MovieChat Forums > The Day of the Triffids (1963) Discussion > Wyndham's Novel was Prescient [SPOILERS...

Wyndham's Novel was Prescient [SPOILERS]


SPOILERS AHEAD for those who have not read the book.

John Wyndham's original novel was not about a botanical invasion from space. The novel's triffids did not arrive via meteors. Rather, they were a completely human product of high-tech industry, developed for their oil which could be used in a fantastic number of applications.

One daring air pirate, in attempting to smuggle triffid seeds from a triffid farm in Russia, is shot down. The plane explodes, the seeds are caught in air currents and are widely disseminated. Eventually the secret of triffid farming becomes well known. Triffid farms abound around the world, and many people keep de-stinged triffids as amusing "walking plant" pets. The protagonist, Mason, in fact, was stung as a youth by an early-blooming triffid growing in the trash heap of his own back yard. From this incident he develops a partial immunity to triffid venom.

Mason is not a merchant marine sailor as the film portrays him. He's a triffid farmer who has a one-in-a-thousand times accident with a triffid sting, some of whose venom penetrates his protective mask, temporarily blinding him. It is while he is recovering in the hospital that the "Night of the Meteors" occurs. Mason awakes to a world mostly gone blind.

When the triffids find that most humans are blind, they have a field day taking humans as easy prey - as in the movie.

However, unlike the movie, late in the novel, Wyndham's characters speculate at the POSSIBLE HUMAN ORIGINS of the catastrophe that has befallen the world, namely:

1) The triffids are not alien plants. They are the product of human technology. Generally harmless when properly tethered and/or de-stinged, they become terribly dangerous only through the failure of human foresight, namely:

2) The meteor shower, which is not necessarily a meteor shower at all. The chilling speculation is given out that "all kinds of nasty things were circling over our heads in space" - nuclear and bio-weaponry. Why not a ring of "Classified" orbiting weapons designed to burn out the human retina?

This is where the novel is at its most horrific, sardonic and prophetic best. The entire triffid catastrophe is strongly implied to have been entirely man-made.

Mason speculates that a partial test - or a limited attack - of the "green meteor" weapons may have gotten out of control.

Or - perhaps - a genuine swarm of green meteors came along and inadvertently knocked the orbiting retina-burners into the atmosphere, where they fell over the globe, willy-nelly and with no control or discrimination.

Wyndham's novel is thus sci-horror at its darkest (pun intended). Today's superweaponry certainly matches, if not exceeds, Wyndham's grim scenario. Wyndham didn't imagine weapons any worse than those that have existed, do exist, and will be developed in the future.

I would like to see "Triffids" filmed as Wyndham wrote it. Not as an invasion of space plants, but as a completely human-created catastrophe, an ecological horror fantasy that will knock smaller boats like Strieber's "The Day After Tomorrow" clean out of the water.

reply

The novel's triffids did not arrive via meteors.


Neither did the film's. You're right about the GM subtext though.

Also the BBC are screening an(other) adaptation this year. Could be interesting.

reply

"Neither did the film's."

Not so. The opening narration explicitly states, " ...a newcomer, Triffidis Celestis... brought to the earth on the meteorites on the day of the triffids."
Not only brought to the earth on meteorites, but because of that given the name of "triffids from the sky." Later in the film, Coker explains to Mason that "a" triffid - the "first" one - had come to earth on a meteor and that the subsequent green/blinding meteor shower must have brought a huge infestation of the plants.

reply

While I won't doubt that Wyndham's book is good, the 2001 introduction by Edmund Morris isn't. It's the only introduction in a classic book that's mentioned on the spine, at least that I've seen. Who is Edmund Morris and why should I care what he, personally, has to say about the novel? His topics are ill chosen, as well. For some bizarre reason he feels Day of the Triffids is topical in light of the (then very recent) September 11th tragedies. He then goes on to explain Cold War fears and how they relate to Triffids.

The Cold War I can see, yes, obviously Wyndham wrote his novel during the Cold War, so it may have some influences upon it due to the time in which Wyndham lived. But bringing up 9/11? Not only could Wyndham, an English author, never predict the destruction of two American skyscrapers before they were even built, one wonders what jet liners crashing into buildings has to do with a blinding meteor storm and poisonous, flesh-eating plant monsters. So it not only bears not even the vaguest connection to Wyndham's story but, written as it was exactly one year after the actual tragedy, Morris' introduction, in hindsight, looks pretty tasteless in its mentioning of it. Tasteless not by dint of bringing it up, but by bringing it up when it is pointless to do so. Triffids aren't terrorists.

Morris also commits the fatal mistake of mentioning neither this film nor the BBC miniseries anywhere in the introduction. Regardless of how fans of the book feel about its adaptations, the movie and miniseries are what led me to it. I never even knew there was a novel until fairly recently. One could argue that whatever their shortcomings, the film and miniseries (the film in particular) kept the word "Triffid" in the public consciousness, leading to it being mentioned in The Rocky Horror Picture Show of all things. And I'm sure many people like myself saw the movie, then learned about the book, and sought it out.

I'm not suggesting that without the movie Wyndham's novel(s) would've faded away and been forgotten, but, regardless, their existence and popularity doubtless led many people seek it out and read it like I did. (I confess I only just got the book and have only skimmed it a bit; I'm still grousing over Morris' crappy introduction.)

For this, the movie and the miniseries merited a mention. But they don't get one. Edmund Morris is more interested in trying to compare the Triffid takeover to an airborne terrorist attack or something. In the end it doesn't matter, especially since Morris wrote the introduction nearly a decade ago, but still I just felt like griping, and as we all know, the Internet, being serious business as it is (wink wink) offers a perfect conduit by which to vent our meager and petty frustrations.

Having thus vented, I'm off to actually read the damn book. :)

reply

Hope you enjoy the book. You made some pithy comments on the Morris introduction (which I haven't read). Seems some literati are more engaged in pet theories than in explicating the things they review...

reply

I did enjoy the book quite a bit, most of it anyway. After the initial mysterious beginning the novel loses its punch so to speak. I still like it though. Still don't like Morris' intro.

reply

Not sure why you didn't like the introduction, but heres another take on it from a review of the book posted on Amazon.com

http://www.amazon.com/Day-Triffids-20th-Century-Rediscoveries/dp/0812967127

>I should also add that the introduction by Edmund Morris is superb, as he does
> an excellent job of stating why "The Day of the Triffids" is still relevant,
> and perhaps more pertinent than ever in our post-9/11 world. He writes
> particularly strongly of Wyndham's pathos for the victims, and how it mirrors
> our own response to terrorism. The rare novel that offers both gripping
> narrative and thoughtful commentary, "The Day of the Triffids" represents
> post-apocalyptic literature at its best and should rightly be held among the
> best contributions to the genre.


Heres another snippet from the Amazon.dot review that connects the two
>Thus, "The Day of the Triffids" stands quite nicely as a post-apocalyptic
> thriller. However, it is what is going on between the lines that makes this a
>classic. First is the obvious comparison between the triffids and the Soviets. >Not only did the latter create the former, but the swarming, relentless >approach of the triffids nicely mirrors the Western view of Soviet expansions >in the 1950's. However, unlike many Cold War era authors, Wyndham's view of >the world is not entirely black and white. While the Soviet system may be the >enemy, and not one he wants to live under, he doesn't remove all blame from
>the West. By their very response to Soviet moves he sees a world made less,
>not more safe, and one that is walking a knife's edge over the abyss.

hope this helps

--------------------------
RIGOLETTO: I'm denied that common human right, to weep.

reply