tag:theconversation.com,2011:/us/topics/blade-runner-2049-43993/articles
Blade Runner 2049 – The Conversation
2019-08-27T17:03:06Z
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/118147
2019-08-27T17:03:06Z
2019-08-27T17:03:06Z
Visions of the future: five dark warnings from the world of classic science fiction
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/289657/original/file-20190827-184207-508u9w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=223%2C42%2C1260%2C686&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Blade Runner 2049: dystopian vision, now even more terrifying.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Warner Bros</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Science fiction is brimming with visions of the future and the many wondrous things the human race can achieve. But it is full of warnings too – and we should be careful to take heed of some of the big messages that are more relevant now than they ever were before.</p>
<h2>Robots and AI</h2>
<p>Ever since the word <a href="https://io9.gizmodo.com/31-essential-science-fiction-terms-and-where-they-came-1594794250">“robot” first appeared</a> in the English language in the early 1920s (although it was invented by a Czech writer), science fiction writers have warned about the blurring of the distinction between human and machine. </p>
<p>Robots <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-turing-test-for-androids-will-judge-how-lifelike-humanoid-robots-can-be-120696">are becoming more and more like humans</a>, such that it may one day become difficult to tell the two apart. But were they ever really so different? Philip K. Dick suggests possibly not, and his vision of replicants in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (1968) – which was to become a classic movie, Blade Runner – certainly poses a lot of important questions.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eogpIG53Cis?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>It’s not just robots we have to worry about these days. AI is now perhaps an even bigger threat than its robot cousins. From the ominous HAL 9000 in Arthur C. Clarke’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), to the “benevolent” AI character Mike in Robert A. Heinlein’s The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (1966), we’ve been warned that the power of AI to infiltrate every aspect of our daily lives might one day prove our undoing – and we will have no one to blame but ourselves.</p>
<h2>Threats from the great beyond</h2>
<p>Science fiction is brimming with invasion narratives, the most famous of which is probably H.G. Wells’ classic The War of the Worlds. Wells’ novel, which first appeared in 1898, has since been adapted into numerous films, TV shows and even a <a href="http://www.thewaroftheworlds.com/">musical</a>.</p>
<p>Of course, many of these narratives tie in with fears about invasions of one kind of another closer to home, with swarming insects or “bugs” used in place of the alien “other”, such as in Heinlein’s classic novel Starship Troopers (1959) and its film adaptation (1997).</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y07I_KER5fE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>But while the invaders of Starship Troopers may stir visions of the Cold War (a common theme – see Invasion of the Body Snatchers as well), perhaps the biggest threat raised by the likes of Wells, Heinlein and the rest is the threat of the enemy not yet known. It may be comforting to think of enemy invaders as mindless hordes, or ravenous beasts, but these depictions are far too simplistic and are designed to appeal to our base emotions. </p>
<h2>The human condition</h2>
<p>Of all the threats confronting the human race, the biggest challenge is by far and a way posed by ourselves. From short-termism and mistaken priorities, to evil corporations shaping the way we think (see: The Space Merchants [1952]), so many science fiction authors draw attention to the many varied failings of the human condition and our often misguided attempts to “do good”.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bsEJfL8tJFU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Expanding to the stars may well solve some of our nearer-term issues such as climate change, overpopulation and a scarcity of resources, but a bigger threat is posed by the fact we are all too likely to take our problems with us and that we will repeat the same mistakes time and time again. </p>
<h2>Science vs nature</h2>
<p>Despite its name, science fiction has, for many years now, been much closer to science fact. While science fiction writers such as Heinlein, Isaac Asimov and Frederik Pohl dreamed of instant communications and a world of knowledge at our fingertips, the future has now well and truly crashed in on the present and we live in a time now where it’s harder than ever to tell truth and fiction apart.</p>
<p>But while some readers might think this a positive thing on the whole (you are, after all, reading this online), science fiction has much to say about overconfidence and the misplaced faith we have in our ability to harness science and use our powers for good.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/m7kgYgE7O3o?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In Flowers for Algernon (1966), a man of low intelligence is transformed into a genius, only to discover a flaw in the experiment that will see him regress to a far worse situation that he started out in. While the story focuses on the rise and fall of a genius, it also reveals a lack of human compassion in the scientists and a lack of understanding for just where their actions may lead. </p>
<p>If we want to use science to conquer nature, we need to be circumspect in how we go about it. Progress for the sake of progress is not always a good thing – and we need to be wary of short-termism and guard against complacency in all we do.</p>
<h2>Distorted reality</h2>
<p>Of course, one of the most chilling aspects of science fiction working its way into our modern-day world is the way reality is becoming distorted, and it becomes increasingly hard to tell truth from fiction.</p>
<p>In this age of consumer culture, social media and fake news, the work of Philip K. Dick is more relevant than ever before, and we should take heed of his warning in books such as Ubik (1969) and The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch (1965), about the dangers of getting sucked into fake realities – many of which we create ourselves (see: social media). Such is the timeliness and relevance of Dick’s work, that his novels continue to provide much material for screenwriters, from the recent TV series The Man in the High Castle (2015) to the critically-acclaimed Blade Runner: 2049 (2017).</p>
<p>All of these musings lead us to wonder, what do we mean by “real” anyway? Dick may not come to any solid conclusions, but he does show us how we are shaped by the world around us. Unless we come to understand our relationship with the world – and our place in it – there is little hope left to be had.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/118147/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mike Ryder does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Science fiction is fast becoming science fact, which should be cause for concern.
Mike Ryder, Associate Lecturer in Literature & Philosophy and Marketing, Lancaster University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/96430
2018-08-13T10:00:25Z
2018-08-13T10:00:25Z
There’s a reason Siri, Alexa and AI are imagined as female – sexism
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231655/original/file-20180813-2894-1vuvasm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/close-caucasian-womans-eye-face-smooth-1151612312?src=4kyyng7tfhnL2Ui8mOILJw-1-12">Pegasene/Shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Virtual assistants are increasingly popular and present in our everyday lives: literally with Alexa, Cortana, Holly, and Siri, and fictionally in films Samantha (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/">Her</a>), Joi (<a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/blade-runner-2049-43993">Blade Runner 2049</a>) and Marvel’s AIs, FRIDAY (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4154756/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Avengers: Infinity War</a>), and Karen (<a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2250912/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Spider-Man: Homecoming</a>). These names demonstrate the assumption that virtual assistants, from SatNav to Siri, will be voiced by a woman. This reinforces gender stereotypes, expectations, and assumptions about the future of artificial intelligence.</p>
<p>Fictional male voices do exist, of course, but today they are simply far less common. <a href="http://www.dazeddigital.com/film-tv/article/39557/1/space-odyssey-stanley-kubrick-hal-9000-ai-in-film">HAL-9000</a> is the most famous male-voiced Hollywood AI – a malevolent sentient computer released into the public imagination 50 years ago in Stanley Kubrick’s <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">2001: A Space Odyssey</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231323/original/file-20180809-30458-tnrkke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231323/original/file-20180809-30458-tnrkke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231323/original/file-20180809-30458-tnrkke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231323/original/file-20180809-30458-tnrkke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=273&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231323/original/file-20180809-30458-tnrkke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231323/original/file-20180809-30458-tnrkke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231323/original/file-20180809-30458-tnrkke.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=343&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">2001: A Space Odyssey.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/ai-like-hal-9000-can-never-exist-because-real-emotions-arent-programmable-94141">AI like HAL 9000 can never exist because real emotions aren't programmable</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Male AI used to be more common, specifically in stories where technology becomes evil or beyond our control (like Hal). Female AI on the other hand is, more often than not, envisaged in a submissive servile role. Another pattern concerns whether fictional AI is embodied or not. When it is, it tends to be male, from the <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088247/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">Terminator</a>, to Sonny in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0343818/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1">I, Robot</a> and super-villain Ultron in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2395427/">Avengers: Age of Ultron</a>. Ex Machina’s Ava (Alicia Vikander) is an interesting anomaly to the roster of embodied AI and she is seen as a victim rather than an uncontrolled menace, even after she kills her creator.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvel_Cinematic_Universe">Marvel Cinematic Universe</a>, specifically the AI inventions of Tony Stark, and the 2017 film Blade Runner 2049, offer interesting and somewhat problematic takes on the future of AI. The future may be female, but in these imagined AI futures this is not a good thing.</p>
<h2>Marvel assistants</h2>
<p>At least since the demise of Stark’s sentient AI JARVIS in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2395427/">Avengers: Age of Ultron</a> (2013), the fictional AI landscape has become predominately female. Stark’s male AI JARVIS – which he modelled and named after his childhood butler – is destroyed in the fight against Ultron (although he ultimately becomes part of a new embodied android character called <a href="http://marvelcinematicuniverse.wikia.com/wiki/Vision">The Vision</a>). Stark then replaces his operating system not with a back up of JARVIS or another male voiced AI but with FRIDAY (voiced by Kerry Condon). </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231325/original/file-20180809-30443-1ks3zsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/231325/original/file-20180809-30443-1ks3zsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231325/original/file-20180809-30443-1ks3zsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231325/original/file-20180809-30443-1ks3zsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=316&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231325/original/file-20180809-30443-1ks3zsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231325/original/file-20180809-30443-1ks3zsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/231325/original/file-20180809-30443-1ks3zsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Iron Man (Stark).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">© Marvel 2016</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>FRIDAY is a far less prominent character. Stark’s AI is pushed into a far more secondary role, one where she is very much the assistant, unlike the complex companion Stark created in JARVIS. </p>
<p>Likewise, in Spider-Man Homecoming, Stark gifts Peter Parker (Tom Holland) his own <a href="https://screenrant.com/spider-man-suit-costume-unknown-powers-abilities-secrets/">super suit</a>, which comes with a nameless female-voiced virtual assistant. Peter initially calls her “suit lady”, later naming her Karen. Peter imbues his suit with personality and identity by naming it, but you wonder if he would have been so willing to imagine his suit as a caring confidant if it had come with a older-sounding male voice.</p>
<p>Karen is virtual support for the Spider-Man suit, designed to train and enhance Peter’s abilities. But in building a relationship of trust with her, Karen takes on the role of a friend for Peter, even encouraging him to approach the girl he likes at school. Here, the female voiced AI takes on a caring role – as a mother or sister – which places the Karen AI into another limiting female stereotype. Female voiced or embodied AI is expected to have a different role to their male-aligned counterparts, perpetuating the idea that women are more likely to be in the role of the secretary rather than the scientist.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/DrJiRd2upDg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Blade Runner’s Joi</h2>
<p>Another classic example of artificial intelligence can be found in <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/">Blade Runner</a> (1982) and its bio-robotic androids, the <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/blade-runner-2049-how-replicants-work/">Replicants</a>. These artificial beings were designed and manufactured to do the jobs that humans in the future didn’t want: from colonising dangerous alien planets to serving as sex workers. Although stronger and often smarter than their humans creators, they have a limited lifespan that literally stops them from developing sufficiently to work out how to take over.</p>
<p>The recent Blade Runner 2049 updates the replicants’ technology and introduces a purchasable intelligent holographic companion called Joi (Ana de Armas). The Joi we are shown in the film is Agent K’s (Ryan Gosling) companion – at first restricted by the projector in his home and later set free, to an extent (Joi is still controlled by K’s movements), when K buys himself a portable device called an Emanator. Joi is a logical extension of today’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/blade-runner-2049-misses-rise-of-creative-artificial-intelligence-79821">digital assistants</a> and is one of the few female AIs to occupy the narrative foreground. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/31FWAWBH9nY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>But at the end of the day, Joi is a corporate creation that is sold as “everything you want to hear and everything you want to see”. A thing that can be created, adapted, and sold for consumption. Her holographic body makes her seem a little more real but her purpose is similar to those of the virtual assistants discussed here already: to serve often male masters. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/blade-runner-2049-misses-rise-of-creative-artificial-intelligence-79821">Blade Runner 2049 misses rise of creative artificial intelligence</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Subservient women</h2>
<p>When we can only seemingly imagine an AI as a subservient woman, we reinforce dangerous and outdated stereotypes. What prejudices are perpetuated by putting servile obedient females into our dreams of technology, as well as our current experiences? All this is important because science fiction not only reflects our hopes and fears for the future of science, but also informs it. The imagined futures of the movies inspire those working in tech companies as they develop and update AI, working towards the expectations formed in our fictions.</p>
<p>Just like in the movies, default real-life virtual assistants are often female (Siri; Alexa). But there is some promise of change: having announced in May that their <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/9/17332766/google-assistant-amazon-alexa-features">Google Assistant</a> would be getting six new voices, but that the default was named “Holly”, Google more recently issued an update that assigns them <a href="https://www.engadget.com/2018/07/10/google-assistant-makes-it-easier-to-pick-a-different-voice/">colours</a> instead of names, done randomly in order to avoid any associations between particular colours and genders.</p>
<p>This is a promising step, but technology cannot progress while the same types of people remain in control of their development and management. Perhaps <a href="https://athenaalliance.org/heres-silicon-valley-companies-need-women-boards/">increased female participation in Silicon Valley</a> could change the way we imagine and develop technology and how it sounds and looks. Diversity in front of and behind the Hollywood camera is equally important in order to improve the way we present our possible futures and so inspire future creators.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96430/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Amy Chambers previously received funding from the Wellcome Trust and the AHRC.</span></em></p>
Virtual assistants are often assumed to be female – perpetuating gendered assumptions in our imagined future.
Amy C. Chambers, Senior Lecturer in Film Studies, Manchester Metropolitan University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/92085
2018-04-10T09:03:09Z
2018-04-10T09:03:09Z
How Philip K. Dick redefined what it means to be (in)human
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/213819/original/file-20180409-114105-c6it7a.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">I think, therefore I am human?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-illustration/3d-rendering-android-robot-thinking-office-644724364?src=lf_CL1HcHY4gTz4WjEbANA-1-4">Phonlamai Photo/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Fifty years ago, Philip K. Dick’s novel <em>Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?</em> questioned what it means to be human in ways that have an immense lasting influence. </p>
<p>The action of the novel – and <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-science-and-fiction-behind-blade-runner-46459">the Blade Runner films</a> based on it – largely revolves around the central tension and struggle between biological humans and artificially constructed androids. Arguably, however, the story’s greatest continuing relevance is in the way it challenges a particular image of the human that has come to dominate in modern Western culture. This image portrays certain qualities – whiteness, masculinity, heterosexuality, rationalism, professional success and physical prowess – as the ideal symbols of humanity’s success.</p>
<p>The novel revolves around the efforts of bounty hunter Rick Deckard, in his quest to identify, track, and destroy androids posing as biological humans. Unsurprisingly, he repeatedly meets violent resistance. Both his livelihood and his life depend on his ability to tell the difference between humans and androids. Ultimately, however, Deckard is forced to face the possibility that there may not be any fundamental difference. This causes him to undergo a deep existential crisis, finding both his sense of identity, and his literal survival, severely threatened. </p>
<p>Deckard’s primary means of distinguishing between humans and androids is <a href="http://nautil.us/blog/the-science-behind-blade-runners-voight_kampff-test">the Voight-Kampff test</a>. Combining psychological analysis with a measurement of physiological reactions, the test seeks to determine whether a subject is capable of empathy. If the subject adequately demonstrates concern for the lives of others, they are deemed human, and allowed to live. If not, they are deemed non-human, and must be destroyed. Deckard’s transformation begins when he realises that some newer androids are capable of passing the test, and so passing for human.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/philip-k-dicks-androids-looked-like-humans-but-real-world-robots-may-soon-feel-empathy-too-92084">Philip K Dick's androids looked like humans – but real world robots may soon feel empathy, too</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A likely response to this dilemma would be to regard the test as fundamentally flawed. A better test would be needed, one based on identifying another trait as the essential feature to distinguish androids from humans. However, Deckard, and the reader with him, is ultimately led to a far more radical conclusion – that the test is accurate after all. That is, the capacity for empathy is the only value that should ever be used to determine the worth of another being. </p>
<h2>Being human</h2>
<p>This revelation is a kind of update on Descartes’ influential “cogito ergo sum”. In place of “I think, therefore I am,” Dick implicitly suggests, “she loves, therefore she is (human/worthy)”. (It is no coincidence that Rick Deckard’s name somewhat echoes that of René Descartes.) </p>
<p>This “posthuman” gesture abandons any scientific, ontological or material basis for distinguishing between humans and non-humans. Yet it continues to capitalise on the widespread human sense that there is something special and valuable about humans. Such a sense is often referred to as a defining feature of “humanism”. What the novel offers us, then, is a kind of posthuman humanism.</p>
<p>On this basis, there is no being – whether mammal, robot, computer, bird, slug, stone, or star – that is excluded from the category of humanity on the basis of its physical nature. Conversely, each and any being may qualify as human by demonstrating empathy for other beings. Meanwhile, the term “human” has by this point come to mean nothing more than “worthy of existence”.</p>
<p>This is far from a mere philosophical or science-fictional game. To see its radical social and political significance in our world, we need only consider the range of ways people have been dehumanised over the millennia of (so-called) humanity’s existence. Slavery, colonialism, alienation, patriarchy, racial inequality, and virtually any form of systemic social injustice you can think of, involve presenting some beings as “less than human” in order to justify their exploitation.</p>
<p>For this reason, it is crucial that Deckard’s entire outlook and sense of self – rather than simply his understanding of the distinction between humans and machines – is thoroughly challenged. His (hetero)sexuality, his commitment to the values of marriage, family, legal and police justice, the importance of professional, financial and social success, all intact at the novel’s outset, have been radically undermined by its end. Seemingly a broken man, he is, nevertheless, left with an enduring sense of the primary importance of an unrestricted, non-prejudiced care or love for other beings.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9Q_K2am2qrE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Admittedly, Dick could have pushed this dimension further, as <a href="https://www.npr.org/programs/specials/racism/010830.octaviabutleressay.html">Octavia Butler</a>, <a href="http://journal.finfar.org/articles/opposing-forces-and-ethical-judgments-in-samuel-delanys-stars-in-my-pocket-like-grains-of-sand/">Samuel Delany</a> and a host of more recent science fiction authors have done. But at least it is an integral part of the narrative. The recent film, Blade Runner 2049, in contrast, downplays this dimension, while retaining the central concern with the relationship between biological humans and artificial androids. </p>
<p>This may be one possible reason why the latest film has attracted <a href="https://theconversation.com/blade-runner-2049-no-hope-in-this-dystopia-85582">great praise as well as intense critique</a>. While Blade Runner 2049 continues to blur the boundary between human and machine, it seems to uphold the notion that, in the end, the goal of either would equate more-or-less to the supposed values of the average white, Western, heterosexual, bourgeois male. This, ultimately, risks undermining the radical political potential of the posthumanist experiment that drives the original story.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/92085/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This article is based on a talk originally given at a Cardiff BookTalk event in December 2017 (<a href="https://cardiffbooktalk.org/">https://cardiffbooktalk.org/</a>). </span></em></p>
Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? is not just a story about realistic robots.
James Burton, Lecturer in Cultural Studies and Cultural History, Goldsmiths, University of London
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/85533
2017-11-08T19:13:29Z
2017-11-08T19:13:29Z
Movies and TV choose to tell us different stories about the cities of today
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/193672/original/file-20171107-6766-cb6qyc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Movies from the "neo-noir" genre offer a darker and bleaker vision of the city, in stark contrast to the world of the TV sit-com.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/london-november-2015-dark-figures-walking-702640312?src=aNrjQupCB1CvYDSIDcFsnQ-1-93">Tan Zi Han/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The way cities are portrayed reveals and shapes public perceptions of the city. For young people, in particular, the media inform and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/jul/29/american-sitcoms-cities-depict-new-york-state-mind">disseminate the most elemental images</a> of the city and the society that inhabits it. </p>
<p>The media can be an important didactic tool – often the only one available to much of the population. But, increasingly, broadcast and social media aim to entertain the public. So how do these media depictions shape how we think and feel about the city?</p>
<p>Most analyses of the role of media take a city-by-city approach, rather than one based on theoretical paradigms. By contrast, we analyse how three urban theory paradigms – <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Postmodernism">postmodernism</a>, <a href="https://www.siemens.co.uk/education/pool/teachers/crystal/downloads/what_is_urban_sustainability_v1.pdf">sustainability</a> and <a href="http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195367867.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780195367867">politics</a> – translate into movies, TV series and TV ads.</p>
<h2>Postmodernism</h2>
<p>Feature films such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner">Blade Runner</a> and its sequel, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blade_Runner_2049">Blade Runner 2049</a>, paint a city in which virtual reality and cyberpunks, known as replicants, have taken over humanity. The Blade Runner city is a darker and futuristic version of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_Quartz">LA depicted by Mike Davis</a>. </p>
<p>Los Angeles, as the archetype of the postmodern city, became a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_School">lab for urban theorists</a> in the mid-1980s. Postmodernism applied to urban theory refers to the increased privatisation and social polarisation of the city. </p>
<p>Blade Runner 2049 (2017), as well as the first one (1982), features dystopian city landscapes that <a href="https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/postmodern-theory-and-blade-runner-9781501311796/">remind us of postmodern urban theory</a>. The movie conveys a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/oct/06/blade-runner-2049-dystopian-vision-seen-things-wouldnt-believe">message about society today</a>. Virtual reality, a fragmented society and the sense of isolation felt by individuals in the contemporary city translate into the aesthetics of the movie. The movie creates a solipsistic universe – there are <a href="https://theconversation.com/blade-runner-2049-no-hope-in-this-dystopia-85582?utm_medium=ampemail&utm_source=email">no social encounters of any value</a> in the Blade Runner city.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gCcx85zbxz4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Blade Runner 2049 and its 1982 predecessor feature dystopian urban landscapes.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Movies from the “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-noir">neo-noir</a>” genre offer a dystopian vision of the city. This genre includes animation movies such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paprika_(2006_film)">Paprika</a> (2006), which takes place in a fantasised city considered as Tokyo. <a href="http://www.laweekly.com/slideshow/in-la-everything-is-fine-the-wonderfully-weird-los-angeles-of-david-lynch-8345838">David Lynch’s movies</a> or sci-fi thrillers such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_Days_(film)">Strange Days</a> (1995) all feature a “neo-noir” vision of Los Angeles’ urban landscapes.</p>
<h2>Sustainability</h2>
<p>Movies typically show a more negative side of cities and suburban life in contrast to TV, which tends to portray a more favourable view. Feature films (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Brockovich_(film)">Erin Brockovich</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koyaanisqatsi">Koyaanisqatsi</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_(2009_film)">Avatar</a>) and even comedies/animations (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy">Idiocracy</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WALL-E">WALL-E</a>) depict a dystopian present/future of depleted resources, corporatism and “dog-eat-dog” ruthlessness. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, as most films dealing with sustainability get relegated to the documentary genre (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Inconvenient_Truth">An Inconvenient Truth</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cowspiracy">Cowspiricy</a>), only a few films get to tell this message to the masses. Good sometimes, but not always, triumphs over evil.</p>
<p>Alternatively, over the past several decades, many TV series (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wonder_Years">Wonder Years</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_Improvement_(TV_series)">Home Improvement</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_%26_Grace">Will & Grace</a>) have portrayed cities and suburbs as great places to live. They rarely engage or even mention pollution, traffic congestion, suburban sprawl or other negative aspects of suburban life. </p>
<p>In part this is due to the fact that most TV shows (although Netflix and Amazon productions are changing this imperative) need to attract viewers to be able to sell advertising. This means the shows rarely deal with any topic that might turn viewers away. </p>
<p>This positive theme carries over to TV commercials, particularly car ads, which further this favourable view of cities. Most car ads show cars in nature and on uncongested roads – they are doing this to combat the view that cars pollute and create traffic congestion. “<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thelma_%26_Louise">Thelma and Louise</a>” images of women in convertibles speeding down car-free, tree-lined roads with their hair blowing in the wind are iconic of the false representations of the city in car commercials. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0Dc0Oj08S7M?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Thelma and Louise draws on the iconic imagery of the freedom of the road.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Politics</h2>
<p>Again, we see split representations. </p>
<p>On the one hand, the city is depicted as the epicentre of glamour, excitement, opportunity and prosperity. Serials such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_and_the_City">Sex and the City</a> epitomise this approach. </p>
<p>The “sitcom city” is another version: it’s a friendly, happy place, saccharine even, with minimal conflict. In shows like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friends">Friends</a> and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seinfeld">Seinfeld</a>, even New York appears to be homely and “suspiciously affordable”, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/jul/29/american-sitcoms-cities-depict-new-york-state-mind">as Maria Bustillos puts it</a>. </p>
<p>By contrast, animated sitcoms (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Simpsons">The Simpsons</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Guy">Family Guy</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Dad!">American Dad!</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Park">South Park</a>) are <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2007/08/simpsons200708">satirical and subversive</a>. While centring on daily life in bland small towns, they offer stark insight into issues that other sitcoms normally sweep under the rug: religious bigotry, alcoholism, drug use, violence, weak morality, and hypocrisy. </p>
<p>On the other hand, the broadcast media render the city as the locus of <a href="http://variety.com/2017/tv/features/tv-social-issues-history-the-defenders-east-side-west-side-1202007945/">crime, unemployment, exclusion, or injustice</a>. Shows like <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wire">The Wire</a> embrace the realism of struggle, injustice and decay in poor urban ghettos.</p>
<p>Since the 1990s, a sub-genre has emerged in Eastern Europe and China to represent the post-socialist city. In European films (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Bye,_Lenin!">Good Bye Lenin!</a>), the images of the city are grim but hopeful. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/o57JvloQj-M?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Despite grim urban imagery, Good Bye Lenin! is hopeful.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In contrast, <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/44289216?seq=#page_scan_tab_contents">Chinese films</a> (<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzhou_River_(film)">Suzhou River</a>, <a href="https://books.google.com.au/books?id=bGHBX6V7IKwC&pg=PA278&dq=Sunshine+and+Showers+Zhang+Zemin&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiyrYjexq3XAhWFvbwKHdv8AuEQ6AEIKzAB#v=onepage&q=Sunshine%20and%20Showers%20Zhang%20Zemin&f=false">Sunshine and Showers</a>) depict the city as a gritty or uncanny place, thus challenging the glitzy and wholesome representations produced by state propaganda and private developers.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85533/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sebastien Darchen receives funding from the Myer Foundation </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dorina Pojani receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC).</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Neil Sipe receives funding from the Australian Research Council and the Myer Foundation. </span></em></p>
Movies often portray the city as a dystopia, particularly in the ‘neo-noir’ genre, which explores postmodern themes. TV shows and ads present an altogether sunnier picture of life in the city.
Sebastien Darchen, Lecturer in Planning, The University of Queensland
Dorina Pojani, Lecturer in Urban Planning, The University of Queensland
Neil G Sipe, Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, The University of Queensland
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/86092
2017-10-24T13:45:36Z
2017-10-24T13:45:36Z
Robotics, science fiction and the search for the perfect artificial woman
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191610/original/file-20171024-30565-p2y72k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ociacia/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Three photographs have been shortlisted for 2017’s <a href="https://www.npg.org.uk/whatson/twppp-2017/exhibition/shortlisted-artist/">Taylor Wessing Photographic Portrait Prize</a>, hosted by the National Portrait Gallery in London. But there is something out of the ordinary about one of this year’s contenders for the prize. One of the portraits – by the Finnish artist Maija Tammi – is not of a human, but a female android.</p>
<p>The android in the photograph is Erica, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/31/erica-the-most-beautiful-and-intelligent-android-ever-leads-japans-robot-revolution">described</a> by her creator, Osaka University professor Hiroshi Ishiguro, as “the most beautiful and intelligent” robot in the world. The hardware beneath her silicone skin helps her achieve facial and mouth movements, but these can be rather unnatural, out of sync with her synthesised voice. She is cognitively sophisticated, though still unable to work out answers to complex questions from first principles, and she cannot move her arms and legs. </p>
<p>If this seems like something out of science fiction, you’re not far off. One of Ishiguro’s first female robots was named Repliee Q1 and he himself <a href="https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=KpjxoQEACAAJ&source=gbs_ViewAPI&redir_esc=y">has said</a> that the name derives from the French for “replicate” and from the “replicants” in Blade Runner: science fiction and robotics have always been entwined. Indeed, in <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/ng-interactive/2017/apr/07/meet-erica-the-worlds-most-autonomous-android-video">a documentary</a> made by the Guardian about Erica, Ishiguro reveals that he wanted to be an oil painter and insists on the similarities between his work and artistic creation. </p>
<p>It is difficult not to see here a masculine Pygmalionesque desire to create the perfect artificial woman. “Ishiguro-sensei is my father and he understands me entirely,” Erica pronounces in the documentary. Her vaunted autonomy seems more like a projection on the part on the roboticists who programme her thoughts, but also occasionally anthropomorphise her: the scientist who introduces himself as Erica’s “architect” also thinks that she is “really excited to interact with people”.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191410/original/file-20171023-1722-x95kfx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/191410/original/file-20171023-1722-x95kfx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=650&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/191410/original/file-20171023-1722-x95kfx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=650&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/191410/original/file-20171023-1722-x95kfx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=650&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/191410/original/file-20171023-1722-x95kfx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=817&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/191410/original/file-20171023-1722-x95kfx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=817&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/191410/original/file-20171023-1722-x95kfx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=817&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">One of Them Is a Human #1 by Maija Tammi (Erica: Erato Ishiguro Symbiotic Human-Robot Interaction Project).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">© Maija Tammi</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Illusions of mastery</h2>
<p>There has been heightened interest in female robots recently: from <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/dec/31/erica-the-most-beautiful-and-intelligent-android-ever-leads-japans-robot-revolution">articles</a>, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/science/audio/2017/may/03/erica-answers-responses-from-an-android-science-weekly-podcast">podcasts</a> and <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p059t7k1">TV programmes</a> featuring Erica, to excited tales of bionic sex dolls (equipped with “personality” apps) in the more lurid corners of media space. If we are to co-exist and interact with robots – and we need serious debate on the psychological, <a href="https://theconversation.com/after-75-years-isaac-asimovs-three-laws-of-robotics-need-updating-74501">ethical</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/machine-gaydar-ai-is-reinforcing-stereotypes-that-liberal-societies-are-trying-to-get-rid-of-83837">social</a> and legal implications of this – it is perfectly possible to construct embodied AIs that are not humanoid and gendered. So why female androids – and why now?</p>
<p>The idea of the machine-woman first acquired a particular force in the 1920s and 30s, which saw a proliferation of cultural images of robots, from the <a href="https://www.wired.com/2011/01/0125robot-cometh-capek-rur-debut">invention of the term</a> by the Czech writer Karel Čapek in 1921 to the iconic female android in Fritz Lang’s film <a href="http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-metropolis-2010-restoration-1927">Metropolis</a> in 1927. This was also a time of unprecedented female mobility, in all senses of the word. The French <em>garçonnes</em>, the <em>neuen Frauen</em> of Germany, and the Japanese <em>modan gāru</em> (modern girls) crossed boundaries between masculine and feminine with their short hair, androgynous figures and demands for political equity (the latter often obscured by an obsessive media focus on their sexuality). </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/on2H8Qt5fgA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The images of submissive artificial women in art and science fiction betray a male cultural desire to symbolically control these new female subjectivities. This was also a time when Fordism and automatisation seemed to transform human bodies as well as machines: the mechanical movements of Chaplin’s assembly line worker in his film Modern Times (1936) are comical, but also deeply disturbing. While machinery has largely been associated with masculinity, fears about technology out of control could be displaced by being projected onto woman, traditionally seen as the weaker, inferior other.</p>
<p>The current media fixation on hyperrealistic female androids and <a href="https://theconversation.com/child-sex-dolls-and-robots-exploring-the-legal-challenges-81912">sex robots</a> comes at a moment when automation threatens not only unskilled labour, but also such bastions of middle-class masculinity as the lower echelons of banking, insurance and law. It is hardly surprising, then, that popular culture is again awash with fantasies of compliant automatised females.</p>
<h2>Animating visions</h2>
<p>While the creators of the new Blade Runner film remain in the familiar territory of “pleasure model” replicants and comforting holographic girlfriends, other artists have been more reflexive about the skewed gender politics of some science fiction and its worrying implications for robotics and for our technological future in general. Ilinca Calugareanu, the director of the Guardian documentary about Erica, and Maija Tammi, the artist who took Erica’s portrait, belong in a long lineage of artists who have interrogated male cultural fantasies of artificial women.</p>
<p>Calugareanu shoots people in slow motion, making actions rhythmic and somewhat inorganic, subtly erasing the differences between human and machinic movement, but also emphasising, by contrast, Erica’s immobility. Erica and her creators are filmed in medium close shots, in the centre of the frame. The men are silent and immobile, their thoughts narrated via a voice-over: the split between speech and mouth movement is similar to Erica’s. The masculine human subjects and the female android get the same filmic treatment, in a gesture that elides the distinction between them.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qfAW0RPY3HQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Maija Tammi’s photograph of Erica, meanwhile, is part of a series titled “One of Them is a Human” that includes a portrait of Ishiguro. The camera angle and the play of light in Erica’s portrait give silicone the warm texture of skin. The slightly tousled hair implies movement, as if she has just turned her head. She looks intently outside the frame with an enigmatic half-smile. </p>
<p>Tammi has spoken about the conventions of portraiture and how they compel us, the viewers, to invent meaning, to endow the sitter with an inner life. Robotic creation can involve a similar element of narcissistic projection. Erica’s “personality” is programmed by her designers; she echoes their taste in robot-themed films and their techno-utopianism (in the documentary, both roboticists and android insist that robots will run the world much better than humans: after all, they are impartial, rational and selfless). </p>
<p>Such work makes us confront our own reflexes of projection, while also questioning divisions between human and machine along gender lines. </p>
<p>In contrast to some of their male counterparts, female scientists such as Synthia Breazell at MIT are developing <a href="http://robotic.media.mit.edu/project-portfolio/">social, empathetic robots</a> that are not explicitly (and stereotypically) gendered. </p>
<p>Let’s hope such efforts – artistic and scientific – soon seep into the mainstream idea of robots too.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Editor’s note: this article was amended on 25 October to correct the German term ‘neuen Frauen’.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86092/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Irena Hayter does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Why do roboticists dream of electric women?
Irena Hayter, Lecturer in Japanese Studies, University of Leeds
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/79821
2017-10-19T22:45:18Z
2017-10-19T22:45:18Z
Blade Runner 2049 misses rise of creative artificial intelligence
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190894/original/file-20171018-32367-19u7131.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C3089%2C1620&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">_Blade Runner 2049_'s character, Joi, is a holographic artificial intelligence marketed as a personal companion to the protagonist, K.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Handout)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The portrayal of artificial intelligence in <em>Blade Runner 2049</em> takes on a nuance absent in the original film. In addition to the advanced intelligence of the replicants — human-seeming biological machines — there is also the holographic character Joi, a logical extension of today’s digital assistants such as <a href="https://www.apple.com/ios/siri/">Apple’s</a> <a href="https://machinelearning.apple.com/2017/10/01/hey-siri.html">Siri</a>, Microsoft’s <a href="https://www.microsoft.com/en-ca/windows/cortana">Cortana</a> or Amazon’s <a href="https://developer.amazon.com/alexa">Alexa</a>.</p>
<p>Aside from these two depictions, AI is largely relegated to the background: Performing simple tasks such as running machines, autonomously piloting spinners — <em>Blade Runner</em>‘s flying cars — and dynamically altering the environments that people inhabit, causing light to move with them as they walk through beautiful and brutal constructed spaces.</p>
<p>In all of these forms, the film makes a key distinction between human and artificial intelligence: Only people are capable of creativity — AI is mechanical.</p>
<p>As researchers interested in digital automation and expertise, we can say that <em>Blade Runner 2049</em>’s depiction of AI as mundane belies today’s reality and the history of the field.</p>
<p>Recent examples have shown computers have started to become active participants in creative work such as the field of design, collaborating with humans to shape the objects and experiences that fill our daily lives. Moreover, there is a long history around computation and creativity that needs to be addressed. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190909/original/file-20171018-32355-1b16xux.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190909/original/file-20171018-32355-1b16xux.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=240&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190909/original/file-20171018-32355-1b16xux.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=240&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190909/original/file-20171018-32355-1b16xux.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=240&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190909/original/file-20171018-32355-1b16xux.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190909/original/file-20171018-32355-1b16xux.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190909/original/file-20171018-32355-1b16xux.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In <em>Blade Runner 2049</em>, actor Ryan Gosling plays police officer K who is accompanied by a holographic artificial intelligence, Joi, played by Ana de Armas.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Handout)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Generative design</h2>
<p>The newly-emerging field known as “generative design” seeks to incorporate the computer more actively into the design process. In these kinds of computer applications, the designer uploads a “seed geometry” — akin to a <a href="http://www.arch.virginia.edu/arch545/handouts/keyframing.html">keyframe</a> reference drawing an animator might use — and then sets a series of requirements ranging from the aesthetic to the functional. </p>
<p>The software then searches through a series of <a href="https://www.fastcodesign.com/3048667/how-4-designers-built-a-game-with-184-quintillion-unique-planets">procedurally-generated</a> designs based on the seed geometry and surfaces those that meet the requirements. The designer can select one of these “solutions” for production or to function as the next seed geometry and the process begins again. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://gallery.autodesk.com/fusion360/projects/elbo-chair--generated-in-project-dreamcatcher-made-with-fusion-360">Elbo chair</a> is a recent example of a successful use of generative design that has garnered a great deal of attention. Created in the summer of 2016 by Autodesk researchers Brittany Presten and Arthur Harsuvanakit, the chair was a part of a project examining how to best incorporate generative design tools into traditional computer-aided design (CAD) software. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vtfNlWEJxw4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Generative design uses computation to envision creations in thousands of ways before a person chooses the best one. (Autodesk)</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>A chair was selected for this project, according to Harsuvanakit, because of the surprising complexity of the object. A “good” chair not only has to be aesthetically pleasing, but it also needs to be comfortable and support body weight. There is also the issue of “produceability” — regardless of how well a solution meets the other requirements, that would mean little if it was not feasible to actually fabricate the chair. </p>
<p>The requirements Presten and Harsuvanakit ultimately settled upon were that the chair was to be produced using wood and a CNC router — a computer-controlled cutting machine. Functionally, the chair would need to bear a weight of up to 300 pounds and the seat would be 18 inches off the ground.</p>
<p>Aesthetically, Dutch mid-century modern was selected for the chair’s style, and a seed geometry was created for the chair that paid homage to several chairs from this school of design. The name of the chair itself is a reference to <a href="http://denmark.dk/en/meet-the-danes/great-danes/designers/hans-wegner">Hans J. Wegner</a>’s design icon, Elbow Chair.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190902/original/file-20171018-32355-5kyiet.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Elbo chair was created using generative design, in which computers co-create with humans.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://gallery.autodesk.com/fusion360/projects/elbo-chair--generated-in-project-dreamcatcher-made-with-fusion-360">(Handout)</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The final results are striking. With its seemingly-strange blend of Danish and almost organic influences — apt considering that generative design is often likened to the evolutionary processes — the Elbo chair also uses 18 per cent less material and bears less stress on its joints compared to the seed geometry. </p>
<p>News about the achievement focused on how Dreamcatcher, the generative design application used to create the Elbo chair, heralds the new creative capabilities of computers. Harsuvanakit and Presten <a href="https://www.wired.com/2016/10/elbo-chair-autodesk-algorithm/">delegated much of the decision-making process to computational processes</a>, using algorithms to replace some of the aesthetic, material, and construction decisions typically made by humans. </p>
<p>While this story may seem overwhelmingly modern, use of computers in creative work dates back to early days of computation.</p>
<h2>Computer-written western</h2>
<p>On Oct. 26, 1960, CBS aired an hour-long special entitled <em>The Thinking Machine</em>. Focused on the rise of digital computers and the potential of artificial intelligence, the special also included three short television dramas that had been written by a computer.</p>
<p>The program that “authored” these three western playlets was called SAGA II. It was developed for the <a href="http://museum.mit.edu/150/23">TX-0 computer</a> by Douglas Ross and Harrison Morse of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Electronic Systems Laboratory. Ross said while they had a great deal of fun developing the program, their underlying intent was not levity, but to demonstrate the potential for computers to engage in “creative” acts.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aygSMgK3BEM?wmode=transparent&start=7" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption"><em>The Thinking Machine</em>, a 1960 CBS television special, included three short western plays written by an artificial intelligence.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the first playlet, a shootout leaves a bank robber mortally wounded. After taking one final drink, the bandit dies, leaving the sheriff to reclaim the money and walk off into the proverbial sunset.</p>
<p>The second playlet is almost identical to the first, but this time the sheriff is mortally wounded instead, leaving the bandit free to escape with his ill-gotten gains. Upon seeing this second iteration, the host of the special, actor David Wayne, said: “Well, I can see that there is one thing the computer doesn’t know — in television the bad guy is supposed to lose.”</p>
<p>Wayne’s statement highlights key differences between the Elbo chair system and Saga II: Whereas both programs are creative in the sense that they are both producing something novel, the newer Autodesk Dreamcatcher system adds discriminative capacities to the mix.</p>
<h2>Empowered machines a transformative technology</h2>
<p>SAGA II can at best be described as a blunt instrument of the creative process. Each time the program was run, a new western would be generated. It was then up to the researcher and producers to determine the quality of the script that was produced. </p>
<p>Conversely, Dreamwcatcher generated large volumes of possible designs for the Elbo chair but only those that met the parameters established by Presten and Harsuvanakit were shown to the user. As such, one can say that Dreamcatcher was actively considering what made a good design.</p>
<p>There are certainly lessons to be learned by exploring the history of CAD as it relates to our current understanding of creative work, but the generative design demonstrated by the Elbo chair also requires us to come to terms with issues around discrimination.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=467&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190908/original/file-20171018-32382-34o6sx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=587&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Actors in the first computer-written western stage a shootout in 1960 as part of the CBS television special on artificial intelligence, <em>The Thinking Machine</em>.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102631242">(Handout)</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This newfound capacity for determining quality that makes this generative design unique unto itself, and requires us to consider how the line between human expertise and computational systems is changing.</p>
<p>Similar developments in medicine demonstrate the capacity of deep learning systems to diagnose cancer. Venture capitalist <a href="https://venturebeat.com/2017/06/20/vinod-khosla-predicts-ai-will-replace-human-oncologists/">Vinod Khosla has said that he “can’t imagine why a human oncologist would add value.”</a> Venture capitalists like Khosla see these new computational capacities as increasing the economic abundance and quality of life of humans.</p>
<p>Yet the question remains: What do we lose when we task computational systems with discriminating on our behalf? Other researchers working in the field of oncology have noted ways in which clinical diagnoses serve as a site for explaining how cancer works. These explanations often lead to new medical breakthroughs. </p>
<p>AI researcher <a href="https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/u-of-t-professor-geoffrey-hinton-hailed-as-guru-of-new-era-of-computing/article34639148/">Geoffrey Hinton</a> of the <a href="http://vectorinstitute.ai/">Vector Institute</a> in Toronto has similarly noted that <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/03/ai-versus-md">“A deep-learning system doesn’t have any explanatory power.”</a> This has obvious ramifications for medicine.</p>
<p>The impact of these kinds of computational systems in the future is unknown. What is certain however, is that both what it means to be creative, and the roles humans and computers play in that process, are changing.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79821/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Daniel Southwick has received funding from Autodesk. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matt Ratto has received funding from Autodesk, SSHRC, and CFI for related projects. </span></em></p>
Blade Runner 2049 misses modern strides in artificial intelligence, which is now capable of performing creative work alongside humans.
Daniel Southwick, PhD Candidate, University of Toronto
Matt Ratto, Associate Professor, Faculty of Information, University of Toronto
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/85582
2017-10-12T22:01:41Z
2017-10-12T22:01:41Z
Blade Runner 2049: No hope in this dystopia
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190028/original/file-20171012-31418-67af63.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C2%2C1704%2C704&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">While the original Blade Runner provides some insight into artificial life, and the book explores power and human relationships, Blade Runner 2049 has none of that.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Handout)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Editor’s note: This article contains spoilers.</em></p>
<p>I went to see <em>Blade Runner 2049</em>, directed by Denis Villeneuve, with great anticipation. The original was so unique and although I was ambivalent about the film’s story and politics, many of its images have stayed in my mind for over 35 years. I have even used <em>Blade Runner</em> in my film studies classes. Yet, I left the theatre severely disappointed. <em>Blade Runner 2049</em> represents a failure of the imagination. The film is a series of vignettes strung together and is the definition of solipsism — steeped in narcissism, excessive self-absorption, isolation and regressive politics. </p>
<p>The set up for the original film was brilliantly articulated by critic, Pauline Kael in a <a href="http://scrapsfromtheloft.com/2016/12/28/blade-runner-review-pauline-kael/">1982 <em>New Yorker</em> review</a>. She wrote that Ridley Scott, director of <em>Blade Runner</em>, “sets up the action with a crawl announcing the time is early in the twenty-first century and that a blade runner is a police officer who ‛retires’ — i.e., kills — ‛replicants,’ the powerful humanoids manufactured by genetic engineers.”</p>
<p>To varying degrees, the original <em>Blade Runner</em> anticipated numerous contemporary debates about artificial intelligence and robots. Philip K. Dick’s 1968 novel, <em>Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?</em>, on which so much of the original film was based, is a profoundly dystopian yet ultimately hopeful novel about human engagement with artificial life. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190029/original/file-20171012-31386-1l6tlgf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190029/original/file-20171012-31386-1l6tlgf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190029/original/file-20171012-31386-1l6tlgf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190029/original/file-20171012-31386-1l6tlgf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=353&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190029/original/file-20171012-31386-1l6tlgf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190029/original/file-20171012-31386-1l6tlgf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190029/original/file-20171012-31386-1l6tlgf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=443&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The dystopia cityscape from Blade Runner 1982.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Handout)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Dick’s book can be despairing and hopeful at the same time, and it is this tension that actually turned the novel into a rich piece of science fiction. Because in spite of the many challenges they face, the characters actually learn both from each other and from the replicants. They learn that power corrupts and it doesn’t matter whether you are human or robot, but feeling emotions of varying sorts makes the difference between a meaningful life and one that has no meaning. </p>
<p>While the original <em>Blade Runner</em> provides some insight into artificial life, and the book makes profound comments on power and human relationships, <em>Blade Runner 2049</em> has none of that. Crucially missing from both the new and the original film, is some history and context. Why are we in such a mess? Why has society degenerated to such a degree?</p>
<p>As if the back story doesn’t matter, <em>Blade Runner 2049</em> is not really set up at all. Audiences are shown that replicants are everywhere, integrated into society, that blade runner police are ubiquitous and that some of the older versions of the replicants are, as before, still unruly and therefore need to be killed. Society is dominated by a seemingly endless horde of people going nowhere in particular and buildings are rotting in the rain. </p>
<h2>The story is strung together</h2>
<p>As the film opens, K, played by Ryan Gosling, a programmed blade runner, is asleep at the wheel of a vehicle he later calls a car, that is flying through the darkness towards an unknown destination. All of this is covered in the one of most expensive fog-and-mist scenes ever produced for a film (the production rings in at just over $150 million). </p>
<p>The wasteland is interrupted when K reaches his destination and encounters a replicant who is targeted for death and who says before he is killed, “you don’t know what a miracle is.” The miracle he is referring to is clarified a bit later on in the film as the birth of a human child, which he witnessed. </p>
<p>The entire film then circles around the search for the miracle child with K discovering that he himself might be human, then watching his hopes dashed but not before he meets his supposed father, Deckard, played by Harrison Ford who reprises his original role from 1982. </p>
<p>Deckard and K develop a relationship and Deckard, of course, becomes a paternal figure to K. Deckard has apparently been living alone for an untold number of years in the remains of Las Vegas. In the portrayal of Vegas lies an implied critique of the reasons for the decay of humanity with Las Vegas representing all that is superficial and wrong about humans. The film does not explain this, it just alludes to the fall of humans as if, because of our past hedonism, we deserve to live in misery, a common theme in dystopian films. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190025/original/file-20171012-31408-50opor.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=233%2C0%2C2034%2C1165&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/190025/original/file-20171012-31408-50opor.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=255&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190025/original/file-20171012-31408-50opor.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=255&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190025/original/file-20171012-31408-50opor.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=255&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190025/original/file-20171012-31408-50opor.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190025/original/file-20171012-31408-50opor.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/190025/original/file-20171012-31408-50opor.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In this vision of the future, we repeat all the clichés of voyeurism that dominated the previous century.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Handout)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Like the original, <a href="http://scrapsfromtheloft.com/2016/12/28/blade-runner-review-pauline-kael/">the story is unimportant</a> and the approach is also derivative relying on the clichés of dystopias drawn from dozens of similar films. <em>Blade Runner 2049</em> also suffers from a bad script and some odd stylistic filmmaking choices. It is essentially a series of events, strung together within a special effects universe, that Villeneuve thinks represents another world or another phase of history. Do we care about flying cars and exploding buildings and robots who fight each other shattering into pieces that fly off into the dark landscape? The fetish for special effects is killing the storytelling in Hollywood.</p>
<p>The opportunity for social commentary is lost. How does industrialist Niander Wallace (Jared Leto), maker of replicants, come to have such enormous power? He determines whether real humans should be killed — to preserve, what exactly, his business? His supremacy? The corporate entity over which Wallace rules is so sophisticated that it knows everything about everybody — a not so subtle variation on the original film and a banal reiteration of endless variations on the themes of absolute power and the human response to fascism. Niander Wallace’s actions may lead us to hate him but we don’t understand his motivations and even if his lack of motivation is a shallow critique of industrial capitalism - is it enough to make us care? </p>
<h2>All life leads to death</h2>
<p>All the characters, even the holographic ones, live in isolated circumstances with no social encounters of any value. If we accept that it is 2049, then why are women portrayed as sex objects? Why do their nude bodies appear everywhere? In Villeneuve’s dystopia, sex is provided through an illusory construction of desires that are mechanical and mechanized. Yet, even if this were seen as a critique of the society Wallace and his fellow industrialists have invented, it remains a fact that we have screwed ourselves and our planet and how we decide to survive is to repeat all the clichés of voyeurism that dominated the previous century.</p>
<p><em>Blade Runner 2049</em> has successfully created a solipsistic universe - where humans are isolated from real feelings, celebrate selfishness with gusto and are completely involved with their own needs, so self-centred that it matters little whether reality or illusion are the guideposts. Either will do because both will lead you nowhere. The overarching principle behind this film is that life is ultimately going to lead to death and all people and robots have to do is survive all the crap in between. </p>
<p>Here K, the male hero, suffers for the good of others as a consequence of a semi-religious conversion, which means he must make the ultimate sacrifice - his own life. Sound familiar? K’s death solves nothing - and brings no hope - unless the hope is hinting at a sequel. Perhaps Harrison Ford will play God in the next film. Kael suggests that the original <em>Blade Runner</em> was a victim of its own depiction of decay suggesting that it has “nothing to give to audiences,” and this, Villeneuve has succeeded in replicating. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gJtZYCv7AxA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">“Every civilization was built off the back of a disposable workforce.” Blade Runner 2049 Trailer (Warner Bros. 2017)</span></figcaption>
</figure><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85582/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ron Burnett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Blade Runner 2049 represents a failure of the imagination. The film is a series of events strung together and steeped in narcissism, excessive self-absorption, isolation and regressive politics.
Ron Burnett, President and Vice-Chancellor, Emily Carr University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/85398
2017-10-10T03:19:09Z
2017-10-10T03:19:09Z
Blade Runner’s problem with women remains unsolved in its sequel
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189492/original/file-20171010-10844-cw1gar.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Ana de Armas and Ryan Gosling in Blade Runner 2049. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">IMDB</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Denis Villeneuve’s much anticipated Blade Runner 2049 has met with mostly praise and a few notably dour takes. It appears to be yielding disappointing results at the box office. While the film is visually breathtaking, the original’s commodification of women’s bodies remains, leaving female agency largely unexplored. Blade Runner 2049 falls significantly short of its masterpiece predecessor — and even Villeneuve’s brilliant previous film <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2543164/">Arrival</a>.</p>
<p>Set in 2019, Ridley Scott’s <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/">original Blade Runner</a> saw LA cop Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) — the titular “Blade Runner” — hunt down rogue replicants, synthetic humans who he must “retire”. During his mission, he meets and falls in love with Rachael, a significantly advanced replicant. A loose adaptation of Phillip K Dick’s <a href="https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7082.Do_Androids_Dream_of_Electric_Sheep_">Do Android’s Dream of Electric Sheep</a>, the film posed a question that has fascinated audiences for 35 years now — what is the threshold between artificial intelligence and human? </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gCcx85zbxz4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The film has influenced an entire generation of science fiction narratives, such as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0910970/">WALL.E</a>, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212720/">A.I. Artificial Intelligence</a> and <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1798709/">Her</a> — all films that Blade Runner 2049 nods to with varying levels of subtlety. Coupled with its remarkable visuals, the 1982 film’s exploration of our relationship with artificial intelligence has also led to significant interest from academia.</p>
<p>The original Blade Runner hasn’t been free from criticism, however. The exoticism of the neon east Asian urban landscape and the objectification of the female replicants were not explored with any satisfying depth. The replicants in Blade Runner are obvious allegories for the societal oppression that minorities face. Few minorities, however, were present in any meaningful way. </p>
<p>In one particularly disturbing scene, Deckard restrains Rachael and forcibly kisses her. While this subservience of women may well be a critique of the dystopian politics of the Blade Runner universe, no female character is granted any significant agency.</p>
<h2>Into the future</h2>
<p>Many of Villeneuve’s films work as puzzles for the viewer. In Arrival, we piece together Louise’s (Amy Adams) backstory as she learns to communicate with aliens. Prisoners is a “whodunnit” with Jack Gylleenhaal and Hugh Jackman, playing a detective and father respectively, desperately trying to find abducted children. In Enemy, Jake Gyllenhaal plays a man seeking out an exact lookalike he spotted in a film. With questions of identity and humanity as central concerns, Blade Runner 2049 is no different. To retain one’s directorial style in a franchise such as Blade Runner is no easy task.</p>
<p>Set 30 years after Deckard escapes with Rachael, an obedient replicant Blade Runner, Agent K (Ryan Gosling), discovers the remains of another that died in child birth. While unsettling, Lieutenant Joshi (Robin Wright) orders Agent K to retire the child and remove all evidence as the knowledge that replicants can reproduce is far too dangerous. </p>
<p>It would “tear down the wall” she says. This leads K to visit the headquarters of replicant manufacturer Niander Wallace (Jared Leto), whose steely servant Luv (Sylvia Hoeks) reveals that the remains belong to Rachael. And so, pursued by the ruthless Luv, Agent K must track down Deckard and the identity of the miracle child.</p>
<p>When at home, Agent K is comforted by Joi (Ana de Armas), a hologram he treats as a doting lover. Switching from appearances such as a 1950s housewife to a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manic_Pixie_Dream_Girl">manic pixie dream girl</a>, she is a built-to-order confidante, reminiscent of Spike Jonze’s sentient operating system in Her, although without the narrative depth. Throughout the course of the film, Joi appears to develop genuine emotions for K, who can — and does — turn her off when she isn’t needed.</p>
<p>The much-lauded retro-futurist visuals are a testament to cinematographer Roger Deakins, in his third collaboration with Villeneuve. Many frames are infused with a level of detail that will continue to satisfy with repeat viewings. Deakins creates a story of colours, from the yellows of the Wallace headquarters to the reds of Las Vegas. In one particularly bewitching scene as Deckard and K brawl, holograms of Elvis and Marilyn Monroe flicker in the background in a nostalgic display of Las Vegas’ former excess.</p>
<p>The score from Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch is sometimes poignant. At other times it is an almost unbearable blare. While Zimmer is typically bombastic here, the score compliments the epic visuals to create a visceral experience.</p>
<h2>And yet…</h2>
<p>The film’s beautiful aesthetics aside, the world of Blade Runner 2049 is a misogynistic one where characters of colour are once again consigned to the periphery. No female character has a purpose that doesn’t serve a man. Joi is a sexbot slave that functions to explore K’s own sense of humanity and emotional development. She is a constant reminder to K that they are both constructed artificial beings. Whenever she is turned on or off, a logo reminds us that she is a product of Wallace Industries.</p>
<p>While Luv is an intimidating figure, she is unquestioningly obedient to Wallace even though it is clear he repulses her. Being a Villeneuve film, I was anticipating some narrative reveal only to be disappointed by her two dimensional malice. </p>
<p>Finally, Lieutenant Joshi propositions K only to be rebuffed — a scene serving no purpose but to explore K’s burgeoning agency. The three female principal roles act as sexual catalysts for men in varying ways. Further, the women in Blade Runner are all disposable. One woman is shot point blank in the head and another is gutted like a fish.</p>
<p>The most interesting female character is Mariette (Mackenzie Davis), a sex worker who is also charged with tracking K. While a relatively minor character, she is the only woman to voice any sense of ambition that doesn’t pertain to a male character.</p>
<p>Blade Runner’s pornographic economy has forced women into being items of consumption. Large nude hologram models adorn LA. Several gigantic statues of naked women in sexual poses adorn the ruins of Las Vegas. Towards the end of the film, a beaten and battered K sees a giant hologram advertisement for Joi. She is naked and beckons him to have fun with her. His expression is sad and worn. K’s feelings towards Joi gives him the emotional insight to help him make his final decision. </p>
<p>Given the gender politics embedded in this film, I was left with so many more questions after this scene. I don’t think the conclusion offers any real substance to explore gender any further.</p>
<p>There are many science fiction narratives today, such as <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0470752/">Ex Machina</a> or <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0475784/">Westworld</a>, that owe a debt to the original Blade Runner. Ironically, they are now telling better stories around artificial intelligence.</p>
<p>In a film that is all about what it means to be human and what it means to be a cyborg, none of the film’s female character’s are given any real opportunity to express any meaningful humanity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85398/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Denis Villeneuve’s much anticipated Blade Runner 2049 has met with mostly praise and a few notably dour takes. It appears to be yielding disappointing results at the box office. While the film is visually…
Stuart Richards, Researcher and Lecturer in Screen and Cultural Studies, The University of Melbourne
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/85050
2017-10-06T12:11:53Z
2017-10-06T12:11:53Z
How Blade Runner 2049 prepares us to welcome robots for real
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189024/original/file-20171005-9753-qpjod4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sony Pictures</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The idea of dangerous, inhumane artificial intelligence taking over the world is familiar to many of us, thanks to cautionary tales such as the Matrix and Terminator franchises.</p>
<p>But what about the more sympathetic portrayals of robots? The benevolence of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Terminator character in the later movies of the franchise may have been the exception in older portrayals of AI, but human-like machines are often represented more positively in contemporary films. Think of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/ex-machina">Ex Machina</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/chappie-suggests-its-time-to-think-about-the-rights-of-robots-37955">Chappie</a> or <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0212720/">A.I. Artificial Intelligence</a>. </p>
<p>This shift is very likely representative of a wider shift in how we think about these technologies in reality. Blade Runner 2049, long-anticipated sequel to the original 1982 Blade Runner film, is a part of this shift.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jnbsx2L_6ys?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The ability of science fiction to inspire technological innovation is well-known. A lot of science fiction writers are scientists and technologists (Arthur C Clarke and Geoffrey Landis are two examples), and ideas from science fiction have sparked <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2015/aug/13/science-fiction-reality-predicts-future-technology">more serious scientific research</a> (touch screens and tablet computers are common examples). But science fiction serves other purposes too. It can be a tool for exploring the social and ethical implications of technologies being developed now – a fictional laboratory for testing possible futures. It can also prepare us to deal with certain technologies as they arise in the real world. </p>
<p>Jacques Ellul, a philosopher and critic of technology, was <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2012/07/07/jacques-ellul-conference/1BVZp8uEiGKoeXAmkDJpeO/story.html">pessimistic</a> in his assessment of science fiction. In 1980, he <a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/The_technological_system.html?id=EDgSAQAAMAAJ">argued</a> that sci-fi shows us the extreme and unacceptable uses that technology might be put to, in order to make us more complacent about the current state of technology. The negative aspects of technology that we live with today are certainly more subtle than those depicted in Orwell’s 1984, though perhaps no less nefarious. Of course, these remarks are most applicable to dystopian fiction. Some technologists have recognised the important role that science fiction plays in shaping public attitudes towards technology and are therefore imploring writers to <a href="https://www.wired.com/2014/08/stop-writing-dystopian-sci-fiits-making-us-all-fear-technology/">stop producing dystopic fiction</a> – of which there has been a glut in recent years, particularly of the teen variety.</p>
<h2>Blade Runner</h2>
<p>Blade Runner is based on Philip K Dick’s 1968 novel <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/childrens-books-site/2015/apr/07/review-do-androids-dream-of-electric-sheep-phillip-k-dick">Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?</a> It features a depleted Earth in 2019, abandoned by most for a better life in off-world colonies. Synthetic humans (androids) known as “replicants” have been engineered as slave labour in the colonies. Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), is a “blade runner” - it is his job to hunt down rogue replicants and “retire” (kill) them. As Deckard gets to know Rachel, a replicant deceived by false implanted memories into believing that she is human, we begin to think of these replicants as not all that different from us.</p>
<p>Part of the lasting intrigue of the original Blade Runner film (for those who’ve seen the <a href="http://www.vulture.com/2017/09/which-cut-of-blade-runner-should-i-be-watching.html">director’s or final cut</a> at least), is arguing over whether Deckard is, in fact, a replicant himself. The book and the film represent opposite conclusions when it comes to Deckard’s humanity, and speculation is further fuelled by the <a href="http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-comic-con-2017-blade-runner-denis-villeneuve-1501062549-htmlstory.html">conflicting testimonies</a> of Harrison Ford and director Ridley Scott.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/W_9rhPDLHWk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>But does it really matter to us whether Deckard is a replicant? We’ve already sympathised with Rachel – and felt relief as she and Deckard drive off together toward their very human “happily ever after” in the original version. We are on their side, even against the unquestionably human blade runners that would “retire” them. The “synths” of Channel 4 drama <a href="http://www.channel4.com/programmes/humans">Humans</a> inspire a similar response.</p>
<p>Blade Runner 2049 picks up 30 years later. New restrictions on the design and control of replicants have been put in place to ensure their obedience and to make them easier to tell apart from humans. “K” (Ryan Gosling) is a blade runner and replicant charged with investigating suspicions associated with Deckard and Rachel of the earlier film. He uncovers information of real importance for the future of replicants in their dystopic society – and we empathise as he struggles with his more “human” instincts against the compulsion to obedience.</p>
<p>The more that fiction portrays robots as just like us, experiencing “human” emotions that arouse our sympathy, the more likely we are to accept the existence of such beings in real life. Granted, the Deckard and K we see on screen are not really near-human machines, but very real human actors. Our sympathetic response to the character may have more to do with the real humanity of the actor. Even so, the positive response we have to his human portrayal may just carry over to an artificial counterpart, provided it could appear equally human. Whether such machines could actually approximate human characteristics so closely is another question.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189139/original/file-20171006-25749-haja5b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189139/original/file-20171006-25749-haja5b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189139/original/file-20171006-25749-haja5b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189139/original/file-20171006-25749-haja5b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=384&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189139/original/file-20171006-25749-haja5b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189139/original/file-20171006-25749-haja5b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189139/original/file-20171006-25749-haja5b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">K on the hunt.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sony Pictures</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The uncanny valley</h2>
<p>It’s a question that may have enormous bearings on how we would ultimately respond to the existence of human-like machines. Robotics researchers talk about a phenomenon they call the “<a href="http://www.sciencefocus.com/article/future/uncanny-valley-creepy-robots-will-haunt-your-dreams">uncanny valley</a>”, which describes how as robots become more human in appearance, our empathetic responses to them increase. But this only happens up to a point. Once a robot appears almost (but not quite) human, our response quickly shifts to one of revulsion. Only when a robot is indistinguishable from a human being, do we return to a more positive response.</p>
<p>This “uncanny valley” that exists between machines that appear “almost-human” (and provoke revulsion) and those that appear “fully human” (and therefore do not arouse a negative response) may have evolutionary significance. We are conditioned to associate beings that look almost like us but seem “defective” in some way with the threat of infectious disease, or inheritable genetic disorders. Or it may just be the psychological discomfort of seeing something that appears human move like a robot – humans are good at sorting things in our surroundings into categories, and we can experience a sense of “eeriness” when these categories conflict.</p>
<p>This idea of the uncanny valley only really comes into play when we consider the possibility of the benevolent humanoid robots we are seeing more often in fiction today. We don’t have to deal with emotional dissonance when it comes to malevolent machines – we recoil at their uncanny almost likeness, but we also hate them for trying to control or destroy us. But benevolent “almost-human” robots evoke conflicting affections in us: we have feelings of friendship and camaraderie toward them, yet at the same time we revile them, feeling that they shouldn’t be so like us.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189140/original/file-20171006-25749-1xj0dpg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189140/original/file-20171006-25749-1xj0dpg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189140/original/file-20171006-25749-1xj0dpg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189140/original/file-20171006-25749-1xj0dpg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189140/original/file-20171006-25749-1xj0dpg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189140/original/file-20171006-25749-1xj0dpg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189140/original/file-20171006-25749-1xj0dpg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Not so uncanny.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sony Pictures</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Blade Runner 2049 suggests we might overcome the emotional dissonance of the uncanny valley. The “eeriness” is definitely present: gaping wounds do not normally seal themselves at a light touch – and no one should be that difficult to kill. But K’s obviously non-human qualities do not prevent us from accepting his equally evident humanity, or sympathising with the broader plight of replicants. This is true even in the relentlessly bleak world of Blade Runner.</p>
<p>So if roboticists ever achieve a sufficient approximation of human likeness in their products, they may find a welcoming public. If robots appear and act human enough, and are benevolent, we can accept some of their less human traits. After all, we’ve been cheering on these machines in fiction for years.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85050/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michael Burdett receives funding from the John Templeton Foundation, The Templeton Religion Trust and the Issachar Fund. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Victoria Lorrimar does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Science fiction prepares us to deal with certain technologies as they arise in the real world.
Victoria Lorrimar, PhD candidate in Theology and Science, University of Oxford
Michael Burdett, Research Fellow in Religion, Science and Technology, University of Oxford
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/74940
2017-10-06T10:00:38Z
2017-10-06T10:00:38Z
Blade Runner 2049: how Philip K Dick’s classic novel has stood the test of time
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188798/original/file-20171004-1134-j6b4me.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://bladerunnermovie.com/tagged/gif">Blade Runner Movie.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The year 2019 must have seemed like a long time in the future 35 years ago, when the original Blade Runner film was set. Based on the US science fiction writer Philip K Dick’s 1968 novel <a href="https://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=http://t1.gstatic.com/images%3Fq%3Dtbn:ANd9GcQT14G7rDG8taAVZo5ubhtSszmjdZ5aO_AqqrU3a7XTzowEuTJ6&imgrefurl=https://books.google.com/books/about/Do_Androids_Dream_of_Electric_Sheep.html%3Fid%3D7K3cCAAAQBAJ%26source%3Dkp_cover&h=400&w=249&tbnid=if17iDj8akuhwM:&tbnh=160&tbnw=99&usg=__X_fZhTrxIghupzYTCTbx1xtsB78=&vet=10ahUKEwjQnML9jdfWAhWFI1AKHS-JC5EQ_B0IywEwGA..i&docid=Uisq8RdBD3xh5M&itg=1&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQnML9jdfWAhWFI1AKHS-JC5EQ_B0IywEwGA">Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?</a>, Ridley Scott’s dystopian vision tells the story of a hunt for four dangerous “replicant” humans. </p>
<p>At the time of its release, the film was a rich source of predictions about the future world – or Los Angeles to be precise – a place ruined by pollution and lit only by giant floating billboards. But now, in 2017, as the world gets ready for the sequel, we are living in the future – videophones, androids, advances in artificial intelligence, it’s all happening. Okay so we don’t have the hover car just yet, but time always was always a complex and paradoxical phenomenon in the writings of the Philip K Dick. </p>
<p>The arrival of an update, set in 2049, as well as two teaser prequels, created at the request of the director of Blade Runner 2049, <a href="http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0898288/">Denis Villeneuve</a>, merely adds to the sense of a “time-slip” that Dick himself would have appreciated – temporal ambiguity being one of the authors favourite themes. These switches in the timeline of Dick’s stories produce feelings of uncertainty and paranoia for his characters. They also unsettle the reader and challenge our relationship to time.</p>
<h2>The future present</h2>
<p>Of course, from the book to the film, a lot has changed. In the book, the protagonist Rick Deckard is a simple and rather vulnerable character and is certainly no Harrison Ford. Large chunks of the text are also missed out in the film in favour of more cinematic landscapes and new material.</p>
<p>Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? shares the basic plotline of the film: the world has been ravaged by World War Terminus, most humans have departed the planet and cities are all but deserted due to the prevalence of radioactive dust. Bounty hunter Deckard is hired to retire “replicants” who have returned illegally to Earth. And over the course of a day, he hunts them down through a crumbling Los Angeles.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189155/original/file-20171006-25784-1h0wpsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/189155/original/file-20171006-25784-1h0wpsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=256&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189155/original/file-20171006-25784-1h0wpsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=256&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189155/original/file-20171006-25784-1h0wpsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=256&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189155/original/file-20171006-25784-1h0wpsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189155/original/file-20171006-25784-1h0wpsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/189155/original/file-20171006-25784-1h0wpsy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=322&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Rachael, a replicant played by Sean Young in the film.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1880753">By Source, Fair use,</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the book, inhabitants of Earth are mostly “specials”, whose mental capacities have deteriorated as a consequence of contamination. Deckard owns and cares for android sheep and his ultimate ambition is to own a real animal – the war having caused the mass extinction of many species. Deckard needs to earn money as a bounty hunter to get enough to finance a real animal. </p>
<h2>Technology at the helm</h2>
<p>Part of the success of Dick’s stories and very much integral to the success of the first Blade Runner film is their proximity to the present. The technological landscape Dick explores – for which the first Blade Runner film is famous – includes many technological advances that have come to light since publication. </p>
<p>He prefigured both augmented and virtual reality. He described machines – such as lifts, cars and consumer durables – that talk back and argue with humans. </p>
<p>Not totally dissimilar to the strange dialogues I have with the voice of an automated self-service till in my local supermarket these days. The writer’s use of quirky technological artefacts that argue, answer back, joke, intimidate and use sarcasm, have become commonplace in the many interpretations of Dick’s output since the release of the original Blade Runner movie. </p>
<h2>The rise of the machine</h2>
<p>In his writing, Dick often characterised complex human relationships and interactions with technology. This can be seen in the original Blade Runner film, where many of these relationships are seen to be paradoxical and infused with paranoia – portraying many of the existential challenges that our relations to technology give rise to. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188804/original/file-20171004-6757-8gelyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188804/original/file-20171004-6757-8gelyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=794&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188804/original/file-20171004-6757-8gelyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=794&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188804/original/file-20171004-6757-8gelyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=794&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188804/original/file-20171004-6757-8gelyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=997&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188804/original/file-20171004-6757-8gelyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=997&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188804/original/file-20171004-6757-8gelyh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=997&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Harrison Ford and Ryan Gosling both star in the new Blade Runner film.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Blade Runner Movie.Com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But the technological landscape in Dick’s novels were not always their main characteristic – and certainly not as much of an obsession as it was for some of his contemporaries such as Isaac Asimov or Robert Heinlein. That said, a lot of Dick’s technological landscape has provided ample inspiration for other cinematic interpretations such as Total Recall, Minority Report as well as of course Blade Runner.</p>
<p>Ultimately, in his novel, Dick used the future to illuminate the present. But of course these are not optimistic or evangelical visions of the future. In all of these stories, whether in the novel or the films spawned, it is a future that is bleak, dystopian and full of struggles. If anything, this is a cautionary warning of what may actually happen. And given that no one knows yet what the world will look like in 2049, only time will tell if this is the future to come.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/74940/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Patrick T. Allen does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
There’s no time like the present for a new Blade Runner.
Patrick T. Allen, Senior Lecturer in New Media Design, University of Bradford
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/84973
2017-10-06T00:54:25Z
2017-10-06T00:54:25Z
Blade Runner’s chillingly prescient vision of the future
<p>Can corporations become so powerful that they dictate the way we feel? Can machines get mad – like, really mad – at their makers? Can people learn to love machines?</p>
<p>These are a few of the questions raised by Ridley Scott’s influential sci-fi neo-noir film “<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/">Blade Runner</a>” (1982), which imagines a corporation whose product tests the limits of the machine-man divide. </p>
<p>Looking back at the original theatrical release of “Blade Runner” – just as its sequel, “Blade Runner 2049” opens in theaters – I’m struck by the original’s ambivalence about technology and its chillingly prescient vision of corporate attempts to control human feelings. </p>
<h2>From machine killer to machine lover</h2>
<p>Even though the film was tepidly received at the time of its release, its detractors agreed that its imagining of Los Angeles in 2019 was wonderfully atmospheric and artfully disconcerting. Looming over a dingy, rain-soaked City of Angels is Tyrell Corporation, whose namesake, Dr. Tyrell (Joe Turkel), announces, “Commerce is our goal here at Tyrell. More human than human is our motto.”</p>
<p>Tyrell creates robots called replicants, which are difficult to differentiate from humans. They are designed to be worker-slaves – with designations like “combat model” or “pleasure model” – and to expire after four years. </p>
<p>Batty (Rutger Hauer) and Pris (Darryl Hannah) are two members of a small cohort of rebelling replicants who escape their enslavement and hope to extend their lives beyond the four years allotted them by their makers. These replicant models even possess fake memories, which Tyrell implanted as a way to buffer the machine’s anxieties. Instead, the memories create a longing for an unattainable future. The machines want to be treated like people, too. </p>
<p>Deckard (Harrison Ford), a policeman (and maybe a replicant too), is tasked with eliminating the escaped machines. During his search, he meets a special replicant who lacks the corporate safeguard of a four-year lifespan: the beautiful Rachael (Sean Young), who shoots and kills one of her own in order to save Deckard. This opens the door for Deckard to acknowledge growing feelings towards a machine who has developed the will to live and love beyond the existence imagined for her by Tyrell Corp.</p>
<p>The greatest challenge to Deckard comes from combat model Batty, who has demonstrably more passion for existence than the affectless Deckard. </p>
<p>The film’s climax is a duel to the death between Deckard and Batty, in which Batty ends up not just sparing but saving Deckard. As Deckard watches Batty expire, he envies the replicant’s lust for life at the very moment it escapes him. Batty seems more human than the humans in this world, but Tyrell’s motto is both clue and trap.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eISTFyLbXhY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The final scene of ‘Blade Runner.’</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Deckard’s end-of-film decision to escape with Rachael defies the rules of the corporation and of society. But it’s also an acknowledgment of the successful, seamless integration of machine and human life. </p>
<p>“Blade Runner” imagines a world in which human machines are created to serve people, but Deckard’s interactions with these replicants reveals the thinness of the line: He goes from being on assignment as a machine killer to falling in love with a machine. </p>
<h2>A world succumbing to machines</h2>
<p>Today, the relationship between corporations, machines and humans defines modern life in ways that Ridley Scott – even in his wildest and most dystopic imagination – couldn’t have forecast in 1982. </p>
<p>In “Blade Runner,” implanted memories are propped up by coveted (but fake) family photos. Yet a world in which memory is fragile and malleable seems all too possible and familiar. <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/how-facebook-fake-news-and-friends-are-warping-your-memory-1.21596">Recent studies have shown</a> that people’s memories are increasingly susceptible to being warped by social media misinformation, whether it’s stories of fake terrorist attacks or Muslims celebrating after 9/11. When this misinformation spreads on social media networks, it can create and reinforce false collective memories, fomenting a crisis of reality that can <a href="https://web.stanford.edu/%7Egentzkow/research/fakenews.pdf">skew election results</a> or <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/26/magazine/how-fake-news-turned-a-small-town-upside-down.html">whip up small town hysteria</a>.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, Facebook has studied <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/29/facebook-users-emotions-news-feeds">how it can manipulate the way its users feel</a> – and yet <a href="https://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/">over a billion people</a> a day log on to willingly participate in its massive data collection efforts.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/09/well/live/hooked-on-our-smartphones.html">Our entrancement with technology</a> might seem less dramatic than the full-blown love affair that Scott imagined, but it’s no less all-consuming. We often prioritize our smartphones over human social interactions, with millennials checking their phones <a href="https://www.inc.com/john-brandon/science-says-this-is-the-reason-millennials-check-their-phones-150-times-per-day.html">over 150 times a day</a>. In fact, even as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/02/well/mind/the-phones-we-love-too-much.html">people increasingly feel</a> that they cannot live without their smartphones, <a href="https://theconversation.com/teens-and-parents-in-japan-and-us-agree-mobile-devices-are-an-ever-present-distraction-84325">many say</a> that the devices are <a href="https://theconversation.com/she-phubbs-me-she-phubbs-me-not-smartphones-could-be-ruining-your-love-life-68463">ruining their relationships</a>.</p>
<p>And at a time when we’re faced with the likelihood of being <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/20/opinion/trump-and-the-society-of-the-spectacle.html">unable to differentiate between what’s real and what’s fake</a> – a world of Twitter bots and doctored photographs, trolling and faux-outrage, mechanical pets and plastic surgery – we might be well served by recalling Deckard’s first conversation upon arriving at Tyrell Corp. Spotting an owl, Deckard asks, “It’s artificial?” Rachael replies, not skipping a beat, “Of course it is.” </p>
<p>In “Blade Runner,” reality no longer really matters. </p>
<p>How much longer will it matter to us?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84973/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Marsha Gordon does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
The relationship between corporations, machines and humans defines modern life in ways that Ridley Scott – even in his wildest dreams – couldn’t have imagined.
Marsha Gordon, Professor of Film Studies, North Carolina State University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/85128
2017-10-05T14:16:34Z
2017-10-05T14:16:34Z
Philip K Dick: you may not have read his books, but you’ve almost certainly seen the movies
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188968/original/file-20171005-9802-11c0v5q.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">philip k dick</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Without conducting extensive research, one can state with some certainty that many more people have encountered Philip K Dick through cinema or television than have read his published novels or short stories. Blade Runner, the critically acclaimed 1982 sci-fi blockbuster directed by Ridley Scott and starring Harrison Ford, was based on Dick’s 1968 novel <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/childrens-books-site/2015/apr/07/review-do-androids-dream-of-electric-sheep-phillip-k-dick">Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?</a> The highly anticipated sequel, Blade Runner 2049, has <a href="http://www.bbc.com/culture/story/20171004-film-review-does-blade-runner-2049-top-the-original">just been released</a> to general acclaim. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dZOaI_Fn5o4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Channel 4 is currently broadcasting a ten-part series of standalone dramas, penned by British and American writers, called Philip K. Dick’s Electric Dreams and based on his short stories. In 2015, Amazon aired the first season of The Man in the High Castle, a loose adaptation of Dick’s Hugo Award-winning novel of 1962 which vividly imagines an alternative history in which the Axis Powers were victorious in World War Two. </p>
<figure class="align-left ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188966/original/file-20171005-9753-1g8a7he.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188966/original/file-20171005-9753-1g8a7he.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=778&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188966/original/file-20171005-9753-1g8a7he.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=778&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188966/original/file-20171005-9753-1g8a7he.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=778&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188966/original/file-20171005-9753-1g8a7he.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=978&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188966/original/file-20171005-9753-1g8a7he.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=978&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188966/original/file-20171005-9753-1g8a7he.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=978&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Philip K Dick, died in March 1982, aged 53.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wikimedia Commons</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The full list of Dick adaptations is too long to reproduce here, but it includes two big-screen versions of Total Recall, based on Dick’s 1966 story: <a href="https://philipkdickreview.wordpress.com/2014/05/30/we-can-remember-it-for-you-wholesale/">We Can Remember It For You Wholesale</a>, Richard Linklater’s 2006 production of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2012/dec/17/philip-k-dick-a-scanner-darkly">A Scanner Darkly</a>, and the Steven Spielberg-directed Minority Report in 2002.</p>
<p>On the surface, it is easy to understand why filmmakers and television producers are so keen to plunder Dick’s oeuvre. For one thing, there is his <a href="http://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/ch.cgi?23">sheer prolificacy</a>. Dick published his first short story in 1951 and never stopped writing until his death from a stroke on March 2, 1982, barely four months before the release of Blade Runner. There are 45 novels and more than 120 short stories for potential adaptors to choose from. </p>
<h2>Dystopian visions</h2>
<p>Many critics have observed that this headlong rush of creativity – driven partly by a naturally feverish imagination and partly by amphetamines – led to works of variable prose quality. And yet each of Dick’s sci-fi texts is replete with surprising and compelling visions of dystopian futures (or presents) and profoundly unsettling explorations of his recurring themes. These include: the nature of reality, subjective consciousness, schizophrenia, alternate universes, authoritarianism, technology and interactions between humans and non-humans. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/q2bmImPNKbM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The opening paragraph of one of Dick’s less critically-acclaimed novels, <a href="https://philipkdickreview.wordpress.com/2014/11/14/eye-in-the-sky-1957/">Eye in the Sky</a> (1957), suggests the attractions of his work for producers of popular visual media: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The proton beam deflector of the Belmont Bevatron betrayed its inventors at four o’clock in the afternoon of October 2, 1959. What happened next happened instantly. No longer adequately deflected – and therefore no longer under control – the six billion volt beam radiated upward toward the roof of the chamber, incinerating, along its way, an observation platform overlooking the doughnut-shaped magnet.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The opening is highly misleading, in fact. If it promises uncompromising action ideal for cinematic special effects, then it highlights a consistent problem with adaptations of Dick’s work, whether or not they are (as is the case with Blade Runner) great movies. The <a href="http://content.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,575667-3,00.html">author himself feared</a> that Ridley Scott would turn his vision into “one titanic lurid collision of androids being blown up, androids killing humans, general confusion and murder, all very exciting”.</p>
<p>Coloured by his wry humour, Dick’s comments nonetheless raise an important issue about his writing which is that it isn’t, in any immediate, descriptive sense, particularly visual. Eye in the Sky, despite the bombastic opening, becomes a deeply paranoid meditation on consciousness, identity and gestalt, in which individuals injured in the deflector beam accident are forced to live in each other’s solipsistic subjective realities, inner worlds constructed and projected through prejudice and ignorance.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GUWHskLEses?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>So Dick’s real visual strengths – the ones much less amenable to Hollywood treatment – consist in the conviction with which he visualises irrational, unconscious, inner terrain. When he describes alien landscapes, as he does in <a href="https://medium.com/longform-literary-reviews/martian-time-slip-by-philip-k-dick-b5814b0dccb">Martian Time-Slip</a> (1964), they are inseparable from the psychological landscapes of his profoundly troubled characters.</p>
<h2>Dissident outsider</h2>
<p>For author Jonathan Lethem, who, having edited the <a href="https://www.loa.org/books/311-the-philip-k-dick-collection-3-volume-boxed-set">Library of America</a> editions of his novels, has tried harder than anyone else to drag Dick into the mainstream, Dick remains “<a href="https://www.loa.org/news-and-views/486-jonathan-lethem-on-philip-k-dick-i-call-him-science-fictions-lenny-bruce">the ultimate outsider, nonconformist dissident</a>”. This is because of his absolute emotional commitment to the inner lives of his characters. Indeed, he was so close to them that, in Lethem’s words, he “was not utterly in control”. </p>
<p>Like that of his sci-fi contemporaries, such as Robert Heinlein, Dick’s work critiques consumer capitalism and authoritarian institutions, and reflects and predicts technological advances, not all of them benign. Lethem is right, however, to argue that Dick stands apart from other practitioners because of his “personal visionary intensity” and the overwhelming sense of powerlessness his characters experience in the face of their shifting universes. For the same reasons, Lethem suggests, some readers have found Dick’s writing challenging.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wZJ0TP4nTaE?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Critics have identified a kind of “<a href="https://blog.oup.com/2016/07/philip-k-dick-spiritual-epiphany/">spiritual turn</a>” in Dick’s work after 1974, when he started having powerful, religious hallucinations. In truth, the novels which followed these visions, such as <a href="http://www.conceptualfiction.com/valis.html">Valis</a> and <a href="http://www.fantasyliterature.com/reviews/the-divine-invasion/">The Divine Invasion</a> (both 1981), have more in common with his early, more obviously political sci-fi stories than many have allowed. Though these later novels evince a sincere interest in gnostic Christianity and divine communications, their obsession with identity, perception and the battle between isolation and connectedness is consistent with previous works.</p>
<p>Philip K Dick, who tried to write mainstream literary novels without much success before embarking on his sci-fi career, seems to epitomise the struggle that genre fiction continues to have to gain credibility within the canon. And yet he also seems to be positioned to the side of that debate, somewhere in his own created universe, following his own path. His remarkable destabilising visions will continue to offer rich material to cinema and television – and yet the adaptations will never quite catch the unique spirit of his work.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85128/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Peacock does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Author’s dystopian visions have inspired some of the most popular sci-fi movies of all time.
James Peacock, Senior Lecturer in English and American Literatures, Keele University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/84743
2017-10-05T09:44:34Z
2017-10-05T09:44:34Z
Could we build a Blade Runner-style ‘replicant’?
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188035/original/file-20170928-22252-149mekf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sony Pictures</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The new <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1856101/">Blade Runner sequel</a> will return us to a world where sophisticated androids made with organic body parts can match the strength and emotions of their human creators. As someone who builds biologically inspired robots, I’m interested in whether our own technology will ever come close to matching the “replicants” of <a href="https://theconversation.com/blade-runner-2049-and-why-eyes-are-so-important-in-this-vision-of-the-future-85119">Blade Runner 2049</a>.</p>
<p>The reality is that we’re a very long way from building robots with human-like abilities. But advances in so-called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soft_robotics">soft robotics</a> show a promising way forward for technology that could be a new basis for the androids of the future.</p>
<p>From a scientific point of view, the real challenge is replicating the complexity of the human body. Each one of us is made up of millions and millions of cells, and we have no clue how we can build such a complex machine that is indistinguishable from us humans. The most complex machines today, for example the world’s largest airliner, the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2006/feb/23/theairlineindustry.travelnews">Airbus A380</a>, are composed of millions of parts. But in order to match the complexity level of humans, we would need to scale this complexity up about a million times.</p>
<p>There are currently three different ways that engineering is making the border between humans and robots more ambiguous. Unfortunately, these approaches are only starting points, and are not yet even close to the world of Blade Runner. </p>
<p>There are human-like robots built from scratch by assembling artificial sensors, motors and computers to resemble the human body and motion. However, extending the current human-like robot would not bring Blade Runner-style androids closer to humans, because every artificial component, such as sensors and motors, are still hopelessly primitive compared to their biological counterparts.</p>
<p>There is also <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-next-wearable-technology-could-be-your-skin-61048">cyborg technology</a>, where the human body is enhanced with machines such as robotic limbs, wearable and implantable devices. This technology is similarly very far away from matching our own body parts.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188037/original/file-20170928-1488-1hen057.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188037/original/file-20170928-1488-1hen057.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188037/original/file-20170928-1488-1hen057.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188037/original/file-20170928-1488-1hen057.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=386&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188037/original/file-20170928-1488-1hen057.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188037/original/file-20170928-1488-1hen057.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/188037/original/file-20170928-1488-1hen057.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=485&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Replicants have human-like abilities.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Sony Pictures</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Finally, there is the technology of genetic manipulation, where an organism’s genetic code is altered to modify that organism’s body. Although we have been able to identify and manipulate <a href="https://theconversation.com/scientists-edit-human-embryos-to-safely-remove-disease-for-the-first-time-heres-how-they-did-it-81925">individual genes</a>, we still have a limited understanding of how an entire human emerges from genetic code. As such, we don’t know the degree to which we can actually programme code to design everything we wish.</p>
<h2>Soft robotics: a way forward?</h2>
<p>But we might be able to move robotics closer to the world of Blade Runner by pursuing other technologies, and in particular by turning to nature for inspiration. The field of <a href="https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2012/11/156584-the-challenges-ahead-for-bio-inspired-soft-robotics/abstract">soft robotics</a> is a good example. In the last decade or so, robotics researchers have been making considerable efforts to make robots soft, deformable, squishable and flexible.</p>
<p>This technology is inspired by the fact that 90% of the human body is made from soft substances such as skin, hair and tissues. This is because most of the fundamental functions in our body rely on soft parts that can change shape, from the heart and lungs pumping fluid around our body to the eye lenses generating signals from their movement. Cells even change shape to trigger division, self-healing and, ultimately, <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-we-built-a-robot-that-can-evolve-and-why-it-wont-take-over-the-world-52506">the evolution of the body</a>.</p>
<p>The softness of our bodies is the origin of all their functionality needed to stay alive. So being able to build soft machines would at least bring us a step closer to the robotic world of Blade Runner. Some of the recent technological advances include <a href="https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2017/01/soft-robot-helps-the-heart-beat/">artificial hearts</a> made out of soft functional materials that are pumping fluid through deformation. Similarly, <a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/s/538181/soft-robotic-glove-could-put-daily-life-within-patients-grasp/">soft, wearable gloves</a> can help make hand grasping stronger. And “<a href="https://www.technologyreview.com/s/512061/electronic-sensors-printed-directly-on-the-skin/">epidermal electronics</a>” has enabled us to tattoo electronic circuits onto our biological skins. </p>
<p>Softness is the keyword that brings humans and technologies closer together. Sensors, motors and computers are all of a sudden integrated into human bodies once they became soft, and the border between us and external devices becomes ambiguous, just like soft contact lenses became part of our eyes. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, the hardest challenge is how to make individual parts of a soft robot body physically adaptable by self-healing, growing and differentiating. After all, every part of a living organism is also alive in biological systems in order to make our bodies totally adaptable and evolvable, the function of which could make machines totally indistinguishable from ourselves. </p>
<p>It is impossible to predict when the robotic world of Blade Runner might arrive, and if it does it will probably be very far in the future. But as long as the desire to build machines indistinguishable from humans is there, the current trends of robotic revolution could make it possible to achieve that dream.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/84743/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Fumiya Iida receives funding from EPSRC, BBSRC, and Royal Society. </span></em></p>
Soft robotics could help move us closer to more human-like robots.
Fumiya Iida, Lecturer in mechatronics, University of Cambridge
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/85119
2017-10-03T13:41:00Z
2017-10-03T13:41:00Z
Blade Runner 2049 – and why eyes are so important in this vision of the future
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/188582/original/file-20171003-3782-lzbf76.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Blade Runner 2049: a different world.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Allstar/Warner Bros</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Even a brief glimpse of <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCcx85zbxz4">Blade Runner 2049</a> takes you straight into Deckard’s world. Denis Villeneuve’s sequel to Ridley Scott’s sci-fi masterpiece gets the colour palette just right, perfectly capturing the tone of the original. </p>
<p>Achieving the look and feel of the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/film/2015/mar/14/why-blade-runner-is-timeless">original Blade Runner (1982)</a> is essential because appearances, vision and eyes are key to both the experience and the story. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eogpIG53Cis?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Blade Runner was ahead of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/artificial-intelligence-can-we-keep-it-in-the-box-8541">AI curve</a> when it made sci-fi arguments about identity and philosophy a mainstream concern. Is <a href="http://www.esquire.com/entertainment/movies/news/a55943/harrison-ford-blade-runner-2049-rick-deckard-replicant/">Deckard a replicant</a>? Do androids have souls? What makes us human? </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ewuqmpbyx-U?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In the original, seeking answers was all about looking at the eyes. The film’s Voight-Kampff “empathy test”, used by the Blade Runners to identify replicants, now has its own special place in <a href="http://www.bfi.org.uk/are-you-a-replicant/">popular culture</a>. The striking image of a glorious blue iris reflecting fire and light has become a cinematic icon; and Rutger Hauer’s emotional final lines when his character, Roy Batty, succumbs to death are a sublime moment in film history:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhäuser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. </p>
<p>Time to die.</p>
</blockquote>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QefqJ7YhbWQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>And now Blade Runner 2049 appears primed to expand the exploration of eyes and identity with mind-bending visuals. In the neon flashes and noirish glimmers, Jared Leto’s character, Niander Wallace, muses on the act of creating replicants like a blind god. His white irises have a sinister and mysterious beauty, but they also belie any sense of limitation caused by his lack of sight – even though he can’t see, he has the “vision” to create or end life. </p>
<p>David Bowie was actually Villeneuve’s <a href="http://www.indiewire.com/2017/09/blade-runner-2049-denis-villeneuve-david-bowie-villain-niander-wallace-jared-leto-1201880269/">first choice</a> for the Niander Wallace role. Seen as an influence upon Blade Runner <a href="http://metro.co.uk/2017/07/23/blade-runner-2049-director-reveals-david-bowie-was-meant-to-star-in-the-film-6800450/">“in many ways”</a>, the late singer was also well-known for his distinctive <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-remarkable-story-behind-david-bowies-most-iconic-feature-52920">mismatched eyes</a> that gave him an otherworldly persona – an affect Leto created in his own way with <a href="http://www.indiewire.com/2017/09/blade-runner-2049-jared-leto-blinded-himself-method-acting-1201874139/">“custom made contact lenses that turned his eyes totally opaque”</a>.</p>
<h2>Eye spy</h2>
<p>Cinema has often used eyes as a visual code for character and morality. Traditionally, damaged eyes tend to represent “baddies” and corruption – suggesting an off-kilter world seen in a dark and dangerous way. The vicious scar Donald Pleasence has around his right eye as a highly memorable Ernst Blofeld in You Only Live Twice (1967) helps to make him an enduring Bond villain. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7BT00WU7Iss?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The Oscar winning <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh4BCgDLmmI">Chinatown (1974)</a>, meanwhile, is full of cracked lenses, broken glasses and other means of distorting vision – ending with the disturbing shot of Faye Dunaway, as Evelyn Mulwray, with her eye socket blown apart by a bullet. </p>
<p>And as Carl Fogarty in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74FdnDxptH4">A History of Violence (2005)</a>, Ed Harris relishes showing his scar tissue to the camera as he recalls his eye being ripped out with barbed wire. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/74FdnDxptH4?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Cinema also has its fair share of “old crones” with cataracts setting curses (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZTybLlWKI">Drag Me to Hell</a>); blind priests who have forsaken their faith (Father Spiletto in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7CEbd7ffNw">The Omen</a>), and “mutants” with unusual eyes spying on unwitting victims (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkdskdFemWM">The Hills Have Eyes</a>).</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Z2UWOeBcsJI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Computers and robots add a different twist to this psychopathology. The calm red lens of HAL 9000 in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2UWOeBcsJI">2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)</a>; Yul Brenner’s blank metallic eyes in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjyOfTEeNHA">Westworld (1973)</a>, and the persistent red dot shining out of Arnie’s silver skull in the original <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k64P4l2Wmeg">Terminator (1984)</a> all project fear through a sense of the uncanny. </p>
<p>If the thought of a non-human consciousness glimpsed through the eye as a “window to the soul” is consistently unnerving, it is because instead of a human connection there is something else there entirely: the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-watching-westworlds-robots-should-make-us-question-ourselves-66434">terror and wonder of the unknown</a>.</p>
<p>By contrast, heroes are more likely to benefit from enhanced vision. Christopher Reeve’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIMXcnzeXSI">Superman (1978)</a> famously has X-ray eyes, while Keanu Reeve’s “Neo” in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKQi3bBA1y8">The Matrix (1999)</a> realises his destiny as “The One” only when he can visualise the code world and see how to change its rules from within.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vKQi3bBA1y8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>New look</h2>
<p>But our changing perception of eyes and how we see them is also visible onscreen. We now have popular blind superheroes like Daredevil, on <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmP3YFk_YHA">film (2003)</a> and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAy6NJ_D5vU">TV (2015 onwards)</a>, and anti-heroes like Elliot in <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46byqBf0dVk">Mr Robot (2015 onwards)</a> who “sees differently” due to a strange combination of dissociative identity disorder and next-level hacker skills. Rami Malek’s starring eyes, somewhere between the unblinking focus of a screen addict and the wide-eyed paranoia of a drug addict, add a mesmeric quality to his performance of Mr Robot’s complex persona.</p>
<p>Back in Deckard’s increasingly toxic world, it looks like Niander Wallace is set to become an iconic cinematic villain in a film already seen by some as <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-41412107">a masterpiece</a>. His cloudy eyes feel well suited to the shadowy undertones of Blade Runner 2049, while his ability to create artificial intelligence offer a dark vision of the future. However bleak an outlook Blade Runner 2049 might visualise, films that look as good as this make it hard to take your eyes off the screen – and offer a glimpse of our future.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/85119/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kevin Hunt does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
They’re more than windows into the soul – they’re a portal into our possible future.
Kevin Hunt, Senior Lecturer in Design, Culture and Context, Nottingham Trent University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.