meiklemons-blog

[meiklemons-blog]

The Illusion of Free Will

Sang Joo “Mikki” Lee

Rosetta Brooks

Monstrous Futures

Fall 2017 Term 5.5

          Steven Spielberg’s Minority Report, the 2002 American neo-noir science fiction film loosely based on Philip K. Dick’s 1956 short story, enforces “precrime” which is a system dedicated to apprehending and detaining people before they have the opportunity to commit a given crime, touching upon the metaphysics that human beings are beholden to their circumstances. The concept of free will, however, is pertinent to everything that makes us distinctly human. Free will determines that the autonomous individual has the power to choose a path of success or destruction within a system of morals and laws, ultimately bearing the responsibility for any resulting consequences. Arguably there is nary a more uplifting quote about the human condition than that from Invictus: “I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul”. We take this ubiquitous idea for granted everyday -- from snoozing the alarm clock in the morning to picking a shirt out of a closet and then pouring a cup of coffee -- while scarcely taking a moment to ponder an alternative, that our circumstances are in line with the strict determinism of physics and biochemistry that predetermine all of our choices, ruling therefore that free will is an illusion.

          Our genes predispose our physical makeups whereas political preference, moral instinct, and ideological rationalization seem to salute so-called autonomous freeform thinking and choice; however, science points that this behavioral freedom is instead as hardwired into us as is our eye and hair color. In Singapore, “1700 Han Chinese students were studied for a permutation of the DRD4 gene which determines how dopamine is released into the brain” (Irene F. Starkehaus).  This study was a variation of a 1999 scientific breakthrough which posited that identical twins who were separated at birth sustained similar political tendencies. The study suggests that women more than men exhibited the strongest link of the DRD4 gene to early rigid development of political attitudes and highly-conservative political views with a less-likely probability to alter those established beliefs throughout their adult lives. Or, in short, that men are more open-minded.

          In addition to genes playing a significant role in the genesis of a person’s political disposition, it can also determine who will become criminals by studying the brains of toddlers. Neuroscientists from New Zealand conducted a research on more than one thousand people from birth in the early 1970s until they reached the age of 38, and produced results that showed those with the lowest 20% brain health at age three went on to commit more than 80% of crimes as adults. The study found that the same 20% account for considerable demands on the state in other ways: they went on to make up 57% of nights in hospitals, 66% of welfare benefits, and 77% of fatherless child-rearing. Given that it is widely acknowledged that socio-economic status and child maltreatment have a major impact on adult outcomes, researchers made sure to isolate each of these factors and measured brain health through a variety of tests including reflexes, language understanding, motor skills, and social skills.

          Another widely discussed topic in regards to the mind is those of serial killers and how their choices have been governed not by themselves but by their brains, which are themselves controlled by each person’s genetic blueprint forged by life experiences. According to Chicago-based forensic psychiatrist Dr. Helen Morrison, after studying and interviewing 135 serial killers she discovered that the shocking trait among them is a chromosome abnormality. They begin to display homicidal tendencies when chromosome abnormality begins to expose itself during puberty in addition to lacking social connection and empathy under brain scans. Neuroscientist Jim Fallon studied the brains of psychopaths for over twenty years and discovered that serial killers share very low activity in the orbital cortex (located in the prefrontal lobe of the brain) which is the area responsible for ethical behavior, moral decision-making, and impulse control. The orbital cortex helps control the amygdala part of the brain, involved with aggression and appetites. Low activity of this cortex means less suppression of primitive behaviors such as rage, violence, eating, sex and drinking. Serial killers, however, are not the only demographic which suffers from this condition. The orbital cortex is inactive when we are dreaming during REM (rapid-eye movement) sleep. This is consistent with some of the bizarre, illogical and disorganized imagery in dreams, as well as the absence of logic and self-criticism which often characterizes them. Dreams that are characterized by a high degree of emotional involvement (joy, surprise, anger, fear, and anxiety as opposed to sadness, guilt, depression) are due to reduced self-reflection because our more recently-evolved, more controlling side of the brain (the prefrontal cortex) gives way to a more primitive, less rational way of thinking under the influence of the amygdala and the limbic system. This explains why we are rarely aware or in control of our dreams, especially when involving heinous acts or sexual encounters with people we would never imagine or consider engaging with in our waking life.

          Knowledge of our neurology and cognitive psychology has continued to improve across the years as scientists have been able to detect the neurological basis of choice before an individual is aware of his or her own thought. This does not bode well with the philosophy of free will. In the 1970s, Benjamin Libet at the University of California, San Francisco, provided neurological evidence against philosophical free will by wiring his patients to an electroencephalogram (EEG) and measuring their conscious thoughts about an action and when the action started. Astoundingly, the patients unconsciously made the decision to act about three-tenths of a second before they became consciously aware of it. “The conscious awareness, in a sense, was a ‘story’ that the higher cognitive parts of the brain told to account for the action…it’s as if the conscious brain was not the decider but simply the spokesperson” (Prof. Massimo Pigliucci). This may explain the feeling that most people have experienced at one time or another of having deliberately done something that they had not actually wanted or intended to do.

         Dr. John-Dylan Haynes, Professor at the Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience in Berlin, conducted an experiment with Marcus Du Sautoy, Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford, and successfully demonstrated that human consciousness can be determined up to six seconds prior to being aware of that choice. Moreover, according to the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience by Joydeep Bhattacharya at Goldsmiths’ College in London and Bhavin Sheth at the University of Houston, Texas; moments of insight are detectable with an EEG up to eight seconds before an individual is consciously aware of it. These are moments when the brain comes to realizations and new conclusions when trying to solve an abstract problem. Our consciousness has a purpose in that its evolutionary superiority rules that it is not just a byproduct, despite the fact that science has deemed the “purpose” of our consciousness is indeed just as predetermined as other aspects of science.

         At the end of the day, our philosophical free will is heavily influenced and shaped by our circumstances under our neurology, psychology, and anthropology. Humans are pre-programmed to respond appropriately and our decisions are merely series of electrical and chemical impulses between molecules in the brain; those molecules being predetermined by genes and environment. Our complex and constantly active brains are composed of systems that generate thoughts, consciousness, choices, and behavior. Conversely, our silent subliminal brains do not make us act under external compulsion, but in accordance with inner necessity.

Works Cited

Borreli, Lizette. “Inside The Criminal Mind: Brain Scans Of Serial Killers Show Low Orbital Cortex Activity, High Psychopathic Tendencies.” Medical Daily, Newsweek Media Group, 24 Feb. 2016, www.medicaldaily.com/serial-killer-criminal-mind-brain-scans-374994.

Colman, Dan. “Neuroscience and Free Will.” Open Culture, Open Culture, 23 Nov. 2010, www.openculture.com/2010/11/neuroscience_and_free_will.html.

Crabtree, Vexen. “The Illusion of Choice: Free Will and Determinism.” The Human Truth Foundation, Vexen Crabtree, www.humantruth.info/free_will.html.

Goldhill, Olivia. “The Disturbingly Accurate Brain Science That Identifies Potential Criminals While They’Re Still Toddlers.” Quartz, Quartz, 17 Dec. 2016, qz.com/866064/neuroscience-study-brain-tests-identify-future-criminals-as-toddlers/.

Klemm, William. “Free Will Is Not an Illusion.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, 10 June 2016, www.psychologytoday.com/blog/memory-medic/201606/free-will-is-not-illusion.

Smith, K N. “Your Political Beliefs Are Partly Shaped By Genetics.” Discover, Kalmbach Publishing Co, 5 Aug. 2015, blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2015/08/05/political-beliefs-genetic/#.WhyLirT81Z0.

Starkehaus, Irene F. “Nurture v. Nature, The Science of Predestination and the End of Choice.” Illinois Review, Illinois Review, 7 Aug. 2015, illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2015/08/nurture-v-nature-the-science-of-predestination-and-the-end-of-choice.html.

[meiklemons-blog]

Student Led Discussion Questions

Blade Runner

Almost all animals have gone extinct. With the production of sex models, and in reference to Blade Runner 2049, female replicants too can conceive and give birth. Do you think women will go extinct too, since there really is no need for women?

Ex Machina

Considering that there were no human female characters and any other form of female characters are designed to look a certain way, what do you think about the gender roles in this film?

Ghost in the Shell

The human mind and human body are meant to coexist — the formulaic equation for a human being. But why are we striving so hard to divorce our minds from our natural bodies through the usage of plastic surgery and implants, virtual reality, head transplants, usb consciousness, etc?

District 9

(Mine)

Arrival

The strong female lead, who is also the savior of humanity that can see into the future, falls victim to the trope that it is more important to have a child, even though the child’s horrific death is predetermined and exposed, than to sacrifice your own desires. Why portray such a selfish and unethical act in this otherwise good movie that’s about working together for the good of humanity and otherworldliness?

Black Mirror: Nosedive

The world of Nosedive meets reality in China, where a credit score system is going to take place for each citizen based on how trustworthy they are. The Chinese government is planning on implementing a system that connects citizens' financial, social, political, and legal credit ratings into one big trustability score. Do you think the episode’s finale is a predictor of the outcome of China?

Gattaca

Considering that genetic manipulation takes place under the will and choice of the parents, do fetuses have the right to consent as well?

Black Mirror: Men Against Fire

The American birth control movement was led by Margaret Sanger

Margaret Sanger led the American birth control movement and founded Planned Parenthood, and she mainly promoted contraceptives in Harlem where it was dominated by blacks. Do you think there’s a parallel between the history of American eugenics and the main character of “Men Against Fire,” where he too, is black?

Moon

What would you do if you discovered that you were a clone?

Minority Report

If you went back in time, knowing everything in history will happen in the future, yielding a gun with a bullet inside, would you shoot Hitler so that the genocide would not happen?

Rick and Morty

Is there a list or website for every episode analysis, referring to every scientific, controversial, philosophical theories or conspiracies?

Akira

What does “Akira” mean?

[meiklemons-blog]

Assignment #4

Blade Runner, 1982

1.There are a number of themes running throughout the movie. Can you name some of them and discuss the relevance of at least 2 of them as they pertain both to concepts of the future and topics that were relevant in the 1980s in America?

One of the major themes that comes to mind is technology and modernization. Blade Runner takes place in a world dominated by technology which has completely steered the earth in a direction away from the preservation of nature and towards wastelands, pollution, and acid rain. The world looks muggy and dark with the only light source being artificial. Almost all animals have gone extinct, which has led to manufactured animals like Tyrell’s owl and Zhora’s snake. Human women have no appearances as well. Zhora and Pris are the only female appearances, other than the giant hologram advertisement of women, and were designed to look like super models and serve as pleasure models.

Another theme is society and class, which in Blade Runner seems to be in a state of total chaos. Los Angeles is run by an enormous company, the Tyrell Corporation, which creates replicants for the purpose of slave labor. Though this society is incredibly technologically advanced, the undertone is that there are groups existing at the bottom of the food chain, participating in a dog-eat-dog fight for survival in a grimy underworld. It appears to be multicultural, but people don’t have the freedom to participate in their society’s governance since it’s dominated by a corporation. For one thing, you see our society and class is not too far off from how it’s portrayed in Blade Runner. You wouldn’t believe the

2. A key puzzle raised by Blade Runner is whether we can definitely distinguish between real humans and artificially engineered replicants. Suppose that no test (either objective or subjectively introspective) could show this for sure, would that mean that a given replicant was indeed fully human?

Suppose that every human being on this earth was given a series of questions to test their empathy. I believe that it is highly unlikely that everyone would pass. Sociopaths, psychopaths, and autistics; perhaps, will not score so highly. Emotions themselves will never be a perfect test of humanity for sociopaths, psychopaths, and autistics are human themselves but lack humanity. To answer the question, yes I believe that a given replicant can be fully human, or even more human. Pris says, “We’re not machines,” and Roy Batty says, “We’re physical.” They’re genetically engineered biological humans. Everything about them is human, except the fact that they’re not born from the womb and don’t have childhood memories.

3. One of the more dramatic philosophical points made in the movie is that we can’t trust our memories; that they may have been implanted in us regardless of how true they seem. What is the main reason that we trust our memories as more or less accurate accounts of our past events?

Memories are a subjective experiences, they are not recordings. These recollections of past events are often “enhanced,” or impaired through emotional output which makes them more susceptible to forming false memories, not just details to a scene, but entire fabrications of it. Memories are real to us and no one else’s experience can outperform our reality.

4. Rachael became convinced that she was a replicant when Deckard described some of her private childhood memories to her. What would it take for you to seriously question the truth of your memories and consider instead that they might be implanted in you as result of a drug or mental defect?

There’s already a lot I question about my being. Often times than not, I question if my dreams are my true reality whereas my waking life might be not, because my dreams are so vivid and stir up experiences and emotions that seem so real, that they almost seem like memories of a past time. In my later years, I learned to simply become more aware through the act of cognitive thinking and diligence and self therapy. As someone who used to be ruled by her emotions, the only mantra to keep me back in line is “Where’s the evidence?” When the devil in my brain lurks to tell me that I am worthless, I am a failure, I am unloved, etc; as opposed to acting out on those thoughts and sinking into a state of depressive episodes and wondering who I am and why I’m here like I used to; I now look at the objectivity and the evidence that lies before me to really prove whether what I think is true or not. Often times, what I think is wrong; my emotions are temporary and fictional. To answer the question, one would need to provide my evidence that I’m not human. If they’re not sufficient, then I will believe I am who I am.

5. Are there any questions raised in the movie about whether Deckard himself is a replicant? If so, what are the clues? If so, what sort of impact should this have on Deckard, particularly in view of his feelings about Rachael?

In the director’s cut and the remastered version, there is a scene of Deckard dreaming of a white unicorn. We don’t know what wakes up from is just a dream or actually an implant after fellow cop Gaff leaves a unicorn origami in front of his doorstep. Throughout the movie, Deckard’s being is questioned when Rachael asks him, “Have you ever answered these questions yourself?” and when Gaff exclaims to him at the end of the final fight scene with Roy Batty, “You’ve done a man’s job, sir!” Other than the fact that he acknowledges Rachael being attractive, he doesn’t think very much of her because his job is to simply retire replicants. He has no use for her or desire for her until her display of emotion puts him in a position where he sees her as a human being.

6. A moral message of the movie may be that it was wrong to enslave the replicants and use them as forced labor since they were so human-like in both appearance and thought process. Is there anything that would need to be different about replicants in order for us to feel that it’s OK to use them for labor?

The running theme of humankind is invading and enslaving people. People were once considered to be property and were used for physical and sexual labor, being traded and beaten, until just recently! African Americans weren’t considered human beings at one point. In some countries, slavery still exists. The point is, we should’ve learned from our past mistakes not to enslave people, and in order to stray away from repeating the same mistake again of ever offending a specific demographic, replicants should not have been designed to look like humans in the first place. Nexus-6 was designed for battle and destruction, what was the reason for them to look human in the first place if they’re job was to just destroy? Why not just make them plain machines? Now in the case of Blade Runner, there’s no turning back on this. We now know that Nexus-6 are conscious and more alive and well as humans. Now we have to claim responsibility for their life and being and treat them kindly. They’re a new kind of human being, and we have to give them rights.

7. What strategies are used to produce meaning in this film?

Because the significance of eyes in this film, they use imagery of a close-up eye in the beginning to set the tone of the movie. And in the eye itself you see the reflection of a hellish landscape that Roy Batty saw and described seeing in his death scene. There is a scene of Rachael’s eye being magnetized in her Voight-Kampff test, scenes that put emphasis on the orange glow of her eyes and the owl’s eyes.

Another strategy used in the theatrical version of this film is Deckard’s narration, which I’m not a fan of. But it’s used so the audience can get into his head and see what he’s thinking. Vangelis’s composition for the soundtrack of this film is absolutely amazing and does such a great job setting the mood for the movie.

Blade Runner 2049

1. What is the significance of an emphasis on eyes in the original movie (1982 version)

The film opens up with an extreme close up of an eye which fills the screen and reflects the hellish landscape. Everything physical about a human being can be perfectly replicated except the finest details of emotion and empathy, which is reflected through eyes, literally the window to the soul. Both human and animal replicants are manufactured with eyes that give off a dark orange glow, which is a bit of a design flaw. While replicants are superhuman when it comes to strength and agility, their eyes are essentially kryptonite. Not only do the reflective pupils betray their true nature, they’re unable to pass the Voight-Kampff test because their eyes don’t react as a human’s would. The Tyrell Corporation boasts that its replicants are “more human than human,” the eyes are the great divide between man and machine. In Roy’s quest to meet his maker, he seeks out Chew, a genetic designer for eyes, who created the eyes of the Nexus-6. Roy refers a lot to eyes and sight when he says to Chew, “If only you could see what I’ve seen with your eyes,” and to Deckard, “I’ve seen things you humans would’ve believe.” Eyes also seem to play an important part in killing, like when Leon attempts to gouge Deckard’s eyes out and when Roy jabs his thumbs into Tyrell’s sockets. The film references a lot to the relationship between sight and memory.

2. What is the significance of eyes in Blade Runner 2049? Does it expand the symbolism? If so, how?

The new Blade Runner 2049 appears primed to expand the exploration of eyes and identity with mind-bending visuals. In the neon flashes and noirish glitters, Jared Leto’s character, Niander Wallace, muses on the act of giving and taking away life from replicants like a blind god. His white irises have a sinister and mysterious beauty with limitations caused by his lack of sight. Joi’s giant hologram does not have human eyes but a pair of completely dark, almost black orbs; to indicate that she has not taken the role of a personally sexualized female fantasy and housewife specifically catered to a single individual, but that she is at her default setting. The eyes are also studied to determine the authenticity of a being just has Deckard uses Rachael’s green eyes to prove that the clone of her in front of him is indeed a clone. K or Joe takes out the eyeballs of the first Nexus-8 he retires in the beginning of the movie.

3. What are the overriding themes explored in the new Blade Runner? How different are they from the original movie? What significance do they hold for today’s culture?

Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049 show a world heavily influenced by Asian culture, fashion, technology, and corporations. The main difference between the two is that Blade Runner has Asian characters and Blade Runner 2049 did not have a single one. White-washed Hollywood might have something to blame for this, I mean come on, Los Angeles in the year 2049 should be much more diversely multicultural. But suspend all disbelief, maybe this has something to say about the white-washing of humanity in general --- all replicants are white, all humans are white, etc. Another powerful theme I realized in the new Blade Runner is just how masculine the movie is. Other than the fact that the main character is male, you see there are no single female human character in the movie other than Robin Wright’s character. In this world, real women aren’t needed anymore. Women are high maintenance and not perfect. In this world, you can have the best version of a woman you want: modelesque, low maintenance, specifically catering to your every need, sexually stimulating, and with the OFF switch. It’s a man’s world, a white man’s world.

[meiklemons-blog]

Assignment #3

Haraway’s anchoring metaphor for “Cyborg Manifesto” is the image of a cyborg, which can be defined in four ways: a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature of lived social reality, and a creature of fiction. She elaborates on how feminists have deployed the notion of women’s experience in both fiction and politics and that the cyborg will change what counts as experience for women in the late twentieth century. Cyborg politics have been linked to oppressive mythologies in scientific progress;  racist, male-dominated capitalism; the exploitation of nature to serve the needs of culture. Haraway argues that this doesn’t have to be the case and that this essay is an argument for “pleasure in the confusion of boundaries and and for responsibility in their construction.” She embraces the cyborg in different ways than that of social feminists, that “most American socialists and feminists see deepened dualisms of mind and body, animal and machine, idealism and materialism" in contemporary culture,” and that this perception of dualism is extremely wrong. She addresses the fact that cyborgs are a fact of the present, rather than the future, by discussing three crucial border crossings that lie between humans and animals; humans and machines, which now in present day is the ambiguous difference between the natural and the artificial; and between the physical and the nonphysical, which is not termed the virtual. The three border crossings are detailed in order to get American socialist feminists used to the idea of politically negotiating through a technological world. Although the cyborg is considered a “monster” due to its roots in the military industrial complex, the cyborg is a figure rain hope and promise for feminism because it appears unfaithful to its militaristic origins. In addition, Haraway deals specifically with the issue of feminist political organizing in light of cyborg politics. She counsels against identity politics, noting "there is nothing about being 'female' that naturally binds women." Instead she advocates the practice of affinity politics which operate by way of "oppositional consciousness." She strongly criticizes the radical feminism of Catherine MacKinnon, arguing that the search for the "essential woman" is not only elusive, it is dangerous. Indeed, feminist might be better served, Haraway notes, by considering "woman" to be a socially constructed category, deployed in a communications network, along the lines of "homosexual" and "youth." In addition, Haraway talks about the “Informatics of Domination,” a movement in which biotechnologies become indistinguishable from communications technologies, in part because both are structured like networks and both rely on the transmission of code for their functioning. In addition to producing new sexualities and ethnicities, the New Industrial Revolution is producing a new world-wide working class which is notable in two ways: first, women produce the majority of its labor; and second, this labor whether produced by women or men, is feminized in the new economy. She goes on to say that in the new economy, poverty is feminized as well as labor; and that as privatization grows larger, public space grows smaller for workers in the new economy. However because more and more individuals in the sciences are resisting military urge, which is something Haraway sees as progressive politics in the future.

[meiklemons-blog]

Assignment #2, Part 2

1. Write a brief summary of the main plot, describing the event or events that are the focus of the film and stating where and when they take place. 

All of the notices about the movie have told us that the story is told in reverse order. Leonard, played by Guy Pearce, kills the murderer of his wife in the film's first scene, and that the film then moves backward from that point, in roughly five-minute increments, to let us see how he tracked the guy down, ending with what is, chronologically, the story's beginning. He has witnessed the violent death of his wife and is determined to avenge it. But he has had short-term memory loss ever since the death and has to make copious notes--he even has memos tattooed to his body as reminders.

2. Name and describe the protagonist and the antagonist in this story.

Who is the true antagonist in Memento?

Is it John G or “Teddy”, who "killed" Leonard’s wife?

The first and most obvious choice for our antagonist is Teddy, the dude who's using Leonard to make some green and leaving casualties on the way. He's constantly trying to get at Leonard's car so he can cash in on the two hundred grand stashed in the trunk. He lies to Leonard about almost everything. But Teddy also has moments of honesty. He warns Leonard against Natalie and tries to persuade Leonard to investigate himself and question where he got the suit and the car. He consoles Leonard about being alive, and maybe he even tells Leonard the truth at one point about who he really is. So maybe he isn't completely a bad guy.

Is it Natalie, who manipulated Leonard into kidnapping Dodd?

Natalie is next on our list for obvious reasons. Teddy might be manipulative, but at least he's nice about it. But Natalie's manipulation is right in Leonard's face. She enrages him by mocking his dead wife in some pretty sleazy ways, and then gives him what is perhaps the evilest smiles as she prepares to use his violent nature against him. However, Natalie may actually like Leonard, or at least pity him. There doesn't seem to be a selfish motive for her running the license plate number and giving him info on John Gamel. Her desire to be remembered by him also seems sincere. So maybe she's not the antagonist either.

Or is it Leonard himself, who chose to ignore the facts (Even after going on about how facts are very important) and continue searching for John G, even after he was dead.

It is Anterograde Amnesia which Leonard is constantly battling and creates the scenario and drives the plot. It is the thing that shapes our protagonist, just like every good villain shapes their hero. Anterograde amnesia is at the center of all conflict in Memento. Both Natalie's and Teddy's manipulation is a result of—and accomplished because of— Leonard's condition. Antagonist is the force of nature against the protagonist. Sometimes, the protagonist and antagonist are the same character, depending on whose point of view you're watching the movie as.

3. In the story told by the film, what is the main conflict and how is it resolved?

Leonard Shelby, a former insurance investigator, suffers from anterograde amnesia, short term memory loss in which he cannot make new memories, after he was injured while trying to stop two men from raping and killing his wife in their home. After he awakes to find one of the intruders, he later confirms his name is John G., got away he vows to find that man and get revenge for his wife’s death. This pursuit of revenge and justice is extremely difficult for Leonard who has to use aids such as Polaroids, notes, and extensive tattoos to help him keep track of things because he loses his memory about every fifteen minutes. These tools remind him of where he is, where he is going, and the purpose of his investigation. Leonard interacts mainly with two other interesting characters in the film: Teddy, an unjust cop who pretends to be Leonard’s friend while gaining money on the side and Natalie, a barmaid, who is seeking her own revenge for the death of her boyfriend.

4. Identify and describe two literary elements or devices that are evident in the movie other than conflict, antagonist, protagonist and imagery. Other literary elements or devices may include: prologue, expository phase, voice, symbol, foreshadowing, flashback, irony, foil, opposition, archetype, motif, characterization, climax, and denouement. For each literary device that you identify, describe the role that it plays in presenting the story told by the film.

The use of Polaroid photographs and multiple plot lines in Memento function as a representation of Leonard’s character. The story itself follows two different plot lines: one that is presented in color (the main plot line), and another that is presented in monochrome (sub-plot line). The main plot follows a sequence that is non-linear and actually loops the story by starting where it ends and vice-versa, which is the plot sequence of the entire film in itself. The subplot follows a chronological sequence, contrasting with the main plot. By having two different plots, Memento not only succeeds in resembling Leonard’s character, but also reinforces the importance of the relationship between the Polaroid photographs and the narration sequence. The film reveals to us how and when Leonard took specific photos. In essence, the photographs are an evidence of a time that once existed but is now forever gone. But, due to Leonard’s disability, they will always be new and true every fifteen minutes (approximate time of how long it takes for Leonard to lose his new memories). So, in a way, they are timeless to him; there is no difference between the past and present, which we see twice when he questions how long it has been since he was in the hotel and since he’s been looking for John. G. The plot sequence is also supporting evidence of the past versus present idea.

Leonard’s voice which serves as a first-person narrator and also an unreliable narrator, whose credibility is seriously compromised, is another literary device served in  Memento. Sometimes the narrator's unreliability is made immediately evident. For instance, a story may open with the narrator making a plainly false or delusional claim or admitting to being severely mentally ill, or the story itself may have a frame in which the narrator appears as a character, with clues to the character's unreliability. A more dramatic use of the device delays the revelation until near the story's end. In some cases, the reader discovers that in the foregoing narrative, the narrator had concealed or greatly misrepresented vital pieces of information. Such a twist ending forces readers to reconsider their point of view and experience of the story. In some cases the narrator's unreliability is never fully revealed but only hinted at, leaving readers to wonder how much the narrator should be trusted and how the story should be interpreted.

5. Music and lighting are part of the way that the moviemakers communicate their message. Go deeper than that. Give two specific examples of how other elements of the cinematic art, such as shot framing, camera angles, camera movement, color, editing choice, or length of take were used by the filmmakers to get their point across. (2 paragraphs)

Christopher Nolan alternates the usage of black-and-white and color to fulfill a narrative strategy and the passage of time. The black-and-white scenes, which run in forward order, find Leonard in his hotel room talking on the phone. In these sequences, Leonard tells that parallel tale, illustrated for us with visual "flashbacks." As an insurance investigator, Leonard had a curious case: a man, Sammy Jankis, who had an accident and wound up with anterograde amnesia. Leonard investigates and ruthlessly denies the man's medical claim on the grounds that it was a mental problem and not a physical one. With the black-and-white scenes in chronological order, Nolan alternates that with much more kinetic and confusing main backward story line, which is told in color.

In addition, Nolan uses Leonard's voice-over as a simulation of his thinking, not speaking. The use of interior monologue places the audience in Leonard's head. We learn what he is thinking and feeling as he looks around the motel room. We enter into his experience of disorientation because his thinking expresses his confusion. The artistic challenge was to figure out other means of telling Leonard's story within the confines of the motel room. Interior monologue in film can only be used in very limited doses because the device is inherently static. The focus of interior monologue scenes is on the words, not the visuals. The image is subordinated to the verbal. The challenge is always how to make the visuals engaging in an interior monologue scene without distracting the audience from understanding what the voice-over is conveying.

6. Describe a lesson from this film that viewers can apply to their own lives: (1) to help them decide on a position to support on a public issue or (2) in their relations with family and friends. Detail the events that relate to this lesson. (1 to 3 paragraphs)

Natalie: “But even if you get revenge, you’re not gonna remember it. You’re not even gonna know that it happened.”

Leonard: “My wife deserves vengeance. Doesn’t make any difference whether I know about it. Just because there are things I don’t remember doesn’t make my actions meaningless. The world doesn’t just disappear when you close your eyes, does it?”

Leonard’s words ring true to my being that we shouldn’t live in ignorance. In the possibility of unperceived existence, can something exist without being perceived? If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound? I choose to live my day by educating myself on other existences and events around me, by listening to the news or reading articles, by just simply being aware. You don’t hear the screams of people trapped under rubble in Mexico because of two high magnitude earthquakes that we didn’t feel it or affect our lives here in Southern California. You don’t see the pigs’ heads bashed by metal bats to render them unconscious for their meat or cows’ throats be slashed with buckets sitting underneath waiting to be filled with blood. In David Foster Wallace’s essay “Consider the Lobster,” he illustrates the lobsters' consciousness and invokes that the obvious "struggling, thrashing, and lid-clattering" which accompanies the lobsters' descent into the boiling kettle and adds that, according to most ethicists, “ this combination of neurological structures and behavior can be used to determine a creature's pain capacity”. Having worked through the complexities of the issue, Wallace returns to his original question: is it possible to truly defend the act of consuming flesh without acknowledging the act's inherent selfishness? I for one, am very passionate about animal rights and have not been consuming meat or taking part in purchasing animal-tested products, etc. We cause suffering on a much larger scale to farm animals on a daily basis than any other form of life including humans. I'm not asking for all meat consumption to end (while that would be ideal); I'm asking for stronger, non-prejudiced animal protection and rights while urging everyone to consider what they eat, where it came from, and how it got there. It frustrates me that progress on this subject is disturbingly slow. For that I blame ignorance, which can be cured through open minds, education, and compassion.

[meiklemons-blog]

Assignment #2, Part 1

The British Channel Four series, Black Mirror, tells a series of disconnected stories taking place in what might be parallel worlds, in which technology is resolutely familiar, but always a bit uncanny. It is a show of this epoch, and of the insecurities and fears which tag along as we watch history unfold itself in front of us. Black Mirror delves into our doubts about social media, ubiquitous computing, surveillance society, and the justice of consumerism, as we struggle to comprehend the growing, always glitching, network around us. 

In an episode of the television series “Black Mirror”, The Entire History of You is set in a world where most people have a device installed behind the ear that records everything they see and hear, allowing them to play back experiences for themselves or other people. It takes our current obsession with documenting ourselves via social media to a logical conclusion and examines the toll it takes on personal relationships.

 As the title of the series of shows suggests, Black Mirror is in many ways a commentary on watching — on what it means to live and look in a world of screens, on how looking has supplanted action, transforming us into the spectators of our own lives. ◦ Discuss how a physically and emotionally invasive technology like this might impact our notion of what it means to be human.

Black Mirror’s “The Entire History of You” and other episodes don’t necessarily advertise that “technology is bad” for you. Instead they silently burrow into the heart of what’s so terrifying about technology because of our human condition and lack of discipline to control the technology---they end up controlling us. We have the tendency to make stuff that is catered to us into our worst selves. According to Thomas Aquinas, the human is a paradox. As “rational animals,” we are the only species that straddles the divide between matter and spirit. We do not just inhabit the material world -- we interpret it, discern order within it, derive meaning from it, and act decisively upon it. Our intellects transcend their material confines with a unique freedom and imagination, which today is referred to as the problem of consciousness. How did a species jump the evolutionary tracks and acquire a capacity to reflect upon its existence within a world of which it is a part and to whose laws it is subject? Questions like this are fundamental to our understanding of what it means to be human. We absorb knowledge first through our senses, and the intellect gradually develops through our bodily experiences and desires.  Fast-forward to the present, technology is increasing objective self-awareness and with wearables, drones, and live-broadcasting gaining popularity, etc. We now live in an age where human interaction and presentation is rarely achieved through the actual act of communicating face-to-face with another human being; but through screens of phones, computers, ipads, television where social media dictates people’s lives and functions in the form of photos and videos. Objective self-awareness happens whenever you see your reflection in a mirror, realize you’re being watched in a bank, or see a photo of yourself on social media. You compare how you think of yourself to how you actually are. Most of the time this leads you to change something. Maybe you fix your hair, act more professional, or get stuck thinking about a specific part of your body. Technology has completely changed the rules of interaction by creating a virtual distance, which is a psychological and emotional sense of detachment that accumulates little by little, at the sub-conscious or unconscious level, as people trade-off time interacting with each other for time spent "screen skating" (swiping, swishing, pinching, tapping, and so on). It is also a measurable phenomenon and can cause some surprising effects. For example, when virtual distance is relatively high, people become distrustful of one another. One result: they keep their ideas to themselves instead of sharing them with others in the workplace – a critical exchange that's necessary for taking risks needed for innovation, collaboration and learning. In result, humans lose their sense of empathy, the ability to understand what other people are thinking and feeling, happens when we see other people. When you do something hurtful, you see that the other person is hurt, sparking mirror neurons or “empathy brain cells” to detect their pain and make you understand what you’ve done. None of this happens on social media. Without eye contact, there is no emotional impact of your actions. What does is it mean to be human if we’re losing touch interaction and empathy?

[meiklemons-blog]

Assignment #1

The opening credits to Westworld are unsettling, disquieting. It’s often hard to tell exactly what we are looking at. Nothing is quite as it seems. But, taken in its entirety, the opening sequence gives the audience several clues about the broader ethical - perhaps even existential themes - the show might tackle. What do you think they are? How does the director of the opening sequence of Westworld (Patrick Clair) achieve meaning? What cultural tropes does he use? And to what effect?

Westworld’s opening sequence is a fantastically woven introduction for the true underlying theme of the show. It sets the tone with a material world, a dark background and white, mostly monochrome. It opens up with what looks like the sun rising in the horizons of a barren landscape, but also resembles a light scope being moved and focused on a body in surgery table. There is a sequence of frames of a needle drawing a grid and designing material veins, bones, a mechanical horse, the intricate details of the human eye in which you see the reflection of the desert landscape where the show sets, boney fingers playing the piano, and two figures (male and female) in an intimate position. The opening picks up the pace showing more mechanisms featuring a gun, the makings of the Westworld logo (which you see the final product at the end), and a face that looks very human. Slowly you see everything unraveling, from the very microscopic perspective of the technological procedures in producing organic beings and movements, from everything I’ve just listed zooms out and features a macroscopic unification of what looks like a clothed woman riding atop a galloping stallion while holding out a six-shooter revolver as if riding into the heat of a gun battle. It’s a visual calling to mind of the Four Horsemen from the Book of Revelation about a “pale horse.” The next imagery is a machine printing manuscripts of dotted codes, most likely the coding and programming of the scripts. The piano rises from the center is a very iconic image. There is the imagery of a desert landscape encompassed in a clear globe, indicating that this is some world that is entrapped, but also looks like the cornea muscles of an eyeball. In the dark background is the appearance of a circular object framing a white sculpted human, familiar to Leonardo Da Vinci’s “Vitruvian Man” which represents in many ways the sacred geometry in which humans are all composed -- a point in reference to our body’s proportions with life following a fractal pattern. The whole opening sequence is black-and-white-ish, working with no color palette to depict this sterile, industrial, almost alien place. Also, color and memory are closely related, so think about that for this show as Westworld dances a lot with memory.

Watch Episode 1 again. Write an in-depth analysis of the episode. What do you think is going on? Although we’re being introduced to the main story (a theme park inhabited by ‘hosts’ (robots) where wealthy guests pay to live out their fantasies), we are also being introduced to a complex narrative about reality. Within the first minute of the episode, Dolores is asked, “Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality?”

What is the significance of the question? And her answer? Some other questions you might wish to investigate are:

1. Where and when is Westworld located, exactly?

2. What was the malfunction 30 years ago?

3. Who is Arnold?

4. What exactly is causing, the “glitches”?

5. Is the glitch accidental? Or is Ford advancing the hosts’ consciousness on purpose? If so, why?

6. How much does Dolores know at this point?

7. What did Bernard whisper to Dolores? And what did he whisper to her father before putting him into storage? 8. What is the meaning behind the “violent delights” phrase?

9. What’s the corporation’s secret plan for Westworld?

10. What is the Man in Black’s actual mission here, where is he going?

11. Is anybody else that we assume is a human actually a robot? Or vice versa?

A lot is uncovered in just the first episode of Westworld; but more than information and answers, you’re left with a lot of questions by the end of the first hour. By now we know that Westworld takes place in the distant technologically advanced future somewhere out in the American desert, the perfect location setting for a Wild West themed amusement park for “Freedom. A place to stake out our dreams.” Guests go to Westworld for many reasons, from bachelor parties to family vacations with some light experimenting or shatter some serious taboos encouraged by some hosts.  Within the first minute of the episode, Dolores, whom we later discover in the first episode that she is the ever built host, is asked, “Have you ever questioned the nature of your reality?” by Bernard, to which she answers, ��No.” and continues to recite her everyday monologue about choosing to see the beauty of the world --  her insistence and innocence on seeing Westworld as beautiful which helps visitors see the park in all its splendor.

Who knows if the glitch was accidental. Top programmer Bernard Lowe alerts park founder Dr. Robert Ford about incidents of aberrant behavior cropping up in some recently re-coded hosts. The team of researches thought that it may be a possibility that the new upgrade was causing the glitch, leading them to retrace and reevaluate. In reference to the malfunction from thirty years ago, it’s quite possible that it was a cheeky reference to the original film and its sequels of spin-off TV series Beyond Westworld from 1980, or some mystery that will be revealed later in the series revolving Dolores, the oldest robot in the park. Unfortunately, some of the robots seem to be accessing their memories on a more conscious level, with Dolores’ father becoming increasingly agitated as he begins to realize the existence of the outside world after coming across a photograph of a woman and the characters he has previously played in the park.  In a conversation with Bernard, Ford suggests that humankind is becoming obsolete – so could he be slipping in updates to help the robots gain consciousness and take over from the human race. Who knows. 

A particular Man in Black seems to take quite an interest in Dolores, claiming they’re “old friends,” possibly relating to an event from thirty years ago. It is known that he is one of the longest standing guests at Westworld who’s grown into a dangerous cowboy character himself from killing Teddy and raping Dolores to scalping a robot to find a mysterious pattern that looks like a map. In some sense he seems frustrated interacting with Dolores for not remembering what memories they shared in the past. 

Towards the end of the first episode, Dolores’ father Peter Abernathy after becoming “aware” whispers something into his daughter’s ears, which she later tells her handlers was “These violent delights have violent ends” - a quote from Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet and an important phrase to analyze for the meaning of the show. Maybe that our actions have consequences, for all including the guests and for Ford, who as an inventor is playing with the acts of God. In addition, Peter has a Bladerunner moment with Ford and tells him he wants to “meet his Maker.”

A few times in the episode, flies crawl over the faces (and even eyes) of the robot hosts, partially to be a bit creepy and partially to underline the point that the hosts “couldn’t hurt a fly” thanks to their core code, in the words of Ford. But by the end of the episode, Dolores casually swats a fly on her neck after performing her everyday programmed morning routine and blinks with wide eyes as if she’s woken up from a daze. Her core code is damaged, she can hurt a living thing, and we’re betting it won’t be long until some human guests start getting the same treatment.