[The following is from the Introduction to the collection that houses the chapter.]
The final chapter, which is by Alexander Pawlak and Nicholas Joll, is about Hitchhiker’s as satire. Actually – and rather to the point, given the business of this book – the argument is that Hitchhiker’s is philosophical satire. In making that argument, we draw parallels between Hitchhiker’s, on the one hand, and famous satires by Swift and Voltaire, on the other. Another topic we discuss is the relation between…
Read more[The following is from the Introduction to the collection that houses the chapter.]
The final chapter, which is by Alexander Pawlak and Nicholas Joll, is about Hitchhiker’s as satire. Actually – and rather to the point, given the business of this book – the argument is that Hitchhiker’s is philosophical satire. In making that argument, we draw parallels between Hitchhiker’s, on the one hand, and famous satires by Swift and Voltaire, on the other. Another topic we discuss is the relation between Hitchhiker’s and other, or more traditional, science fiction. The chapter contains material on the meaning of life as well.
