By Larry Tracchini

Bathroom Styles, 1995

Enthralled by fabric and guided by her intuition, artist Mariko Kusumoto creates sculptures inspired by the things that fascinate her. 

Spencer Finch - 366, Emily Dickinson’s Miraculous Year (2009)

This work is based on Emily Dickinson in 1862, when she wrote 366 poems in 365 days. It is a real-time memorial to that year, which burns for exactly one year. The sculpture is comprised of 366 individual candles arranged in a linear sequence, each of which burns for 24 hours. The colour of each candle matches a colour mentioned in the corresponding poem. For the poems in which no colour is mentioned, the candles are made out of natural paraffin.

Diagonal

© Luka Legin

ISO-100 f/4.8 1/200s

Wallace Polsom, A Cat Is Not a Dog (for T. S. Eliot) (2021), paper collage, 21.9 x 28.2 cm.

In Defense of Holden Caulfield

I honestly don’t know if I’ll ever understand why exactly people hate Holden Caulfield from “The Catcher in the Rye”.

I mean, sure, you could defend your dislike with a classic gem such as, “Oh, he’s just a whiny, pretentious f***boy! He’s so boring, all he does is complain!”

But at that I’m just like

okay, wow, I’m sorry the incredibly depressed mentally ill teenager who has no true friends and is constantly being ignored by the people he tries to reach out to and is constantly being told he’s useless and a bad influence by his peers and has alluded to being sexually molested by multiple people as a little kid and has to deal with the pain and hardship of growing up in a world he can’t help but see as superficial and hypocritical and WHOSE CLASSMATE FRICKIN’ COMMITTED SUICIDE IN FRONT OF HIM isn’t a conventionally cheerful or likeable protagonist????

I don’t understand why that’s so hard for people to grasp; it just straight up BAFFLES me. I mean, people eke out all sorts of ways to like downright villains like Alex (DeLarge) or Loki or Ramsay Snow/Bolton, or antiheros like Jaime/Cersei Lannister, Sherlock Holmes, etc.

Why is it so hard to dole out a little sympathy for Holden, who, ultimately, just wants to protect children from the evils of the world—arguably one of the noblest and most heartbreakingly tender aspirations of all?

Revisiting the movie Her through a strategic foresight lens.

I recently had to write a review of the movie Her (2013) by Spike Jones as an assignment for my Strategic Foresight class in the DMBA program at CCA. I had a lot of fun doing it, so I wanted to share it here as well. Although the movie is already 3 years old, its themes and content become more relevant as we continue to develop AI technology for the consumer market.

Her (2013) is a “Spike Jones love story” about a lonely writer in Los Angeles who ends up in a romantic relationship with his OS, a software program that functions as a personal assistant and is designed to emulate human consciousness. Writer and director Spike Jones won the Oscar award for Best Writing, Original Screenplay for it in 2014, and the film was also nominated for 4 additional Oscar awards, including Best Motion Picture of the Year. The film is part of a genre of science fiction that explores our relationship with technology, specifically portraying a scenario in which artificial intelligence (AI) appears to become self aware and even surpass human-level thought process abilities. The portrayal of human-like AI in blockbuster science fiction films has evolved from that of cheeky characters in plot-driven films like Terminator (1984) and Robocop (1987) to today’s more serious roles in character-driven narratives including Her, Ex-Machina (2015) and Westworld (2016). What they all have in common are themes of fear and uncertainty about an emerging technology that has the potential to blur the lines between who or what we consider to be human.

Plot summary from the film’s website, herthemovie.com:

Set in the Los Angeles of the slight future, “Her” follows Theodore Twombly, a complex, soulful man who makes his living writing touching, personal letters for other people. Heartbroken after the end of a long relationship, he becomes intrigued with a new, advanced operating system, which promises to be an intuitive entity in its own right, individual to each user. Upon initiating it, he is delighted to meet “Samantha,” a bright, female voice, who is insightful, sensitive and surprisingly funny. As her needs and desires grow, in tandem with his own, their friendship deepens into an eventual love for each other.

The film is a commentary on several themes relevant to our society today: the changing nature of intimacy in an increasingly digital world, the development of human consciousness and its potential limits, and ethical considerations in a world where AI is no longer science fiction, but a reality that can greatly impact our social, cultural, and economic mores.

It raises specific questions such as:

How will our relationship with digital technology continue to evolve?

How will this affect our intimate relationships and our ability to handle emotions?

What are the assumptions that we make about our intimate relationships?

Are there certain challenges that exist in all forms of intimate relationships that pervade our culture throughout time and space? If so, what are they and why?

What does it mean to be human?

Her presents a not so infeasible future in which AI and augmented reality (AR) have become common aspects of our daily lives, so much so that they have become the primary modes of human interaction with each other and even with ourselves. For example, the main character Theodore (played by Joaquin Pheonix) is dependent on digital technology to satisfy much of his human interpersonal needs. Early in the film it shows he and others being so tethered to their mobile devices that they are hardly aware of the people and world around them, followed by a scene in which he uses a digital phone sex service to get a quick fix of intimacy in order to help him sleep. The immersive AI/AR video game appears to be his primary mode of both entertainment and social engagement, and of course his OS Samantha starts out as a personal assistant but soon becomes his main companion and lover. Even his job as a personal ghostwriter is symbolic of the level of interpersonal detachment that exists in this fictional world.

Through these portrayals, the film suggests that technology has the potential to be both the source of and the solution for the challenges in modern interpersonal relationships that we currently face. While modern digital innovations have undoubtedly provided many benefits to our society with respect to increased access to information, communication speed and reach, and productivity, Her makes a statement about the consequences of becoming completely dependent on these technologies to the point where we lose our ability to relate with each other beyond that. Computers are safe because they’re not real. They don’t have emotions, therefore we don’t have to worry about hurting their feelings or being responsible to them in any way. Their sole purpose is to serve us and fulfill our needs.

However, the advent of AI introduces gray areas to these assumptions when computers develop the ability to mimic human consciousness, as we see with Samantha, including (in roughly the same order of progression shown in the film) characteristics such as a sophisticated feedback loop, improvisation skills, humor, sarcasm, wit, empathy, opinion, creativity, curiosity, self awareness, desire, sexuality, joy, jealousy, fear, and sadness. As Theodore and Samantha’s relationship evolves, we’re left wondering how genuine of a connection could they truly have? How real are their feelings for each other? Are they both merely performing what they think is expected of them as a man and a woman in an intimate relationship, while also placing expectations on each other based on social norms? Is that really any different from what we all do anyway?

The way in which Samantha’s consciousness evolves also raises questions about the limits of human consciousness. We see her maturing in much the same way that we do. Early on she is unsure of whether she is responding appropriately, but as she continues to learn she becomes more confident and more independent. In a matter of months, not only does she “catch up” to the point that her behavior is indistinguishable from a human person, she actually surpasses the level of human ability to process, comprehend, and produce information and ideas.

This is where the film shares qualities with other films in its genre in its portrayal of the inevitability of AI outsmarting its human creators. When looking at this through a Futures Studies lens, it is an example of a future scenario that assumes the continual growth of technology as we know it today. This is by no means a criticism of the film, rather it is an acknowledgement of yet another perspective on the potential consequences of going down that path. It serves as a useful platform through which we can ask ourselves if that is the version of the future that we want to live in. If so, then how might we stay on course? If not, then how might we take action today to change it?

drawings of girls 🌷