Last updated: July 8th, 2009
I was wandering about my local library when I stumbled across Seth Godin's The Dip. I love Seth Godin's blog, so I had to read this book. There is only one word to describe The Dip : enlightening. As I was reading it, questions started to flood my mind. Is the space program mediocre? Can anything on the cutting edge be mediocre? Should we give up on a mediocre space program? What would you define as a mediocre space program? What would you define as a exceptional space program? Was Apollo only beginner's luck; something bound to happen because is was humanity's first trip to the moon? Is this the worst period of the space age? Is the space movement suffering from a temporary setback that we will overcome if we keep pushing?
This post is my attempt to answer these question. Also, my head will roll because of this post. I want to create a discussion and the space community needs to hear this.
Apollo was beginner's luck. The public was stunned by entering the space age, it was new, it was fresh and it generated support because of this. Fear accelerated and fueled Apollo. During the time of Apollo, you where nearly a traitor if you didn't support NASA.The public fully supported space because of those reasons.
Apollo existed in a time where the motivations for space where different. Times have changed.
CNN has a segment called The Cafferty File where views give their comments on questions Jack Cafferty asks. The best comments are then read on air. On July 6, 2009, Mr. Cafferty asked "In light of the ballooning National Debt, what priority should the U.S. space program have?". The pro-space comments where very good and concise, all far better then my comment. But, the anti-space comments where interesting. Check them out here. Those comments can be summed up with the following statement: "the space program is a waste of money". The space program seems to be the scapegoat for the recession. What once inspired is now hated. That's not the end to the public opinion hole we have dug ourselves into. The National Space Society says, in regards to barriers to space habitation,
The general public is rapidly losing interest in space development: (1) because the pace of space development is frustratingly slow, especially when compared to incredibly fast pace of the home computer revolution; (2) because NASA is forced by taxpayer watchdogs to portray human space activities in the most boring manner; (3) because the real and exaggerated perceived risks of outer space frightens them; and (4) because little activity, planning, and public discussion occurs regarding private trips into space. ~NSS
“The dip is the long stretch between beginner's luck and real accomplishment” (Godin 18). Welcome to the dip, the time will be between Apollo and the next moon landings will be painful. Apollo was humanity's beginner's luck in space, welcome to the real space experience, humanity. Welcome to a frontier the demands a sustainable reason to explore. We can't even go to the moon based on fear, nationalism and new experiences. Commercial space will be a real accomplishment. An international effort in space will be a real accomplishment.
Trenches of Public Opinion
We might be breaking a few laws of physics because of how deep this hole is. But, I think Seth Godin's book gives us the reason behind this. “It's called Zipf's law, and it applies to resumes and college application rates and best-selling records and everything in between. Winners win big because the marketplace loves a winner” (Godin 7). Space habitation is in second place in terms of public support for a vision of the future. First place goes to human extinction. I need to do a study to prove this claim, but, from what I over heard in the halls of my classroom, more students are worrying about, thinking about and imagining the world ending on December 12, 2012 then students considering a future where space is settled. The 2012 "movement" is taking what should be our supporters.
But, in a way, the 2012 "movement" is the best vision of the future. "The consumer get[s] to decide [the best vision of the future], not [us]" (Godin 11). This is a problem because "now there are a million micromarkets, but each micromarket still has a best" vision of the future (Godin 11). The space movement is a micromarket, a market that is well saturated. There are a ton of micromarkets that we haven't touched. For example, I need to run a another study to prove my point, but, I think people are more likely to support the 2012 "movement" then the space movement because the bible portrays human extinction; there is no mention of space habitation in the bible. This is regardless of religion. NASA can not give out press releases and hope convince the public. We, the grunts of the space movement, have to go into as many micromarkets as possible and convince each one. We must become the best vision of space for each group of people on this planet. NASA can not convince our friends, we must convince our friends because we can only craft a message the appeals to the values held by each micromarket.
Reinventing a Movement
So many in the space movement are telling the public that we can not quit on space. But, “the opposite of quitting isn't waiting around. No, the opposite of quitting is rededication. The opposite of quitting is an invigorated new strategy designed to break the problem apart” (Godin 51). What I'm suggesting is scraping most, if not all of our strategy, and reinventing it without the influence of Apollo because Apollo was a fluke. In other words, the mindset that brought us to the moon will not bring us to the moon again.
Reactions
So, I stuck my neck out by posting this. I'm struggling with those questions I posted at the beginning. Was Apollo really a fluke? Can we get past the decline in public opinion? Should we reinvent the movement? Feel free to flame me.
Sources
Godin, Seth. The Dip. New York, Penguin Group, 2007.
Photo by adamhenning
