New Books Network: "Utopia is Boring" with Evie Kendal
Podcast: New Books Network – Concept Art
Host: Pat McConville
Guest: Dr. Evie Kendal
Date: October 14, 2025
Overview
This episode explores the interplay between science fiction, bioethics, and emerging reproductive technologies with Dr. Evie Kendal, a bioethicist and public health scientist. The discussion covers nostalgia in media, dystopian and utopian motifs in science fiction, the ethics of artificial wombs (ectogenesis), and the importance of nuanced literary analysis when using fiction in scholarly bioethical arguments. Dr. Kendal also shares about her upcoming book, her creative work, and the pitfalls of technopessimism.
1. Dr. Evie Kendal’s Interdisciplinary Journey
[02:14–03:39]
- Background:
- Started in biomedical science, realized she needed a creative outlet, and added English literature.
- Progression: Biomedical science → Literature diploma → Literature Honors → Public Health Masters → PhD in Bioethics (focus: artificial wombs in science fiction).
- Interdisciplinarity:
- Consistently intertwines science/technology with the arts (literature, theater, cultural studies).
- Quote:
"I'd be in the lab and then I'd go read some fairy tales. And that was a fantastic sort of opportunity to have both of those sides of my interests being met." – Dr. Evie Kendal [02:35]
2. Art, Nostalgia, and Pandemic Coping
[03:39–04:21]
-
Art is crucial for scholars and the general public, especially during challenging periods such as the pandemic.
-
Nostalgia TV and other cultural products provided emotional support, underscoring the power of art to help people cope.
Quote:
"A lot of what I was doing was the same as everyone else. Sitting on my couch watching nostalgia TV to feel better." – Dr. Evie Kendal [03:46]
3. Science Fiction in Bioethics: Uses and Misuses
[05:35–09:20]
-
Many bioethicists rely on the negative imagery from science fiction (e.g., The Matrix) as a shorthand for danger, sometimes without deeper analysis or argument.
-
The danger in this approach:
- Misrepresents both the text and the technology.
- Ignores the nuanced societal context science fiction often presents.
-
Importance of genuine interdisciplinarity and close literary reading.
-
Science fiction’s technology is often a metaphor, not the core cause of dystopia.
Quote:
"When you take the piece of technology in the abstract and apply it as if it were going to be exactly the same in the real world as in whatever dystopian world has been built in that science fiction narrative, without any of the other social changes... it's very unrealistic." – Dr. Evie Kendal [07:11]
4. Why Dystopia Prevails in Science Fiction (And Utopia Is Boring)
[09:20–11:39]
-
Dystopia is more dramatic and compelling to explore than utopia.
-
Utopian narratives (“perfect world” stories) tend to lack dramatic tension, making them less interesting and less common today.
-
Science fiction and bioethics overlap in posing "what if?" scenarios, but direct comparisons can mislead if context is ignored.
Quote:
"There was a time where utopian narratives were quite popular. ... And we went very heavily to the other side, which is that dystopian exploration of possible futures." – Dr. Evie Kendal [10:00]
5. The Fallacy of Technological Determinism and Conflation
[11:39–19:29]
-
Bioethicists often over-rely on technopessimism, assuming new tech (like ectogenesis) will inevitably lead to negative outcomes (e.g., cloning, human factories).
-
Dr. Kendal’s commissioned sci-fi piece for the Berggruen Institute intentionally provided multiple, nuanced possibilities.
-
Good bioethical analysis and creative work can inform each other, especially using literary techniques like point of view.
On Gattaca:
- Viewer sympathy is shaped by whose story is told; a different character focus would lead to different conclusions on genetic engineering.
Quote:
"Most scientists are actually not evil masterminds... They're actually just helping to cure diseases. ... We need to make sure, of course, for the very few that are, that we have protections in place, but also that we don't inadvertently cause harm..." – Dr. Evie Kendal [17:20]
6. The Need for Close Literary Reading in Bioethics
[19:29–23:00]
-
Many bioethics arguments misuse literary references (e.g., Frankenstein, Brave New World) by trading on tropes rather than engaging the actual texts.
-
Such superficial use is “scholastically lazy”—a visceral trump card rather than a real argument.
-
Encourages deeper, more respectful use of literature for richer insights, and sees storytelling as essential to human reasoning.
Quotes:
"What we see in many uses of science fiction in bioethics is misreading ... If you've read that text very closely, you might see it as, you know, the tragic victim of technology is the monster. ... You can take very different meanings from that." – Dr. Evie Kendal [19:44]
"It was described to me once as scholastically lazy. I thought that was a great phrase. So it's not really arguing, it's using a trump card." – Dr. Evie Kendal [21:23]
7. Upcoming Book and Textual Case Studies
[24:50–31:17]
-
Book: "Science Fiction and the Ethics of Artificial Wombs" (Bloomsbury Academic, 2026).
-
Octavia Butler’s Dawn:
- Explores Afro-futurism, human-alien hybridization, and reproductive trauma through protagonist Lilith.
- The narrative is shaped by point of view; a different perspective would yield different attitudes toward artificial gestation.
-
The Pod Generation (Film):
- Provides a counter-narrative to dystopias, imagining capitalist adoption of artificial gestation.
- Depicts nuanced experiences of pregnancy, bonding, technological risk, and capitalist motives.
- Highlights both benefits and problematic stereotypes regarding gender roles and reproduction.
Quote:
"Had we got the story from a different point of view, it might have been a completely different narrative. It may have been very positive toward the idea of using artificial gestation..." – Dr. Evie Kendal [26:24]
8. New Work & Final Thoughts
[31:17–32:15]
- Dr. Kendal is developing the "creative utopian bioethics methodology".
- Expanding into ethics of planetary defense (asteroids, comet threats, and technology policy).
- Underscores the importance of interdisciplinary storytelling in ethical analysis.
Notable Quotes & Moments
- On Interdisciplinarity:
"Always... bringing those two areas in together, the science... and then more artistic interests..." [02:50]
- On Nostalgia and Art:
"Nostalgia TV kept a lot of people alive. Stories really matter." [23:58]
- On Dystopia:
"Utopian narratives... they're just a bit boring. ... We went very heavily to the other side, which is that dystopian exploration of possible futures." [09:25–10:00]
- On Technopessimism:
"Most scientists are actually not evil masterminds in the lab hoping to clone people." [17:20]
- On Misusing Tropes:
"It's not really arguing, it's using a trump card. Because you know that people have a visceral negative reaction as soon as you say Brave New World..." [21:23]
- On Narrative Perspective:
"When I was writing my creative work, I was thinking, okay, whose perspective are we actually going to focus on and make sure that it wasn't always the same in each case?" [12:56]
Key Timestamps
- 02:20 – Evie Kendal’s academic and personal background
- 03:42 – Influence of art and nostalgia on coping
- 05:35 – Science fiction’s role and misuse in bioethics
- 09:25 – Why dystopia dominates, and utopia is boring
- 11:39 – The dangers of technopessimism and conflation in sci-fi
- 19:43 – Importance of close literary reading for bioethics
- 24:50 – Upcoming book and case study on 'Dawn' and 'The Pod Generation'
- 31:19 – Current and future projects
Summary for New Listeners
This episode is a must-listen for anyone interested in the intersection of science, emerging technology, literature, and ethics. Dr. Evie Kendal deftly unpacks how and why science fiction shapes public and scholarly understanding of technology, often in unexpectedly reductive or misleading ways. She calls for a deeper, more rigorous engagement with fiction—arguing that careful literary reading and creative thinking are necessary for responsible ethical analysis as technology continues to evolve.