Amstiel and Rhoson

In some of the subglacial lakes surrounding the ice caps, life is teeming. Peculiar residents are the amstiel and its tribe. This is a type of basal antitrematan, related to the terrestrial shellubim, which has evolved a unique method of locomotion. Most non-periostracan antitrematans begin life as a mobile, albeit planktonic, larva, which grows up into a sessile adult. The amstiel on the other hand stays mobile throughout its entire life. It achieved this by retaining the muscles inside the tunicine stalk, which the shellubim lose in their adult life, and expanding them into what used to be holdfasts. While the stalk still develops into a hardened, wood-like stem in the adult, said holdfasts have developed joints, becoming arthropodous legs.

This lifelong mobility gives the amstiel a great advantage in an everchanging environment, for it lives by walking across the ice-ceiling of the frozen-over lakes. Often the ice is thin enough to let through precious light, which photosynthetic organisms use to live, including relatives of the amstiel. The amstiel itself is a pure filter-feeder dining on the plankton and detritus produced in these upper lake-levels. But the ice is everchanging, always growing and shrinking with the temperatures above surface. Sessile organisms are entombed by the ice in winter, while in summer they may lose their footing and can even float to the surface through temporary holes in the ice, where they can die from the exposure or be picked up by above-ground predators. The amstiel can simply walk away from these problems, migrating to suitable spots and anchoring itself there to filter in peace.

These newfound legs have also opened up a new way of reproduction for these organisms. Instead of broadcasting free-floating propagules and larvae into the water, two amstiel simply meet up, impregnate each other and walk away from the affair. The young gestate inside the body and are birthed as miniature adults already capable of walking, though the shell and stalk still need to solidify.

Of course, the amstiel cannot walk away from every problem, for speedy predators may lurk in the water. Though thankfully, for our individual here, the passing rhoson is seemingly just telling it to get out of the way, as it hunts a darting selpie. The rhoson is a periostracan of a kind even more basal than the kratox. Like it, the valves have fused into a skin-covered carapace, the main feeding organ has become a toothed, periscopic proboscis and the stalk has turned into a tail, but there are still reminders of an earlier form of life. The scolecodonts which make up the jaw are not fused into a bird-like beak, but articulate independently of each other as vertical mandibles, much like the mouth apparatus of a polychaete worm. Viewable through the thin skin of the fins is also the arm-skeleton, which is still organised much as in the exposed lophophores of the amstiel, just more robust and muscular. Though seemingly primitive, animals such as this are among the top-predators in the few remaining aquatic habitats of Mars and, as the fossil records indicate, have been for a very long time. In some ways they were the closest thing Mars ever brought forth approaching fish and possibly they even suppressed the early evolution of the aquatic onychognaths and aspiderms. But whereas some distant fossil relatives of the rhoson could grow to sizes rivalling the largest of Earth’s sharks, each of the animals you see here pictured could easily fit into a human hand. Actually holding them is not recommended, for the rhoson’s jaws could easily cut through a spacesuit, while for the amstiel it would just be demeaning to be held like a popsicle.

Why you should watch Robinson Crusoe on Mars

If one had to accurately describe Robinson Crusoe on Mars, one would not have to look farther than the movie’s title, as it is pretty much exactly what it says. But if one had to describe it in another way to modern audiences, it is basically The Martian by Andy Weir, but released eight years before Weir was even born. Coming out in 1964, the movie tells the story of an astronaut stranded (nearly) alone on Mars and trying to fight for survival. Being made before the likes of 2001: A Space Odyssey or Planet of the Apes, one would expect this to be a typical science fiction movie of the era, with all the campiness that comes with it, from bad acting and lousy effects to concepts and creatures that are more fantastical than they are scientific. But, while there are traces of camp here and there, Robinson Crusoe on Mars, made by Byron Haskin, best known for 1953’s The War of the Worlds, decidedly stands out, as it is a genuine attempt at classic science fiction and was made at a crossroads between our old and new understanding of Mars. As such, it is of historic importance, as a real attempt was made to capture the then current vision of the surface conditions of the red planet. Don’t believe me? They even went as far as putting the label “This film is scientifically authentic” on the poster. Is that not hilariously fantastic? More movies should have that. What if we started putting labels of scientific accuracy on sci-fi media, complete with a rating system?

The Story

The movie begins with a manned mission in the orbit of Mars. On board are the two astronauts, Christopher Draper, played by Paul Mantee, and Dan McReady, played by Adam West (yes, THE Adam West. Batman is in this movie, deal with it), as well as their pet companion, a spider monkey named Mona (female in the movie, but according to IMDb played by a male monkey, who had to wear fur pants to hide that fact). As they orbit, they come too close into contact with a meteoroid and have to abandon the main ship by separately entering the escape pods to land on the planet.

There, Draper crash-lands alone, completely wrecking his vessel but surviving. The surface of Mars is arid, cold, no vegetation or life in sight. Though the air pressure is still high enough and there are low amounts of oxygen, so that Draper can take off his helmet and survive for about thirteen minutes before he has to return to breathing with his air tanks. This is obviously where the movie differs from modern knowledge, but it was very accurate to how surface conditions were envisioned in the early 60s. Earth-based telescopes and spectroscopy had already advanced enough by then to determine that Mars was not hospitable enough to support the civilizations and fantastic fauna of older fiction, but without direct measurements taken, it was still thought that the air pressure was high enough (in part because the dust veil around the planet gave astronomers the impression of a thicker atmosphere), perhaps similar to that around high mountaintops on Earth, that simple life was possible on the surface and that human astronauts might only need breathing masks. That Draper can breathe for a few minutes without tanks also seems plausible with then current knowledge, as seasonally changing colour-patches on the surface (not seen in the movie, but referenced at one point) were interpreted as vegetation and where there are plants there might also be a bit of oxygen. Only a year after this movie was released would Mariner-4 fly by Mars and show that even this scenario was too optimistic. 

After Draper salvages what he can, he makes his way across the lonely dunes and hills of Mars, finding shelter in a cave. Most of the movie was shot in Death Valley, but smartly, the blue sky of Earth and other background shots were replaced with matte paintings by Albert Whitlock (who would later also work on Star Trek and Carpenter’s The Thing), which give the movie an appropriate and rather beautiful alien atmosphere. Some shots even look remarkably similar to real life photos that would later be returned by the Mars rovers. The following days, as he uses up his air supply, Draper tries to find his friend McReady again, but is devastated to see that he has not only also crashed but died in the process. Only Mona the monkey survived. Together they go back to Draper’s cave, where he knows that the dwindling air supply spells doom. Nearly suffocating to death, he then finds out by accident that the strange yellow rocks he as been finding across the Martian surface are flammable and, when burned, actually release oxygen for him to breathe, saving his life. While this was obviously a convenient invention by the movie, there ironically is now some basis in reality to this. Today we know that the Martian sands are laden with perchlorate salts. Though toxic to humans and white in colour, with the right chemical reaction these can actually produce free oxygen. Various microorganisms on Earth, such as bacteria of the phylum Pseudomonadota, make use of this reaction, which obviously inspired my own work here on this site.

From here on out the movie follows the classic robinsonade-style story, just in its Martian setting. Having found a temporary solution to his oxygen-problem, as well as fuel for a nightly fire to keep themselves warm, Draper and Mona now have to contend with the lack of water and food, as supplies are quickly running out. In a cave they find a subterranean aquifer, in whose waters grow alien plants, looking like a mix between reeds and sausages. These the two are able to cook and eat. Using the newly-found resources, Draper builds himself a little farm and with the remaining scrap metal constructs various conveniences and contraptions to turn his shelter into a home, morphing from astronaut back into caveman in the process. 

But the worries do not end. While the movie does give its characters occasional breaks from the distressing situation they have found themselves in, it does nonetheless take itself very seriously. The monkey is surprisingly almost never used for comedic relief, but acts more as both a consolation as well as frustration for Draper. Though she gives him someone to care for, he cannot hold a conversation with her, which he obviously laments as the many months of isolation wear on. Heartbreaking, and quite well-acted by Mantee, is also a dream sequence where Draper sees his friend McReady alive again, but unable to talk to him, taunting his loneliness and driving him to near madness. Here the movie is very close again to the realities of space travel, as the consequences of the long periods of isolation that come with it will inevitably have negative effects on the human mind. This is a problem any modern prospect of a manned Mars mission will continue to struggle with. 

From here on out we go into spoilery territory (so read at your own caution), but you could have probably already guessed by the poster that Draper is not as alone on Mars as he had thought. While there are no native Martians and the movie even goes out of its way to explain the infamous canals as natural volcanic features, Draper eventually comes across a mining colony set up by aliens from another star system. Said aliens are quite evil and use slaves for labour. While spying on them, Draper bumps into one of the slaves, whom he calls Friday, in direct reference to the equivalent character from the Daniel Defoe novel. Friday is played by Victor Lundin, who would later go on to play the first onscreen Klingon in Star Trek, and looks exactly like a human. The alien language he speaks apparently also consists of Mayan words, which is perhaps some stealth reference to ancient astronaut hypotheses. In my personal head-canon, Friday is not an alien, but instead a descendant of ancient Mayans who were abducted and enslaved by aliens in antiquity. His relationship with Draper, as they flee together and hide at his shelter, is an uneasy one at first, but they get to know each other and become friends, with Draper attempting to teach Friday English. Eventually, however, their hideout is found by the slavers and they have to flee. What happens from thereon after I let you find out yourself.

Why you should watch it

Robinson Crusoe on Mars is many things. First, it is a quite good adaptation that perfectly captures what made the original Defoe novel appealing and also elevates its elements thanks to its higher stakes setting. Dare I say, it even improves upon it. Astronaut Christopher Draper certainly is a more likeable and relatable character than literal slave-owner/trader Robinson Crusoe. Draper’s respectful conversation with Friday about what God means to them will also likely resonate better with modern audiences than Crusoe’s blunt conversion of Friday to Christianity. Also, it is an “X in space” adaptation, which immediately makes everything better.

Secondly, it is science fiction of the best kind. It took what was known about Mars and spaceflight at the time, extrapolated it to create an interesting setting, took only few artistic liberties and put the protagonists against the thus generated odds, while also not being above having fun with its setting. While the movie was made right during the transition from old to new Mars, it also feels like a missing link between older and newer sci-fi movies. While the second half of the movie, with Draper and Friday escaping the alien slavers, still has clear shades of campy B-movies from the 50s, the first half has a serious, suspenseful, tough scientific feel that foreshadows examples of the genre that would come later, such as 2001, Star Trek or Alien. In a few ways it even already pokes fun at things that would become tropes in the future, such as when Draper theorizes that Friday communicates telepathically, to then discover that the guy can just talk and was simply acting mute at first. One could almost think that is a jab at Star Trek type aliens, if not for the fact that the original series would not come out until two years after this movie.

Thirdly, it is just all-around enjoyable to watch. The effects are decent for the time, the sets are beautifully designed, the technological props have that lovely outdated haptic look with buttons and tube-monitors (which still has lost none of its charm, as media like Fallout proves), the music is atmospheric and triumphant and the actors convey genuine emotion. I just said in the previous paragraph that the second half of the movie is reminiscent of earlier B-movies, but this does not at all mean that it brings the quality or seriousness of the movie down, for the simple reason that the blooming friendship between Draper and Friday is a heartfelt one that the viewer will love to watch and root for, as the two strangers struggle together for survival against all odds. “Heartfelt” I feel is the best way to describe this movie in general.

In conclusion, this is exactly the kind of movie that makes young, impressionable children want to be astronauts, just as Karel Zeman’s Journey to the Beginning of Time made kids in the 50s want to be paleontologists. It portrays space as a dangerous place, but one that begs to be explored and is filled with opportunities for adventure. It combines the best elements of science fiction with those of a robinsonade: Man, faced against strange new lands, creatures and technologies, survives, thrives and conquers through his sheer ingenuity, curiosity and determination. Lastly, it shows that even faced with the increasingly harsher reality of Mars, great stories can still be told on the red planet. This is directly proven by Ridley Scott’s 2015 adaptation of The Martian, which could be viewed as a modern up-to-date remake of Robinson Crusoe on Mars and was a resounding financial success that won several awards. In this light, let us pay some tribute to the movie that did it first and paved the way for many later classics. Matt Damon also did not have a pet monkey in that movie, which immediately makes it worse.

Oh yeah, and you can also just watch the movie through the Internet Archive

If you liked this and other articles, please consider supporting me on Patreon. I am thankful for any amount, even if it is just 1$, as it will help me at dedicating more time to this blog and related projects. Patrons also gain early access to the draft-versions of these posts and other exclusive contents.

Related Posts:

• The Things which lived on Mars and in our Minds

Malacoda

The Malacoda is an organism commonly found in the deserts and desert edges of Mars. It can perhaps be best described as a hand-sized land-clam. Unlike in a clam, its shell has no hinge, instead it is a single piece with five openings. The posterior or "bottom" opening is where a muscular foot emerges, which the organism uses for locomotion. It is a stiff trunk, possibly supported by internal fibres of cartilage or other materials, clad in scaly skin and terminating in three snake-like tentacles. Malacoda cannot walk or jump, instead they slither across the sands at a leisurely pace. The foot is also the main organ used to dig themselves into the ground.

Along the ventral or "front" side are three further openings. From these emerge stalks with remarkably complex lens eyes at their end, quite similar to those of conch snails in appearance. These may have evolved from ocelli that lined the mantle rim of the animal’s ancestors before the shell fused nearly shut. Each of these eye-orifices has a little valve, so the stalks can retract into the shell and be closed off from the world when the malacoda senses danger from predators or sandstorms or needs to bury itself.

At the anterior end or "the top", is the opening for the retractable proboscis. At its end is a robust, somewhat bird-like beak of still unknown material, remarkably similar to what is found in the Periostraca, though this likely is a case of convergent evolution. Underneath the mouth are also two slit-like orifices, likely breathing holes leading to simple lungs, which may be comparable to the apical opening of a scaphopod or the siphon of bivalves. Amusingly, if a malacoda is viewed from behind, the two orifices may look like two eerie eyes, giving the back of the proboscis the appearance of a mouthless, vaguely humanoid face. When the proboscis is fully retracted into the shell, only the beak may peek out. The shell is notable for its narrowness and spines. The spines are rather blunt, so they likely serve less a protective purpose and are more useful for when the animal buries itself vertically down, much as in digging clams.

Malacoda spend the majority of their life buried underground, often in a dormant state. Once the long Martian autumn approaches, the snakeish tentacles vibrate and bury the foot into the ground. Through periscoping motions the rest of the trunk is then buried and through rather adorable wiggles the shell drills itself into the sand until only the proboscis may peek out of the ground. Often, however, the malacoda is buried so deep that only a small funnel in the ground hints at its presence, at whose end the open beak may lie in wait like an antlion in case any small critters accidentally slide down the hole. Once finally the winter comes, even this wait ends and the organism enters full anoxic dormancy, in which its metabolic rate becomes so low that it might as well be dead. Finally in spring, the malacoda emerge en masse from their graves to feed with their robust beaks on the short bloom of succulent desert flora, often in the form of monovexillan fronds or spongisporians. During this time they also reproduce by impregnating each other through the mouth. Their eggs are laid down into the wet sands near oases or ephemeral ponds, where they have to lie dormant for at least one winter before being able to hatch into miniature versions of the adults. Often though, the eggs may lie dormant for decades until hatching.

Malacoda are Martians of intriguing affinity. The construction of the proboscis is reminiscent of some of the Antitremata, whereas the presence of a muscular foot attached to the mantle is a feature associated more with the Spiriferia. The construction of the shell is comparable with neither. The Martian fossil record suggests that the malacoda is the sole surviving member of a whole phylum that has otherwise gone extinct, the Conchocauda. Likely related to the aforementioned clades, these were a group of marine and freshwater armoured animals, whose fossil shell superficially resembled that of clams, but entirely lacked a hinge, meaning it was a single, inarticulatable piece, often with a narrow slit at the “front”. In the malacoda this slit seems to have fused, leaving only the aforementioned openings. As far as can be judged by soft tissue imprints, the extinct Conchocauda lacked eye stalks and a beaked proboscis, meaning that these are novelties evolved by the malacoda, likely as an adaptation towards life on land and a change in diet. Conchocauda were dominant reef builders during the early Thermozoic Era, but seem to have gradually declined ever since, likely as a result of the planet drying up (Sivgin 2345). Unlike Antitremata and Spiriferia, they seem to have made the jump to land only very late in the planet’s history, leaving most of them to die with the oceans, while the few latecomers to land were easy prey for far older lineages. Nonetheless, the malacoda’s life strategy seems to be working out, as its population numbers are comparatively high and the animal is widespread across the warmer regions of the planet. It is the last of its kind but also the most successful.

An interesting oddity discovered during autopsy by a team of the astrobiological department of the CNSA is that the saliva inside the malacoda’s beak contains a mild toxin of unknown purpose. There are no known cases of (living) malacoda biting astronauts and the toxin is far from lethal, but if it were to be ingested, it could cause mild hallucinogenic effects similar to LSD. While perplexing, this seems oddly appropriate for such a bizarre-looking organism. Possibly it affects Martian natives differently due to their biochemistry, so this could be a protective weapon against predators.

On that note, it is also probably impossible to not mention that this same study was also the cause for possibly one of the most spectacular and darkly amusing mishaps in the study of Martian life. Although the specimen being studied was already dead, the researchers must have accidentally poked its nervous system in such a way that the proboscis reflexively shot out of the shell and mechanically bit one of the biologists right in the crotch area. The victim, who in most accounts is referred to by the pseudonym “Boning McGee”, had their penis cleanly bitten off. Though the organ was later able to be reattached, the released study bizarrely included the rather mean and inappropriate remark that it would not have been much of a loss (Manchot 2334). This likely hints at quite a bit of behind-the-scenes animosity among the workers of the CNSA.

References:

• Manchot, Hans: General description of new genus and species Xenocadulus bethanyensis, including phylogenetic speculation and possibility of medicinal use, in: Astrobiology Magazine, 679, 2334, p. 211 – 222.
• Sivgin, T.K.: Life on a Dead Planet. The first 3 billion years of Evolution on Mars, Zürich 2345.