One of my most popular articles, a very well received piece on the line between science and science fiction, exploring whether or not our 2015 will be at all like "Back to the Future"

1. Back to the Present: Part MMXV
Written by Ben Chapple
4:29pm October 21, 2015.
That’s the deadline, folks. That’s how long we have.
Robert Zemeckis changed the world when he gave audiences his 1985 science
fiction film franchise Back to the Future. Michael J Fox himself put it best in an
interview, explaining, “The irony of this movie about time is that it’s timeless.”
He could not have been more accurate. It propelled the careers of Fox and his co-
star Christopher Lloyd; made the DeLorean DMC-12 an iconic vehicle with
incomparable street cred; and bestowed the pop culture vernacular with phrases
such as “Flux Capacitor”, “1.21 gigawatts”, and, of course, “Great Scott!”
However, the impact of Zemeckis’ sequel to his first Hollywood blockbuster,
entitled Back to the Future Part II (BTTF2), has held an even firmer grip on our
contemporary society since its 1989 release than its predecessor did four years
prior. The reason for this, most notably, was its fictionalised portrayal of October
21, 2015. Who could forget Marty McFly and Doc Brown flying towards the
camera and then disappearing into thin air, only to reappear in a 2015 so
colourful and kaleidoscopic, with technology so advanced and with fashion so
ludicrous it almost made us laugh? 1989 audiences would no doubt have
envisioned this world, no less than 26 years in their future, with a large degree of
cynicism and humour. They probably would have laughed when Marty ordered a
Pepsi from a digital Michael Jackson or when Griff Tannen revealed an
extendable baseball bat while draped in clothing that could only be described at
Mad Max meets Mardi Gras.
Without doubt BTTF2 holds a dear place in our hearts, but for many of us this
sentimental relationship has much to do with the wildly fantastical and
hilariously hideous representation of our future. If Marty and Doc did not travel
to the future, it is likely that the franchise would not have remained as firmly
rooted in our pop culture as it is. Much of this is due to our insatiable lust for
prediction. Why else did Marty want the Sports Almanac? Why else do we
gamble, make forecast lists of the Oscars, bet on who will win the Superbowl or
adore texts like George Orwell’s 1984 or Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner?
Humans are designed such that predicting the future becomes a game, and we
make educated guesses only to find out the result some time later. It’s simply fun
to do, and that’s a huge reason why BTTF2 has retained its throne in science
fiction after all these years – because Zemeckis predicts a future that is within
reach and we are now on the cusp of discovering the answer. Back to the Future,
as with most other famous science fiction works like Total Recall and Planet of
the Apes, employs a ginormous degree of creative license, and yet we as
audiences love them dearly because we interpret them as predictions of our

2. future. This is where the line between science fiction and science first becomes
blurred; when audiences, in our desire to suppose and explore realms just
beyond our reach, absorb science fiction texts, which have been written and
designed to entertain and commentate, and interpret them as science fact.
This is not a new concept. For years, we have seen authors, artists, and
filmmakers alike constructing futuristic landscapes both in the near future and in
the far future that, for whatever purpose intended by the creator, shaped an
expectation for audiences. George Orwell and Isaac Asimov are notable examples
of authors challenging expectations by presenting futures that vary from
totalitarian regimes to a robotic apocalypse, and have recalibrated how their
audiences envision the future since the early 1900s. While these examples
remain incontrovertibly significant, none have more relevance in pop culture
than BTTF2 and there are two simple reasons for this. Firstly, October 21 2015
has been getting closer and closer and is almost upon us, as is the answer to our
question, “Is BTTF2 an accurate prediction of the future?” And secondly,
Zemeckis’ future looks a whole lot more fun. I mean, who really wants a future
like Blade Runner?
Just over the horizon, October 21 2015 awaits us, but what dwells there? Will
there be hoverboards and flying cars? Will we wear mesh and spikes with
rhinoceros-horned shoes?
We need only walk into our living rooms to answer these questions. It is
indisputable that, as science fiction informs our expectations of the future,
naturally it begins to inform science itself. This is where the line between science
fiction and science once again blurs; science fiction sets us a challenge. Asimov,
Orwell, Zemeckis, and Scott stare science in the face and dare it to match them,
or to even surpass them. That is what great science fiction does; it not only
cautions, but it informs.
BTTF2 specifically was not the first time we saw flat screen TVs or virtual
glasses, but its genre certainly was. Decades ago, science fiction writers imagined
technologies and landscapes we would not see for years. Google Glass and Oculus
Rift virtual glasses look remarkably similar to those in BTTF2, as well as other
designs in Star Trek and The Terminator. While Funny or Die made a viral video
of a (disappointingly) fake hoverboard, Hendo has developed an actual
hoverboard with spokesperson Tony Hawk. Flat screen TVs, video conferencing,
drones, robots, biometric identification and automation are just some aspects of
BTTF2’s fictionalised 2015 that are arguably integral to our present 2015. While
flying cars and Nike power laces currently only exist as prototypes and promises,
credit must be given where it is due. One would hesitate to say that Zemeckis,
along with his science fiction posse, directly inspired scientists to stroll down to
the lab and dedicate themselves to building a pink hoverboard simply because
that’s what Zemeckis told them to do, but the connection is nonetheless
undeniable.
And this is where the relationship between science fiction and science proves
itself not to be a lateral beast; rather it is a cyclical one. Science fiction presents a
projection of our future, albeit intertwined with heavy creative license, but that
projection needs to come from somewhere – historically, the number of

3. successful predictions proves that it cannot simply be sheer dumb luck. Ergo, as
science fiction informs science, so science informs science fiction. If, generally
speaking, science exists to explain and predict the unpredictable, science fiction
is there to express those predictions through an accessible creative form. It’s a
link so obvious many overlook it, but the greatest science fiction writers prove
this to be true, for example Arthur C. Clarke, author of 2001: A Space Odyssey, had
degrees in math and physics, while Isaac Asimov had a PhD in biochemistry.
H.G. Wells, the world’s first futurologist, is arguably the best science fiction
writer of our time, having predicted technologies such as genetic mutation (The
Island of Dr Moreau, 1896), digital tablets and automatic doors (When the Sleeper
Awakes, 1899), warplanes (The Shape of Things to Come, 1933) and lists accurate
details of a devastating device he called an atomic bomb (The World Set Free,
1914) after having earned a degree in biology from the Royal College of Science
in London. While not every science fiction text is nearly as accurate as his, Wells’
success is representative of the relationship between science and science fiction,
the accuracy of his predictions earning him the title, The Man Who Invented
Tomorrow.
But Wells’ tomorrow is our today, so who is our H.G. Wells? Who will invent
our tomorrow? It’s a big question and not one that I can answer. Just like the
original audiences of BTTF2, it’s something that we cannot find the answer to for
many years to come, but that will certainly not stop us from speculating. After all,
if this article proves anything it’s that speculating is what we do best. If H.G Wells
could predict the atomic bomb, why can’t we predict the fashion trend for
summer in 2025? One could argue that the increasing trend in wearable
technologies could see landscapes similar to BTTF2 evolve, where our personal
devices compress into digital forms attached to or designed as clothing apparel.
We see hints of this emerging with Fitbit wristbands and the new Apple Watch,
while Forbes conducted a survey concluding that 71% of young adults want
wearable tech. Personalised clothing technologies have existed since the 90s
with wearable mood rings and hypercolor t-shirts, so it seems the trend will only
grow more advanced and in-demand as our technological progress accelerates.
In the end, what’s certain about our future is that it’s entirely unpredictable
and – as science expands, technology grows more advanced, and awareness of
individuality in a consumer culture reaches its peak – it seems our predictions of
the future will fluctuate every few weeks. Will our future be clean and romantic
like Spike Jonze’s Her or will it be characterised by an interplanetary class divide
as in Neill Blomkamp’s Elysium? Overpopulation, global warming, famine,
economic collapse, zombie apocalypse, releasing Jaws 19 in 3D; in the eyes of
current science fiction, there seems to be a plethora of ways our world will end,
and one can only hope that these predictions are not as accurate as Wells’ and
Asimov’s.
But in the meantime, it’s not yet 4:29pm October 21 2015, so I’ve still got my
fingers crossed for Mattel to deliver a bright pink hoverboard to my front door.