lachaise cemetery. The victorious Armée versaillaise put one hundred and forty-seven Fédérés up against the wall and shot them and threw their corpses in a trench by the wall. Opposite this simple memorial is the grave of Marx’s daughter Laura and her husband Paul Lafargue, who wrote among many other things the excellent The Right to Be Lazy. In old age, they committed suicide rather than be a burden on the revolution. Nestor Makno, the Ukrainian anarcho-communist revolutionary was cremated here, too. I guess I’m wilfully mistranslating/misunderstanding the inscription on this. On a cheerier note, this is the bar where Lenin and Trotsky used to hang out in 1915/16 to play chess. I guess it was a little less blandly bourgeois back then. The current management are less inclined to recall Bolshevik grandmasters than to boast that Pierce Brosnan once ate there. Lenin, mind you, can pop up in the least expected places (as, indeed, can Stalin).
This is the first of the series’ six episodes based on the fiction of Isaac Asimov, its most adapted author. The others are ‘Sucker Bait’ (1954; 15 November 1965), ‘Satisfaction Guaranteed’ (1951; 29 December 1966), ‘Reason’ (1941; 1 January 1967 as ‘The Prophet’), ‘Liar!’ (1941; 14 January 1969) and ‘The Naked Sun’ (1956; 18 February 1969). Only the first two episodes survive.1
‘The Dead Past’ was directed by John Gorrie, who had previously worked on Doctor Who, directing ‘The Keys of Marinus’ (1964) and possibly one episode of ‘The Reign of Terror’ (1964), though this seems to be disputed, not least by Gorrie himself.
The adaptation of Asimov’s 1956 Astounding story was by Jeremy Paul, probably best known in sf circles for a pair of original Play for Today (1970-84) teleplays, The Flipside of Dominick Hide (9 Decemeber 1980) and Another Flip for Dominick (14 December 1982). Paul also adapted John Brunner’s ‘The Last Lonely Man’ (1964; 21 January 1969) for Out of the Unknown, and scripted ‘Poor Butterfly’ (9 January 1969), an original Journey to the Unknown (1968-69) teleplay, and Hammer’s Countess Dracula (Sasdy 1971).
Asimov’s story presents a particular set of problems for the adapter in that it typifies both the strengths and weaknesses of his fiction as fiction. Take, for example, the opening scene, around 800 words long, in which Arnold Potterley, a Professor of Ancient History, has an appointment with Thaddeus Araman, head of the Chronoscopy Division, to plead once more for access to a chronoscope so that he can further pursue research into ancient Carthage (primarily to prove that the ancient civilization was not a brutal regime, given to sacrificing its children by fire to appease Moloch in times of adversity, and that this idea is merely a lie spread by the Greeks and Romans). There is a brief description of Potterley’s appearance, but no clues at all as to what Araman looks like or where the scene is set – presumably Araman’s office, since he looks through a folder of papers and has a buzzer (on his desk?) with which to summon his secretary; there is also some sitting down and standing up, implying there are chairs. But overall, there are few visual cues of any kind, and no other appeal to senses whatsoever, just two talking heads expositioning at each other. (Yes, I know it’s not a verb, but at times like this it needs to be.) Readers are left to themselves to fill in as much or as little of this detail as they want.2
Yet somehow it works, probably because Asimov is such an effective writer of exposition – it is why he was drawn to the kind of logic-problem stories typical of both his sf and crime fiction, and it is why he is better as a science populariser (or vulgariser, as I seem to recall him insisting) than a fiction writer. It is also part of his role in the hegemony of Campbellian sf. Asimov’s fiction so very effectively denies human material embodiment, it could not help but appeal to readers of a genre constantly and anxiously constructing its self-image (in opposition to fantasy, horror, the weird, romance, science fantasy) as one of reason and rationality. Presumably, this denial of embodiment, emotionality, irrationality, etc, also appealed to many adolescents and to the core lower-middle-class genre readership of the period, precariously positioned just that little bit higher up the class system than their parents and aspiring to at least remain there.
Of course, television drama – and particular the tradition of single plays – urgently wants to be more than just an interchange of talking heads, and this becomes difficult when depicting a future world on a budget.3 The episodes has just six speaking parts (and three extras), and nine sets, all of them interiors. The only external views are a couple of glimpses of the past on chronoscope screens and the city vista outside of Araman’s office window. Futurity is conveyed through fashion (suit jackets without lapels, collars or pockets; matching waistcoats and trousers revealed in medium and long shot to be one-piece outfits; shirts that fasten up one side rather than centrally; invisible fastenings, and especially no buttons, which seem to have become every bit as disinvented as seatbelts in the Star Trek universe) and some minor technological innovations, such as a small desktop videophone and the chronoscopes’ giant wallscreens. Dialogue can bear some of the weight, but exposition has to be briefer, tighter, sketchier when spoken than when on the page (at least within the magazine sf norms of Asimov’s time).
Part of the dilemma faced by Arnold Potterley is that he lives in a society in which the boundaries between – and indeed within – disciplines are heavily policed. As he expositions at a junior faculty member Jonas Foster, a physicist who has yet to make his first grant application, which will fix his specialism for his entire career,
Scholars … could be free only if they could freely follow their own free-swinging curiosity. Research … forced into a predesigned pattern by the powers that held the purse strings became slavish and had to stagnate. (15-16)
Actually, Asimov does not even try to stage this as a conversation between people. Foster’s thoughts soon slip into authorial exposition:
No one would advocate running a factory by allowing each individual worker to do whatever pleased him at the moment, or of running a ship according to the casual and conflicting notions or each individual crewman. It could be taken for granted that some sort of centralized supervisory agency must exist in each case. Why should direction and order benefit a factory and a ship but not scientific research?
People might say that the human mind was somehow qualitatively different from a ship or factory but the history of intellectual endeavor proved the opposite. … as knowledge grew, more and more data had to be absorbed before worthwhile journeys into ignorance could be organized. … More and more, the individual researcher gave way to the research team and the research institution. … By 1940, only the government, large industries and large universities or research institutions could properly subsidize basic research.
By 1960, even the largest universities depended entirely upon government grants, while research institutions could not exist without tax concessions and public subscriptions. By 2000, the industrial combines had become a branch of world government and, thereafter, the financing of research and therefore its direction naturally became centralized under a department of the government.
It all worked out naturally and well. Every branch of science was fitted neatly to the needs of the public, and the various branches of science were co-ordinated decently. (15-16)
This resonates with concerns voiced by JBS Haldane and Bertrand Russell in the 1920s, JD Bernal in the 1930s, Robert K. Merton in the 1930s and 1940s, among others, that the industrialization of science by states, especially for military purposes, and by corporations leads not only to secrecy but also distorts the practice of science for purposes of profit and social control. For the contemporary reader, especially if an academic in a UK university, such passages reek of the disastrous consequences – well, some of them – of the RAEs and REFs, and of the reorganization of research councils so as to channel research funding to the already-wealthiest universities and to promote top-down agendas of questionable merit.
Potterley goes so far as to claim that the government is actively preventing research using the chronoscopes – time windows, which enable one to see and hear the past – and into neutrinics, the science underpinning the technology. Against his better judgment, Foster is drawn in, and recruits the assistance of his uncle, Ralph Nimmo, a science writer whose job seems to combine science journalism, ghost-writing grant applications and ghost-writing refereed journal articles (I am not sure such a career actually quite exists yet, but again this seems prescient of the significance now given to ‘impact’ in the funding of UK research).
And, of course, once Foster is able to develop a low-cost easy-to-build version of the chronoscope, it turns out that Potterley’s suspicions are well-grounded. In a pretty well-orchestrated escalation, Asimov reveals that chronoscopes can only view the past up until about a century and a quarter previously, after which the noise to signal ration becomes impenetrably high. After some moral-panicking about new media – that people will spend all their time watching this new channel, close themselves off from the world and become obsessed with trying to relive the past – a far more significant point is made. The ‘past’ actually begins a split second ago, which makes the chronoscope a highly effective surveillance device – and one that, thanks to Foster and Nimmo, anyone can now build. It is the end of privacy, the beginning of an utterly new world.
Asimov’s conclusion also includes the suggestion that what Potterley saw as state tyranny was actually the state acting in the best interests of all. This tension runs through a lot of his work – partly a typical American obsession, partly a Wellsian desire for rational management by a benevolent elite, and partly the Technocracy and Michelism, perhaps tinged with debates about radical democracy versus centralised control (Trotsky vs Lenin vs Stalin), picked up in his Futurian days. The story’s abrupt conclusion, its refusal to try to imagine the world that might be created by the widespread use of chronoscopes, is among other things a reiterated terror of the supposedly irrational (and embodied) masses.
The episode does a pretty good job of capturing the various arguments and counter-arguments driving Asimov’s story forward, but sometimes struggles to enliven them, despite a strong cast of character actors and competent direction. The latter sadly fails to transform the sense of confinement produced by the limited sets into the oppressive claustrophobia that would lend more urgency and conviction.. A small but key change to the story comes at the end of the first scene – rather than completely forgetting about Potterley, Araman sets in motion a game of cat and mouse, once more channeling into television sf Orwell’s and Kneale/Cartier’s Nineteen Eight-fours. But even when Araman visits the Potterleys’ house while Foster is working in the basement there is little real sense of tension or suspense.
Solid production design does visually elaborate on the generational gulf between the Potterleys and Foster quite effectively, though, through the contrast between their Victorian house and his one room apartment, and the set-dressing of these spaces, including rather different artworks on the walls. (Foster’s apartment includes an alcove that can be separated from the main room by one of those sliding/concertinaing plastic doors. In the early 1970s we moved to a house with one of those separating the lounge space from the dining space, and even then it seemed so modern and swish. How wrong we were! My dad, being an omnicompetent sort of chap but not an open-plan kind of guy, had by the mid-seventies ripped it out and built a partition wall, and suddenly we had a living room and a dining room. Woo-hoo!)
Oddly, the aspect of the story the episode does not capture particularly well is Asimov’s cod-Freudian attempt to create psychological depth for Potterley. His strong, seemingly irrational, aversion to cigarettes is gradually revealed as a symptom of his guilt over this three-year-old daughter Laurel’s death in a house fire twenty years earlier, for which he may or may not have been responsible. He becomes terrified that his wife, already more or less obsessed with their long deceased child, will use the technology not only to spend all her time watching the infant Laurel but also discover whether or not he caused the fire. There is also the implication – made more explicit in the episode – that this underlies Potterley’s obsession, which he thinks of as a rational cerebral pursuit, with Carthage’s fiery infant sacrifices. It is all rather clunkily schematic and unsophisticated, and the episode has the unenviable task of compressing it while also playing it down.
It is unclear quite how aware Asimov was of the Freudian imagery in his story. A cigarette is not always just a cigarette and the Carthaginian Moloch took
the form of a hollow, brazen idol with a furnace in its belly. (19)
Although the story seems to imply Laurel’s death was the origin of Potterley’s symptom, this imagery points to a more deeply rooted Oedipal trauma, an unresolved castration anxiety and a terror of the archaic mother that includes terror of engulfment, of a lack of separation from others and, once more, of embodiment. This underscored by the final images of Caroline Potterley.
One real strength of the episode is its transformation of the story into a commentary on television as a medium. When it is highlighted that the past is not some fixed distant object but a constantly unfolding present-moment-just-gone, there is a moment of hesitation between archive and stream and a resonance with the transformations of television drama in the post-war period from live broadcast to recorded/edited more or less as-if-live to recorded and edited post-production. Furthermore, in a nice final touch, the episode also considers the role of audivisual media in the constitution of memory, affect and identity. Footage of a younger Potterley playing with Laurel ends with her running into the foreground and freeze-framing – a nod to the final shot of François Truffaut’s Les quatre cent coups (1959), already paid homage by Tony Richardson’s The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner (1962). But unlike these precursors, the episode then shows this fragment, which recalls home movie footage, several times, revealing Caroline Potterley as its obsessive viewer. It is a complex moment. On the one hand it emphasizes the construction of her character by both Asimov and Paul as consisting entirely of maternal neurosis – a fate shared by both Ripley and Sarah Connor – while repeating a masculine terror of the archaic mother. But it does also suggest how ungrounded that might be since she would rather take joy in seeing her daughter again than pin down her husband’s guilt and punish him.
I have no idea whether or not Bob Shaw was familiar with ‘The Dead Past’, but his Other Days, Other Eyes (1972) reworks an awful lot of this material rather effectively. The first of the stories in his fix-up novel was published in Analog (August 1966) less than a year after the episode was broadcast.
Other things to watch out for — It is not quite clear where ultimate responsibility lies, but either Dudley Simpson, credited with incidental music, or Brian Hodgson, credited with radiophonics, or their guvnor really needs to lay off the theremin. Don’t get me wrong. I love the theremin. It so brilliantly evokes weird alien otherness, conveys a sense of futurity and even, now, of pastness (this is how the future used to sound). But it is overused in this episode – at least it now sounds overused – and without adequate attention to its connotations. The most hilarious sequence comes when Foster is slaving away, secretly constructing a chronosocope, in the basement of the Potterleys’ home. There is a montage of one or other or both Potterleys rising anxiously as if to go down and see what he is doing. But it now comes across as a couple of dissatisfied parents, whose son has returned from college without a job and is now living in the basement, trying to get up the nerve to go and complain that he is playing his theremin too loud.
— The curious maintenance of Asimov’s US framework, particularly of Foster’s education at MIT, presented as the absolute imprimatur of a properly scientific education. Even though he and everyone else in the story sounds impeccably English, and it perhaps being set in London (is the ancient dome visible among the futuristic skyscrapers from Araman’s window St Paul’s Cathedral?). Does this betray a sense of the future as being American? Of an eye being cast to export markets? Or an inattentive adaptation?
Irene Shubik had previously script-edited a 75-minute adaptation of The Caves of Steel (1953; BBC2 5 June 1964), written by Terry Nation, directed by Peter Sasdy and starring Peter Cushing and John Carson, for Story Parade (1964-65), and a 60-minute adaptation of ‘Little Lost Robot’ (1947; ITV 7 July 1962) for the Boris Karloff-hosted Out of the This World (1962), starring Maxine Audley as Susan Calvin and directed by Guy Verney, whose many other television credits include Sydney Newman’s early sf serials for ITV Pathfinders in Space (1950), Pathfinders to Mars (1960-61) and Pathfinders to Venus (1961). Only a few fragments of The Caves of Steel survive, while ‘Little Lost Robot’ is the only episode of Out of the World to survive and is available on a BFI DVD (which includes audio recordings of the series’ adaptations of Tom Godwin’s ‘The Cold Equations’ (1954; 14 July 1962), starring Peter Wyngarde (!) and Jane Asher, and of Terry Nation’s adaptation of Philip K. Dick’s ‘Imposter’ (1953; 21 July 1962), and the script for the series opener, an adaptation of John Wyndham’s ‘Dumb Martian’ (1952; 24 June 1962).)
This makes me really curious to see ‘Little Lost Robot’, and perhaps even more curious to see the script, since Terry Nation has a reputation for not including details of character or setting, arguing that that sort of things was the job of casting, wardrobe and production design. I’m guessing the director had very little to work with.
Asimov’s 2050s seem to have become the 2030s in the television episode, but at one point Asimov’s wording implies a much later date than the story logic demands, and the episode is rather vague about when it is set (an observation, not a complaint).
Sources Isaac Asimov, ‘The Dead Past’, Earth is Room Enough. London: Panther 1960. 9-50. Out of the Unknown DVD boxset. BFI, 2014.