“Who Can Replace a Man” by Brian Aldiss: The Central Paragraph

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Analysis
Conclusion
Bibliography

Introduction

“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?” (Aldiss, p. 205).

A theme of possible future relations between a man and machines is illuminated in the short story Who Can Replace a Man by Brian Aldiss. The author chose the machines’ perspective for his work of fiction, the events are viewed through the so-called eyes of penners, tractors, and field-minders, emphasizing their independence and ability to evaluate the situation critically and draw conclusions. The paragraph under analysis may be regarded as central for the entire story because the question voiced by the penner wondering who can replace a man, coincides with the central idea of the work.

Analysis

Whatever complicated brain the machines might possess, based on logic, does not allow solving any substandard problems. Machines were created by man to satisfy the growing demands of humanity. Though machines depicted by Aldiss exceed all expectations of a present-day reader, still, their existence would be senseless without a man. Machines admit this fact while lack of orders causes their anxiety. In the paragraph under analysis, the roles of men and machines are defined. The penner admits that any machine might be replaced with another one, while it is much more difficult with a man. The first part of the story depicts the attempts of the machines to answer the first question of the paragraph under analysis, whether the men were broken down. The lack of orders depicted in the paragraph appears to be a pre-condition for the chaos depicted in the following chapters. Being left to their resources, machines do not know what to do. From the one side, they get accustomed to executing orders and are unable to occupy their time without men’s instructions. On the other hand, the sense of their existence is lost after the men do not need them anymore. The chaos and the war between machines with brains of different classes are predetermined by a lack of orders and the unexpected disappearance of humans. The logical conclusion drawn by the machines from their suppositions demonstrates the level of their brains development and simplifies the problem. Analyzing the situation, machines omit numerous additional factors which would be taken into consideration if the conclusions were made by a man. The supposition that the men have broken down, may be regarded as a figure of speech. In one of the following chapters the penner, one of the main characters, clarifies the reasons for people’s disappearance: “Once the world was overpopulated, and then the soil was exhausted in raising adequate food. This has caused a diet deficiency” (Aldiss, p. 205). The term of diet deficiency is not clear to the machines. For this reason, they explain the disappearance of people by their breakdown, a term accessible to them.

The machines are trying to answer the central question of the paragraph under analysis from the very beginning of the story up to its end. At the very beginning, it is left without any answer and remains rhetoric. The machines do not voice their suppositions concerning their future without the human masters though each of them has got its own opinion of the current state of affairs. For example, the operator, which is assured that due to its brain it has to become a leader of a group, tries to give instructions to the rest of the procession. It notes that “Since man no longer rules us, we will rule ourselves. It will be better than being ruled by man” (Aldiss, p. 208). The machines enjoy their independence but need somebody or something to be ruled by. Their self-government resulted in chaos proving their inability to make independent decisions and choose a leader. The author makes attempts of machines to rule the world resemble the processes in human society. Some machines regard themselves as smarter than others and try to rule them. Expressing its opinion of people, the penner notes that “They should never come back” (Aldiss, p. 208). Still, contradicting their own words, they start to look for people in the mountains. They have been deprived of the function of self-control and are created to serve people and satisfy their needs. The central question of the paragraph is answered at the end of the story. The only man dying from starvation manages to rule several machines at once. Nobody and nothing can replace a man. All attempts of the machines have not been crowned with success, an only order of a man to get him food, clarifies the situation, while the machines undoubtedly recollect who their master is.

Conclusion

The paragraph under analysis is central to the rest of the story Who Can Replace a Man by Brian Aldiss, raising the main question of the work. The rest of the plot depicts the unsuccessful attempts of the machines to rule themselves, while the last paragraph of the story clarifies the author’s main idea and gives an answer to the central question.

Bibliography

Aldiss, Brian W. “Who Can Replace a Man?” Masterpieces: The Best Science Fiction of the 20th Century. Ed. Card, Orson Scott. New York: Ace Books, 2004. pp. 203 – 211.

Click Here To Order Now!

“Who Can Replace a Man” by Brian Aldiss: The Central Paragraph

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)