Below are two images of artificial intelligence that I have produced. What is the first thought that comes to mind when you look at them?
“Knight shoots the laser pistol” (left), “Caveman in his office” (right), images generated by author via Leonardo AI
On the left is a medieval knight with a laser pistol. On the right is a caveman who starts the day by cursing Monday and forgetting to take a sip of his coffee. But he has an office with a nice open space, so why is he so angry?
Okay, no need to say more, there has been a time shift here. The things of one era have been attributed to another era. We call this “against time” phenomenon anachronism.
In fact, this term is present in many works we are familiar with. We all watched “The Flintstones” when we were young. You may remember the interesting technological devices embedded in the Stone Age fiction. The modern structure created in the cartoon tries to give the perception of today and this attracts our attention. Because we live with this technology, we are familiar with the labels created and do not find them strange.
Of course, this structure is often found in literature. Frankly, when I think of it, I think of examples from the science fiction genre. Because using such a form in any fictional text might not be a problem. After all, in fiction we have the freedom to express what we want in the way we want. Especially if we are talking about a work that deals with the element of time travel, it would be absurd not to experience it.
Although the first thing that comes to mind is a technological or futuristic effect, this does not have to be the case. In fact, it does not even have to be indicated by a concrete device or object. The essence is that everything that is known is not appropriate to the time.
But it should also be noted that what we are actually talking about is a structure that is created through knowledge and awareness. This leads us to talk about a structure that we can generally create retrospectively. In other words, it may be difficult to give an anachronistic example with our assumptions about the future, because we cannot know exactly what might happen in the future. But in a fictional world this will of course be true.
Let’s say you find a work of Shakespeare that has just come to light today and, what do you know, you suddenly see that he uses the word “computer” in a part of the text. There is no such thing, of course, but it would be absurd if there were. But the strange thing is that if he had used the word “computer”, we would either think that (since we are looking from the present to the past) he was a person of great farsightedness, or (since we are looking at history in its normal flow from the past to the present) the existence of this word would have been accepted (with a different meaning) even then and could have affected the present. In other words, the occurrence of something anachronistic is more likely in fictional contexts and alternative scenarios.
And now for a real anachronism from Shakespeare. You weren’t expecting this, were you? Well, anything goes with Shakespeare. In his play “Julius Caesar”, there are clock metaphors, even though clocks had not yet been invented in Caesar’s time. In other words, Shakespeare is actually acting by thinking through the consequences of his own era and leaving an effect on a past era that does not belong to him. However, as far as I have read, scholars are still not sure whether this is intentional or accidental.
We have said that the basis of anachronism is really either lack of knowledge or confusion. Let’s take a contemporary example. Suppose we are watching a historical documentary. The actors who portray it have to wear the clothes of the period. But let’s say the director is not competent in this matter, or is careless for some reason, then he will have an anachronistic attitude. And because another costume from another period will be used, which does not correspond to the reality of the past, this will be an example of anachronism.
“Caesar wears a watch”, image generated by author via Leonardo AI
In this case, it is necessary to consider the following: what effect can the use of anachronism have in works?
As we have mentioned, when it takes place in fictions, it will provide the author with flexibility and freedom. If the narrative is in line with reality, the parallels that may occur will create hypothetical scenarios and will capture an attraction. At the same time, everything outside of reality may also prepare the ground for the formation of a comedy element as it will add absurdity to the situation. “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy” is an ideal example for this. In the work, it reiterates that a simple and everyday item such as a towel will be useful for future events. In addition to this, I think this is the most beautiful aspect, it is perfect for metaphor and symbolism. When an object or an idea at the beginning of the work reveals itself out of place towards the end and makes the whole narrative make sense, it usually creates the effect of “Ah, now I get it!” or “Wow! The director really made a good connection”.
On the contrary, it may not always be useful. This is because, as the name suggests, irrelevant placement of elements in relation to time can cause confusion. This can be even more problematic if the flow of the work is not linear. If the subject matter is part of reality, it should be thoroughly researched rather than historically appropriated, or the dosage of fiction to be attempted at unknown points should be properly adjusted. For inconsistencies that may occur outside of reality are tantamount to exposing oneself to criticism. Although it is difficult to completely undermine the theme, when dealing with a local narrative, it may also cause wear and tear or disrupt the authenticity of the theme. Historical approaches should therefore be read in a culturally logical way. While these rules are more malleable in the fictional world, as soon as there is a juxtaposition with reality (think of cultural elements from different parts of the world in works of fantasy or science fiction), the audience will prefer to rationalise and seek consistency.
When it comes to time, the idea comes to mind that what is written may be old, as well as concrete examples or ideas. “If a writer uses the words of an earlier period of a language, is this an example of anachronism?” The answer is both yes and no. The language of Shakespeare’s time was called Early Modern English. If I consciously use the English of that period and write a work now, it is called “archaism”. If, on the other hand, I mix several languages of the old period and use them carelessly (for example, the words “Old English” and “Early Modern English” together), this is an example of anachronism. Because, as we said at the beginning, the main thing is that there is periodic inconsistency.
Finally, I thought about whether there might be examples of this in our personal lives. We all have a bit of nostalgia or a passion for older, more ancient things. I asked myself, “Are our activities, in which we adopt this kind of style, anachronistic in structure because they contrast with the present?” It seems that nostalgic objects, some activities in the traditional style, antique or historical collections do not make us anachronistic. However, this is true in a situation where we completely adapt our lives to the old style. In other words, we have to get rid of the things of today and belong to another era. This means, of course, first and foremost a complete detachment from technology.
If you like wearing old clothes and learning about them, you are simply creating a style for yourself. But if you adapt your whole life to that period, if you consciously surround yourself with the things of that period, you become anachronistic. Monks are the best example of this.
I am not sure how often this literary device is used. When I think about it, there is only one proper point in my own fiction that comes to mind, but it is obvious that it creates a surprise factor. Although my fiction has a linear flow and occasionally uses examples from the past, I cannot say that I use an anachronistic style. Moreover, the fact that the inconsistency it creates has to be carried out consistently is both a paradoxical situation and proof that it is not as easy as it is made out to be.
Comments