Tucson rampage casts light on toxic political tone
http://ping.fm/N2vHE
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Monday, July 6, 2009
BLADE RUNNER 1982
http://www.libertyfilmfestival.com/libertas/wp-content/uploads/2007/08/bladerunner3.jpg
http://chatcheri.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/blade_runner.jpg
IMDB ImagesBlade Runner 1982
A movie like no others in the 1980’s. It has religious & philosophical implications and not mention it was one of the first movies to introduce products placement. It dealt with issues of cloning – and the fear most must feel, in their thoughts, that someday replicates could take over.
Scanning-pixel enhancements was also a new concept of the era. When you have watched the movie or if you watch the movie in the future, its fun to find the back stories. And you have to admit the Asian influences were quite captivating. The people were housed like chattel, much like today in big cities.
And are we afraid of clones who resemble human behavior, emotion, and likeness more so than just mere robots?
Much like Star Wars, Blade Runner is much more than just a Movie for the masses, it is relaying messages that are subtle and which could actually happen, much like 1984 by George Orwell
Movie Poster
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/blade_runner/
David Lynch on Product Placement
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2009/05/26/video-david-lynch-gives-his-opinion-about-product-placement-in-movies/
“Free Scott, a part of Ridley Scott Associates Films, is hooking up with indie studio Ag8 to develop Purefold, a web series that will grapple with the themes in Blade Runner without actually referencing that world in any direct fashion. The web shorts, well could eventually become a TV series, will evoke the grand themes of the sci-fi classic -- compassion, humanity, identity, a dystopian future -- without using anything from the book it was based on ...”
http://www.cinematical.com/2009/06/05/new-web-series-purefold-takes-blade-runner-and-runs/
Another View of Product Placements in Big Budget Films
The New York Times in 1993:
“An auto maker with a glorious past is using a film of the present to reassure consumers that it has a future. When Warner Brothers opens "Demolition Man" today at more than 2,000 theaters nationwide, moviegoers watching Sylvester Stallone and Wesley Snipes play cop and robber in the year 2032 can see the results of an unusual product placement promotion by the Oldsmobile division of General Motors. Rather than simply helping to sell more cars, the promotion is intended to burnish the images of Oldsmobile and G.M. by linking them to the presumed technological wonders of tomorrow. "We felt being involved in this movie, set in the future, would send a subtle message to the public that G.M. was alive and well in 2032," said Eric Dahlquist, president at the Vista Group, a product exposure management company in Van Nuys, Calif., that handles promotional activities like product placement and licensing.”
Written By, Stuart Candy Honolulu, Hawai'i, United States Minor Outlying Islands I'm a researcher at the Hawaii Research Center for Futures Studies, and research fellow of The Long Now Foundation. I'm a lecturer and PhD student in political science at UH-Manoa, and also study communication at EGS. I'm drawn to collaborative opportunities that combine practical impact, deep creativity, and fun.
http://futuryst.blogspot.com/2007/03/brand-runner.html
More Images
http://www.cinemastrikesback.com/news/new%20dailies/BladeRunner2-1024.jpg
http://www.the-garrison.com/member%20folders/williams/Pix/Blade%20Runner%20Racheal.jpg
http://randomcrusader.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/bladerunner1.jpg
http://randomcrusader.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/roy.jpg
Internet Movie Data Base (IMDB)
User Rating:8.3/10 161,881 votes
Top 250: #113
Director:
Ridley Scott
Writers:
Hampton Fancher
David Webb Peoples
Release Date:
25 June 1982 (USA)
Genre:
Action | Sci-Fi | Thriller
Tagline:
A Futuristic Vision Perfected [2007 Final Cut]
Plot:
Deckard, a blade runner, has to track down and terminate 4 replicants who hijacked a ship in space and have returned to earth seeking their maker.
Awards:
Nominated for 2 Oscars. Another 9 wins & 14 nominations
User Comments:
Intriguingly Philosophical
________________________________________
Cast
(Cast overview, first billed only)
Harrison Ford
... Rick Deckard
Rutger Hauer
... Roy Batty
Sean Young
... Rachael
Edward James Olmos
... Gaff
M. Emmet Walsh
... Bryant
Daryl Hannah
... Pris
William Sanderson
... J.F. Sebastian
Brion James
... Leon Kowalski
Joe Turkel
... Dr. Eldon Tyrell
Joanna Cassidy
... Zhora
James Hong
... Hannibal Chew
Morgan Paull
... Holden
Kevin Thompson
... Bear
John Edward Allen
... Kaiser
Hy Pyke
... Taffey Lewis
________________________________________
Additional Details
Also Known As:
Blade Runner: The Final Cut (International: English title) (DVD title)
Rated R for violence and brief nudity (definitive cut); Rated R for violence. (1991 version)
Runtime:
117 min
Country:
USA | Hong Kong
Filming Locations:
2nd Street Tunnel, Downtown, Los Angeles, California, USA more
Company:
Ladd Company
________________________________________
Fun Stuff
Trivia: Outside of the eye scientist's lab, on the left hand side of the door is some graffiti in Japanese/Chinese characters that reads: "Chinese good, Americans bad."
Goofs: Audio/visual unsynchronized: The note that Deckard plays on the grand piano is not the note we hear.
User Comment
Intriguingly Philosophical, 6 March 2001
Author: brendan (jfitch7@aol.com) from Flushing, N.Y
Blade Runner, directed by Ridley Scott and based on Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, is a Sci-fi slash Noir film about a cop named Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) in a decrepit 2019 Los Angeles whose job it is to "retire" four genetically engineered syborgues, known as "Replicants". The four fugitives, Pris (Daryl Hannah), Zhora (Joanna Cassidy), Leon (Brion James), and their leader, Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer), have escaped from an off-world colony in order to find their creator and bully him into expanding their pre-determined four year life span. This film originally flopped when it came out in 1982, but since has become a widely acclaimed cult classic with a director's cut to boot. A large part of the success that this movie has received can be attributed to its ability to operate on many different levels.Ridley Scott's hauntingly possible depiction of what might become of Los Angeles down the line is absolutely brilliant. It captures elements of Noir with its urban atmosphere of decadence, lighting, and characters neither clearly defined as good nor evil. Corruption is everywhere. The garbage-littered streets and permanence of dark and rain give us the sense that we've seriously screwed up the atmosphere, and the impression that all respectable human beings have fled to the off-world colonies, leaving only the scum of the earth behind.
There is a hint of style from the 40's, especially with respect to cars, costumes, and music. Rachael's entire outfit, including her hair, screams the 40's.
The soundtrack, arranged by Vangelis (who won an Oscar for his Chariots of Fire score), consisted mainly of Jazz and Blues. This functioned to represent a dark, moody world of uncertainty and pessimism.
The special effects were exceptional. Much of the set was pulled off using models. In my opinion, sets made by hand require leagues more of skill and are much more impressive and realistic than those computer generated. These guys really knew what they were doing. I was especially fond of the pyramidesque Tyrell Corporation building, which hinted at the god-like presence of Eldon Tyrell (Joe Turkell), the creator.
The script (Hampton Fancher, David Peoples, and of course Phil Dick) worked for me, as well as the actors who gave voice to it. Harrison Ford was well...Harrison Ford. I thought he did a tremendous job down-playing the role. His voice-over narration helped you along, and was yet another feature conducive to Film Noir (apparently this was taken out of the Director's Cut). Rutger Hauer's performance was intense. His lines at the end were intriguingly philosophical. Daryl Hannah's chilling robotic expressions were quite impressive. Joanna Cassidy was just plain hot.
There is more to this film than just pulp. It works on so many remarkable levels. The movie itself is a detective noir quest for the meaning of life in a science fiction environment, but the story is a commentary on what it means to be human and the questions each one of us have about life, like: How long have I to live? Why do I have to die? What happens when I die? Doesn't my maker care? Is this all merely an illusion? At the end of the film we are left to wonder if these Replicants are human, and if Deckard himself is in fact a Replicant. Scott raises more questions here than he answers, and as a result, critics are still debating the mysteries of this film today. In a sense, the ambiguity of Blade Runner is the culprit of its success.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/
For the Trailer YouTube
More Pictures
Music
Blade Runner Special Effects
In Blade Runner's dystopian near future, replicants, or genetically engineered humanoids, do the hard work on off-world colonies. After a bloody mutiny, the androids are forbidden from coming to Earth — on pain of death. So when six rogue replicants return home, they must be "retired" — hunted down and killed — and Ford's Deckard, once a top replicant hunter, or "blade runner," is pulled out of his own retirement to do the job.I worked on Star Wars Episodes I and II, on the Matrix films, on AI and Terminator 3; yet 25 years later there are ways in which Blade Runner surpasses anything that's been done since. Watching the theatrical release DVD at home with PM reminded me of Scott's genius for creating stunning effects with simple technology.
Watch this opening pan across the Los Angeles skyline — there's nearly nothing else like it. This is something I think Ridley Scott does better than almost any other director. Whether he's shooting a fantastical movie like Alien (1979), or a realistic one like Black Hawk Down (2001), you always know where you are in the movie's physical space. Blade Runner is unmatched by any other sci-fi film in terms of feeling like you're in an environment you understand. This isn't the kind of sci-fi where everyone wears silver suits. It's lived-in science fiction — a world.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/industry/4218376.html
Blade Runner and Religious Implications
Blade Runner: Religious/Philosophical Parallels
The replicants are fallen angels (fallen from the heavens/outer space), with
Roy as Lucifer.
Tyrell lives in a giant pyramid (like a Pharaoh), which looks like a
cathedral inside, whereas Sebastian lives in an abandoned apartment with a
"toilet bowl plunger" on his head.
Tyrell creates. He builds his creations imperfect. Once of his creations
resents the in-built imperfection (since the creator had no reason apart from
fear to inhibit his creations), and he returns to the creator to fix him.
This parallels the baby spiders killing their mother.
Tyrell's huge bed, pedestaled and canopied, is modeled after the bed of Pope
John Paul II.
Roy:
"Fiery the angels fell,
Deep thunder roll'd around their shores,
Burning with the fires of Orc."
This is a paraphrase of William Blake's "America: A Prophesy":
"Fiery the angels rose, and as they rose deep thunder roll'd
Around their shores: indignant burning with the fires of Orc."
When Roy finally confronts Tyrell, he calls him his "maker," and "the god of
biomechanics." In the light of the parallels this film draws between the
plight of the replicants and that of all human being -- four years against
fourscore -- this scene has strange reverberations. If Roy can condemn his
creator for determining his life span at four years, why can we not condemn
our Creator (if we choose to believe in one) for placing us under a death
sentence at birth. Can we sit in judgment of God?
Insofar as he creates artificial life and is killed by it, Tyrell is another
Dr. Frankenstein. Tyrell and Frankenstein both are cruel towards their own
creations, and yet it is these creations, not the creators, who are
persecuted. We are sympathetic towards both Roy and Frankenstein's creature,
as they are inherently benign creatures who become violent only when spurned
by a paranoid society. Our creations tell us more about the ugliness of
ourselves than they do about the created. The "Frankenstein" parallel is not
perfect, however, as Dr Frankenstein is not directly killed by his creation.
Roy puts a nail through his palm, a symbol of Christian crucifixion.
In Milton's "Paradise Lost", Satan is, despite himself, the most attractive
and interesting character. Roy is, of course, both Christ and Lucifer, but
the important thing is that, almost despite ourselves, we are obliged to
locate our sympathy where we do not want it to go. On a theological level,
the "felix culpa", our "fortunate fall" through which we are redeemed, is
occasioned by Satan, just as Deckard's "fortunate fall" is through Roy -- Roy
not only saves him from plummeting, but in fact elevates him to the heavens
-- a redeemed world.
When Batty dies, he is released from torment as he releases the dove. (The
laserdisc notes say that they couldn't get the dove to fly off into the
rain.)
After Roy's death Deckard muses: "All he'd wanted were the same answers the
rest of us want. Where do I come from? Where am I going? How long have I
got. All I could do was sit there and watch him die." According to an essay
in "Retrofitting Blade Runner", these three questions are the title of a
painting by Gauguin during one of his more suicidal phases: "Where do we come
from? What are we? Where are we going?"
http://stason.org/TULARC/movies/blade-runner/12-Blade-Runner-Religious-Philosophical-Parallels.html
BLADE RUNNER (1982)
PHILOSOPHICAL ISSUES: Personal identity
CHARACTERS: Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), Tyrell (owner of Tyrell Corporation), Sabastian (again genetic engineer), Rachael (Sean Young, replicant), Leon (replicant), Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer, replicant), Pris (Daryl Hannah, replicant)
OTHER FILMS BY DIRECTOR RIDLEY SCOTT: Alien (1979), Thelma and Louise (1991), Gladiator (2000), Black Hawk Down (2001), Matchstick Men (2003)
SYNOPSIS: Blade Runner is based on the science fiction novel by Phillip K. Dick Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, who also authored the story behind the film Total Recall (1990). Set in the future, around the year 2020, Deckard is a retired law enforcement officer who is coerced back into service for a special mission. A group of enslaved replicants (genetically engineered human-like creatures) revolted on another planet. As the replicants were designed to live for only a few years, they returned to Earth to find a way of extending their lifespan. Deckard must hunt them down and kill them. He visits the Tyrell Corporation, manufacturers of the replicants, and meets Rachael, a worker there who is unaware that she is a replicant herself. Deckard discovers this fact and informs her of it, which forces her to be on the run as well. Deckard tracks down and kills all the rebel replicants but one, and in the mean time shelters Rachael and becomes her lover. The remaining replicant learns from Tyrell (founder of the corporation) that his lifespan cannot be extended. He then expires while in combat with Deckard. Deckard and Rachael make their escape together. The film was nominated for two Academy Awards (art direction and visual effects).
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
1. A key puzzle raised by Blade Runner is whether we can definitively 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?
2. One of the more dramatic philosophical points made in the movie is that we can’t trust our memories: 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?
3. 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 implanted in you or the result of a drug or mental defect?
4. The director’s cut version of the movie made an alteration to the original theatrically-released story line: at the close of the movie it seems clear that Rachael has a short replicant life-span, rather than a full human life-span. Assuming that she and Deckard safely escape, does this make the ending that much less happy?
5. Another alteration in the director’s cut is that questions are raised about whether Deckard himself is a replicant. What is the main indication of this, and what sort of impact should this have on Deckard, particularly in view of his feelings about Rachael?
6. A moral message of the movie is 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. What would need to be different about replicants in order for us to feel that it was OK to use them for labor?
REVIEWS
This film pulls no punches in asking the most troubling questions about artificial intelligence and cloning. What is a human? If it looks just like one, but we made it, can we kill it? This is Deckers job, a “Blade Runner” played by Harrison Ford. When Replicants, the pseudo clone slaves of human society, run amok (or in this case, return to earth, which they are banned from) it’s the job of a Blade Runner to find and “retire” them. They are spoken about in a very particular language, so as to reinforce the nonhuman status they retain. Decker has already found himself morally opposed to killing replicants at the onset of the film, or if he’s not morally opposed, he’s at least very tired of it. When it’s made clear to him the dire consequences of his refusal, he takes up the hunt again. He begins by visiting Tyrell Corp., the company that designs and produces replicants. There he is introduced to Rachel, a female replicant who’s been implanted with memories so as to make her more stable. From personal experience I might add that, if stability was the goal, they might have rethought making her female. Anyway, Decker falls in love with Rachel, and this further complicates things, because he’s supposed to kill her too. This raises questions about love in general. If he can fall in love with her, is she human?http://www.philfilms.utm.edu/1/blade.htm
How Science Became God In Blade Runner
By: Tony Schloss
In one of the most acclaimed science fiction movies of all time, Ridley Scott presents us with a beautiful and scary vision of the future. It is a vision that has sparked many debates throughout many genres, including, film, literature and science. In Blade Runner, released in 1982, we are faced with a post-apocalyptic Los Angeles, full of darkness, acid rain and decay. Within this picture are three scientists who, together, paint a very different picture of the science and scientists of the future. Each one of them has a purpose in the scientific world and also in society as a whole. In this study, we will find that there are both literary and realistic origins of the representation that we are faced with in the movie.
Blade Runner focuses around the adventures of Rick Deckard, a bounty hunter, whose prey are the replicants, androids who are virtually indistinguishable from humans. The story is set in downtown Los Angeles, in the year 2019. This is a post nuclear holocaust world, where the sun is darkened by the fallout and acid rain continually falls. Six replicants of the Nexus 6 generation, the most advanced, have escaped from their off-world colony, where they were being used as slave labor. The leader of the replicants, Roy Batty, is on a mission to find more life for himself and the others, for they only have a four year life span and are on the verge of death. Roy is a military style replicant, so he has killed many people in inter-galactic wars and continues to kill as he searches for life. Deckard is on a mission to find all of these replicants and in the terms used by the police and the giant Tyrell Corporation that made them, "retire" the replicants.
There are three scientists in the film, but the most important of them all and also the seemingly most powerful man in the society of the film is Tyrell. Tyrell is the president and super-genius of the Tyrell corporation, a huge company that makes the replicants, the artificial human slaves that have allowed humans to move off-world and colonize other planets. Tyrell is presented to the viewer as having a God-like presence. Only in his office do we see any essence of the sun and a calm space. The motto of his corporation is "More human than human". He calls Roy Batty, the leader of the rogue replicants, his "prodigal son". In the movie he is presented as the highest science authority and is constantly referred to by others as a genius. In addition to this he seems to be the leader in politics and other realms. The police seem to work in cooperation with the Tyrell Corporation, and the office of the corporation is the largest building in the city. The whole of society seems to revolve around the Tyrell Corporation, and Tyrell is the leader of it all. It becomes clear very quickly in the film that science and technology are two of the most important factors in this society. By presenting Tyrell to us, the leader of science and also like a God, we are led to believe that science is the work of the Gods. In a new type of creation theory, it is science and technology that has created the world. Without the replicants provided by Tyrell, we can presume that the creation of off-world colonies, which in turn led to the decay of earth, would not have been occurred. Science has become something that has always been feared- the maker and destroyer of worlds, an all-powerful beast, a God, and Tyrell is the head of it all.
In contrast to Tyrell is the scientist Chu, who is a genetic engineer of eyes. He works in the freezing basement of his shop, far, far away from the light and sun of the Tyrell office. Though he creates part of the Nexus 6, the generation of replicants in the movie, he remains at the bottom of the corporate ladder, suggesting a wide industrial network of sub-contractors employed by Tyrell. He and J.F. Sebastian, our third scientist, represent all of the other scientists that help create the replicants. J.F Sebastian lives in a large apartment, but he is the only tenant in the building. His apartment is dark and dank. These men are middle class citizens and are portrayed as very much like the rest of those still on earth. The difference between their homes and work and Tyrell's is remarkable. In addition, these two scientists show that science is no longer separated into the academic world. Now the scientist and his work are fully integrated into the consumer culture which must provide the goods and services. The director may have extrapolated from present day America, where consumer culture seems to control all of society, and put the two together to form an even larger beast. Having science come to the everyday and be perhaps the most valuable commodity in the film's culture once again increases its omnipotence.
Now that we have investigated these scientists and their role in the movie, we must ask ourselves a more important question, that of how did these portrayals come to be? Director Ridley Scott wanted this movie to be truthful to his vision of the future, and have that vision be plausible. We can see in the set design that the director was attempting to create a setting that was not a far-fetched idea of someone's imagination, but a place based on real ideas of how the future might look. The buildings are created to look as though the have been built upon over and over, because Scott determined that it would be more economically feasible to keep adding to the edifices rather than tearing them down and creating new ones. The building that we see the most of, the Tyrell Corporation building, is one of the few buildings that looks drastically new, which is presumably a metaphor for the business that occurs inside the walls also being a new business of the future. But even that building bears a striking resemblance to a Mayan temple, perhaps evoking the technological advancements that the Mayans accomplished centuries before.
With this believable backdrop being set, we must now ask whether the scientists and the science practices stay true to that vision. Seeing that it is a film, we must first look to see whether there are precedents set in the literary world that would cause for us to be comfortable with the director's view. In Roslynn Haynes book From Faust to Strangelove, the author gives many examples of literary works that bear significant similarities to the characters of Blade Runner, in addition to the logic behind the individual author's reasons to write the stories the way they did. There is a direct relation to the Blade Runner screenplay and Alfred Doblin's Berge, Meere und Giganten (1924). Haynes tells us that in Doblin's story " industrial scientists and research groups have effectively assumed total power over society.". The partnership of Tyrell and the police illustrates this same circumstance in Blade Runner. The police chief in one of the first scenes of the movie is in obvious partnership with Tyrell. The psychological test conducted by the police to determine whether a person is real or artificial seems to be a common occurrence in this society. The police presumably administer the test to find Tyrell's replicants, but we can imagine that they could use it for any sort of devious plan.. Tyrell alone has created the society, and with the police with him they together can rule over this society. The police chief himself said to Deckard, "If you're not cop you're little people!", illustrating the point.
Aldous Huxley, one of the most famous and brilliant science fiction writers of all time, also has many stories that relate to the Blade Runner dystopia and story. Huxley also wrote essays explaining his beliefs about his stories. In one of these essays, entitled Jesting Pilate, he wrote " They (mankind) have required an intellectual, a logical and 'scientific' proof of their existence....when you start your argumentation from the premises laid down by scientific materialism, it simply cannot be discovered. Indeed, any argument starting from these premises must infallibly end in a denial of the real existence of values." The replicants, probably the only true rebels against society in the movie, illustrate this idea in their actions. This society they are in, which is so permanently intertwined with science, created them, and now they are questing through that society to find understanding in their existence and to continue it. But since their existence is based upon these scientific principles, they fail, and will always fail in finding an answer. In Brave New World, Huxley does not name any individual scientists, illustrating his point of loss of individuality and science being all pervasive. Chu and J. F. Sebastian represent these unnamed scientists of Brave New World. They are part of the system, but as common and simple as today's plumber or auto mechanic. It is not to say that plumber's or mechanic's are not individuals or special, but only to illustrate the point that the genetic engineer of the future appears to live and work at the same socio-economic level as these occupations, with all the same degrees of respect for the occupation.
In addition to the origins of the story being found in literary sources, there is also precedent to believing the story from writings and examples of some of our most influential intellectuals. Sigmund Freud, in 1929, wrote a scathing review of science and its purpose in society. The book, entitled Das Unbehagen in der Kultur, were essays involving science and our doomed effort to master "the human instinct of aggression and self-destruction".( Einstein, History, and other Passions, Gerald Holton, 1995) In another part of the book he details man's constant inner battle between Eros and Death, the instinct for life and the instinct for destruction. In the replicants we see this battle wage itself , and possibly even more so in Deckard. In Blade Runner the replicants are attempting to find life, but the only way to do so that seems to be possible for them is to leave a trail of destruction. They also act as metaphors for the society that created them. Therefor, our society, in its struggle for civilization, also continues to destroy, something we see occurring everyday through out the world. Deckard fights this war inside of himself as well. His job is to find all replicants and "retire" them, but he is faced with a problem. His love interest, Rachel, also turns out to be a replicant, though her life span is unknown. As Deckard tracks and kills the four outlaw replicants, he is torn inside by his love for Rachel. In Deckard, unlike the replicants and society, it appears that Eros wins, for he and Rachel leave his apartment together as the film ends. But we can not be so sure, especially in this future world, this world of "accelerated decrepitude" as Pris the replicant calls it. Freud also writes that though science and technology began in order to protect us from our hostile environment, it now only exists so we can fulfill our selfish wishes. Freud writes that it basically allows us to play God. In Blade Runner, the leader of the science world, Tyrell, shows every sign of a man playing God. The motto of his company is "More human than human", which as if to say that they can make newer, better being than the Creator himself. All of Tyrell's surroundings also give the idea of his omnipotence, as outlined earlier in this paper.
Gerald Holton, in his book Einstein, History and Other Passions, speaks about the ideas of Isaiah Berlin, whom he calls "one of the most sensitive and humane historian of ideas.". Berlin writes that there are two defining factors of our century, that of amazing progress in science and technology, and also the proliferation of ideologies that have shaped the minds of so many, like racism, nationalism and bigotry. Once again, if we look back at Blade Runner, we see these exact two things occurring. The technological advancements that allowed for the replicants to be created which then in turn led to the prejudice against them and their use as slaves.
Finally, in an essay entitled, "Technology and Politics in the Blade Runner Dystopia", written by Judith B. Kerman, the author investigates the factual truth of the story by interviewing Ridley Scott and researching other pertinent texts. Kerman points out the discrepancy in the housing arrangements, the fact that J.F. Sebastian lives in a huge apartment in an empty building while there is obvious overcrowding at the street level. Kerman explains this potential flaw in the movie by quoting Marx. She writes that such a contradiction is pointed out by Marx as an inevitable, irrational problem created by capitalism. The proliferation of weapons to never be used and prosperity coming at the expense of the unemployed and disadvantaged are examples of this capitalistic contradiction that Marx outlines. It is through the work of the masses of the street level Los Angelinos and the replicants that enables the higher classes to move off-world. Though Scott never has said that he was attempting to make a Marxist movie, being British and having an outsiders view allows him to see the problems with American society. Doing so, perhaps unconsciously, he has created a scathing review of our society. Scott has also extrapolated from the current trends of large corporations controlling much of the capitalist market, and also controlling the governmental regulation of these huge companies. This is another reason why we see Tyrell in cahoots with the police. But instead of using the model of a dynamic and controlling businessman as the leader of a huge corporation, he instead has a genius, a man of science who created a product that caused his to rise to the top, in this case, of society. As we watch Bill Gates and other computer designers create huge empires based on their inventions, the character of Tyrell does not seem so far off into the future.
Science fiction stories set in the future quite often have the possibility of being too far out of our present day scope to be believable. Blade Runner, though set in the future, is so carefully constructed that it disregards this fear almost completely. It can be understood, artistically, through an investigation of science and scientists in literature that came before. Its setting and characters can be found historically throughout the literary world. In addition to this, it also is believable based on real trends throughout this century. The structure of society, centering around science and technological advances seems to be a trend that may be beginning as we speak. The recent discovery of cloning in the lab could easily be believed to be a precursor to the genetically engineered replicants of the movie. The main striking difference between our society today and the society of the movie is that in the movie there was a nuclear war at the turn of the century. Hopefully, this is a difference that will continue to last. Besides this hopeful difference, the science and scientists of the movie could possibly be the science and scientists of a not so distant tomorrow.
Bibliography
Bass, Thomas. Reinventing The Future. Addison-Wesley Publishing, Copyright 1994.
Haynes, Roslynn D. From Faust To Strangelove: Representations of the Scientist in Western Literature. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University Press, Copyright 1994.
Holton, Gerald. Einstein, History, and Other Passions. Woodbury, NY: American Institute of Physics, Copyright 1995.
Kerman, Judith. Retrofitting Blade Runner. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, Copyright 1991.
Robinson, Kim. The Novels of Philip K Dick. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Research Press, Copyright 1984.
Velikhov, E.P. Science, Technology and the Future. New York, NY: Pergamon Press, Copyright 1980.
http://www.wesleyan.edu/synthesis/culture-cubed/schloss/maintemp.htm
Friday, June 19, 2009
Digital Divide
Digital Divide: What is it and why does it matter? It refers to the gap between those who benefit from digital technology and those who do not.
By Kristen Franks
The first truth is that the digitaldivide.org believes there are nine basic truths; we will be focusing on two of the truths, according to digitaldivide.org they assume the divide is widening, not narrowing, and at an ever-increasing rate.
The last truth, closing the digital divide involves using new technologies to formalize the ‘informal economy,’ thereby bringing the poor into established markets.
Referring back to the first truth, digitaldivide.org presupposes that the allure of consumerism is peaking the interest of the poorest individuals in low-socio-economic urban areas. In addition, that allure could be dangerous to those who venture out of the small village to find their way to commercialized technology, they may not have the financial mean to support themselves and may find themselves on the mean streets with out financial support to return home.
A tidbit to ingest the 80/20 theory. Upper to middle class have high quality Internet access to digital technology because 80% of the profit is generated by 20% of the most affluent.
Moreover, the reason additional capital for technology is not put into place for providing access to the poor is that - bottom line - profitability – there is no profit by providing access to the poor.
So…how do we change current market trends and behaviors?
According to digitaldivide.org it is a two-prong approach, direct and non-direct, the direct approach would be to gather business and government to change the incentives that shape digital markets. Which may lead to an indirect approach, theoretically it could team up the public sector with the private sector. The technological benefits would create a more advantageous coordination within the health care and education systems – and that would be a plus.
Decades ago a man, named Maslow* said that if a persons basic needs are not being met, secondary needs will not be considered or approached, by that individual.
*http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/maslow.html
Now back to digitaldivide.org following along the same lines as Maslow, digitaldivide.org believes that closing the gap on the digital divide is not a top priority. Clean water and employment should be the top priorities. However, technological advancements would create a more conducive pathway towards cleaner water and more access to employment, green-eco friendly technology would serve the basic needs first, then secondary needs would follow; the two can work in conjunction to lesson the divide.
“Closing the divide is not a silver bullet for reducing poverty. But there is a much lower likelihood of large scale and sustainable poverty reduction without doing so.”
http://www.digitaldivide.org/dd/digitaldivide.html
It can be gathered according to digitaldivide.org that trends in commercialization and market forces are widening the gap. However, they also assume if the public and private sector work in juxtaposition that several needs can be met at once and that would provide for many basic needs being met, as well as, secondary needs, such as access to digital technology.
Now let us move on to another set of data with a different agenda. Let us see if in fact ymca.net has established similar conditions.
According to ymca.net access to information technology, benefits youths in a number of ways:
Increased self-esteem
Increased understanding of their own potential
Raised educational awareness
Higher ability to obtain employment
Increased motivation and ability to create their own businesses
The benefit for communities are immeasurable for if the youth of today are exposed to information technology and have proper digital access than that would in fact break down social barriers between disadvantaged youth and local businesses.
Information technology is a not only about employment and resource mobilization it can also integrate principles of civic engagement, community participation, and empowerment.
The ymca.net has proven itself over the years of its commitment and dedication to individuals whether from this country, Africa, or the many other countries the YMCA seems to encourage and promote. The YMCA is just another example on how the public sector can anticipate the needs and goals of a community, and put into place a directive that sees that those needs are being met.
Therefore, it would seem that the ymca.net and digitaldivide.org have one common theme, digital access and information technology can contribute to disadvantaged individuals and aid in lending a hand in developing communal relationships. It will also assist in promoting goodwill, which will also begin to bridge the gap between persons from affluence and those persons from moderate to those of low-socio-economic resources. Those processes will also support the theory that social fragmentation between the classes is also lessoned.
Let us take a look at what Arshad Mohammed of the Washington Post, assumes to be the case. Let us see if there is any correlation between what the Washington Post claims what has been theorized by digitaldivide.org and ymca.net.
Almost verbatim of what digitaldivide.org supposes, “The problem is there is not sufficient market incentive to serve the lowest-income part of our city…”
DC government has granted one company access to their IT contract with one (BIG) catch! Whoever wins the bid for digitizing Washington DC, has to provide access for impoverished neighborhoods. In addition, whichever company bids the lowest and offers access to the majority of low-income neighborhoods will win the bid, and will supply citywide technological support.
However, there seems to be contention from the private sector, they are reporting that, “it is unfair to force us to compete with networks that may be supported by a municipality.” Again, providing access to low-socio-economic populations is interfering with the private sectors profitability framework.
According to: http://www.broadbandinfo.com/high-speed-internet/deals/default.html
There is a different in the quality and price range for Broadband services.
Comcast® Broadband Offers and Deals: $100 Cash Back
Comcast High Speed Internet service for as low as $19.99 per month for the first 6 months and you get $100 cash back.
Road Runner High Speed Online™ is 100 times faster than dial-up.
$34.95 per month for 12 months*
Free modem
No contract necessary
Charter High-Speed® Internet Offers and Deals
Charter High-Speed® internet for $24.99 per month for six months!
$100 Cash Back.
Order your Charter Internet service today and get a free Motorola cable modem.
There are no contracts required with Charter!
Insight Communications Broadband Offers and Deals
Get 12 full months of Insight Broadband at a special rate of only $30 a month.
Get up to six Insight email addresses that you can access anywhere with Insight webmail.
No contracts needed with internet service plans.
Digital Home Phone Service Deals
It may not seem like a lot of money but according to the main Broadband services; Broadband can range from 19.99 to 30.00 a month just for Broadband. That may be a great deal of money for those who are already living at the poverty line or below. In addition, if a family of two only makes $14,570.00; they may not have the financial resources for Broadband services.
According to: http://www.atdn.org/access/poverty.html
The 48 Contiguous States and DC
Persons in family
Poverty guideline
1
$10,830
2
14,570
3
18,310
4
22,050
5
25,790
6
29,530
7
33,270
8
37,010
For families with more than 8 persons, add $3,740 for each additional person.
One side note even those who are promoting free access for information technology it is not high-speed broadband. However, it is not dial-up either. It is about ten times faster than dial-up but, by no means, can it be compared to high-speed access.
Accessibility to information technology is possible. However, the drawback is slower connections, as compared to their wealthier counterparts.
Now looking back at what digitaldivide.org, ymca.net, and now what the Washington Post supposes, “Proponents argue that bringing high-speed internet to low income groups can bring economic, educational, social benefits to people who would otherwise be deprived.”
Rey Ramsey - Chief Officer of a non-profit group called One Economy Corp, has also said it,
http://www.one-economy.com/press/report/archive/2008/06/19/oe-report-may-2008
“Information is King... What’s important today is having access to broadband at an affordable price.”
Which goes back to another quote from ymca.net, “Despite isolation and lack of opportunity, young people can be engaged through information technology in ways that transform their local reality into new opportunity.”
My conclusion would be that the three opinions postulate several common themes:
Everyone should be afforded effective, cost efficient, and availability to information technology and digital access.
Digital access can lead to a greater accessibility between low-socio-economic regions and those of more affluent to moderate means; which would allow for a re-connection between the classes, which also would promote more community participation amongst all class levels.
In addition, it would bridge the gap between those of financial disadvantage as compared with those who are not. It would also aid in the development for more advantages such as employment, business or educations opportunities.
Nevertheless, it would seem when comparing all three opinions one-draw backs seems to be clear – the private sector needs to inherit a more philanthropic attitude that would support low economic areas for the betterment of financially disadvantaged urban areas, rather than only seeing to their profit margins and shareholders dividends.
There also seems that there could be a ‘connect’ between profitability and philanthropy.
If big business would see that to promote and engage in affordability or free access to information technology it would enable a more perceptive technological employee – which in turn would support greater shares in their profitability margins.
So if anyone is in support of these main points in this podcast, please call, email, or write to your local State Representatives or Congress people and tell them that you feel everyone should have access to information technology, and for those in low-socio-economic area should be offered some form of free digital access.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Kristen Franks
By Kristen Franks
The first truth is that the digitaldivide.org believes there are nine basic truths; we will be focusing on two of the truths, according to digitaldivide.org they assume the divide is widening, not narrowing, and at an ever-increasing rate.
The last truth, closing the digital divide involves using new technologies to formalize the ‘informal economy,’ thereby bringing the poor into established markets.
Referring back to the first truth, digitaldivide.org presupposes that the allure of consumerism is peaking the interest of the poorest individuals in low-socio-economic urban areas. In addition, that allure could be dangerous to those who venture out of the small village to find their way to commercialized technology, they may not have the financial mean to support themselves and may find themselves on the mean streets with out financial support to return home.
A tidbit to ingest the 80/20 theory. Upper to middle class have high quality Internet access to digital technology because 80% of the profit is generated by 20% of the most affluent.
Moreover, the reason additional capital for technology is not put into place for providing access to the poor is that - bottom line - profitability – there is no profit by providing access to the poor.
So…how do we change current market trends and behaviors?
According to digitaldivide.org it is a two-prong approach, direct and non-direct, the direct approach would be to gather business and government to change the incentives that shape digital markets. Which may lead to an indirect approach, theoretically it could team up the public sector with the private sector. The technological benefits would create a more advantageous coordination within the health care and education systems – and that would be a plus.
Decades ago a man, named Maslow* said that if a persons basic needs are not being met, secondary needs will not be considered or approached, by that individual.
*http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/maslow.html
Now back to digitaldivide.org following along the same lines as Maslow, digitaldivide.org believes that closing the gap on the digital divide is not a top priority. Clean water and employment should be the top priorities. However, technological advancements would create a more conducive pathway towards cleaner water and more access to employment, green-eco friendly technology would serve the basic needs first, then secondary needs would follow; the two can work in conjunction to lesson the divide.
“Closing the divide is not a silver bullet for reducing poverty. But there is a much lower likelihood of large scale and sustainable poverty reduction without doing so.”
http://www.digitaldivide.org/dd/digitaldivide.html
It can be gathered according to digitaldivide.org that trends in commercialization and market forces are widening the gap. However, they also assume if the public and private sector work in juxtaposition that several needs can be met at once and that would provide for many basic needs being met, as well as, secondary needs, such as access to digital technology.
Now let us move on to another set of data with a different agenda. Let us see if in fact ymca.net has established similar conditions.
According to ymca.net access to information technology, benefits youths in a number of ways:
Increased self-esteem
Increased understanding of their own potential
Raised educational awareness
Higher ability to obtain employment
Increased motivation and ability to create their own businesses
The benefit for communities are immeasurable for if the youth of today are exposed to information technology and have proper digital access than that would in fact break down social barriers between disadvantaged youth and local businesses.
Information technology is a not only about employment and resource mobilization it can also integrate principles of civic engagement, community participation, and empowerment.
The ymca.net has proven itself over the years of its commitment and dedication to individuals whether from this country, Africa, or the many other countries the YMCA seems to encourage and promote. The YMCA is just another example on how the public sector can anticipate the needs and goals of a community, and put into place a directive that sees that those needs are being met.
Therefore, it would seem that the ymca.net and digitaldivide.org have one common theme, digital access and information technology can contribute to disadvantaged individuals and aid in lending a hand in developing communal relationships. It will also assist in promoting goodwill, which will also begin to bridge the gap between persons from affluence and those persons from moderate to those of low-socio-economic resources. Those processes will also support the theory that social fragmentation between the classes is also lessoned.
Let us take a look at what Arshad Mohammed of the Washington Post, assumes to be the case. Let us see if there is any correlation between what the Washington Post claims what has been theorized by digitaldivide.org and ymca.net.
Almost verbatim of what digitaldivide.org supposes, “The problem is there is not sufficient market incentive to serve the lowest-income part of our city…”
DC government has granted one company access to their IT contract with one (BIG) catch! Whoever wins the bid for digitizing Washington DC, has to provide access for impoverished neighborhoods. In addition, whichever company bids the lowest and offers access to the majority of low-income neighborhoods will win the bid, and will supply citywide technological support.
However, there seems to be contention from the private sector, they are reporting that, “it is unfair to force us to compete with networks that may be supported by a municipality.” Again, providing access to low-socio-economic populations is interfering with the private sectors profitability framework.
According to: http://www.broadbandinfo.com/high-speed-internet/deals/default.html
There is a different in the quality and price range for Broadband services.
Comcast® Broadband Offers and Deals: $100 Cash Back
Comcast High Speed Internet service for as low as $19.99 per month for the first 6 months and you get $100 cash back.
Road Runner High Speed Online™ is 100 times faster than dial-up.
$34.95 per month for 12 months*
Free modem
No contract necessary
Charter High-Speed® Internet Offers and Deals
Charter High-Speed® internet for $24.99 per month for six months!
$100 Cash Back.
Order your Charter Internet service today and get a free Motorola cable modem.
There are no contracts required with Charter!
Insight Communications Broadband Offers and Deals
Get 12 full months of Insight Broadband at a special rate of only $30 a month.
Get up to six Insight email addresses that you can access anywhere with Insight webmail.
No contracts needed with internet service plans.
Digital Home Phone Service Deals
It may not seem like a lot of money but according to the main Broadband services; Broadband can range from 19.99 to 30.00 a month just for Broadband. That may be a great deal of money for those who are already living at the poverty line or below. In addition, if a family of two only makes $14,570.00; they may not have the financial resources for Broadband services.
According to: http://www.atdn.org/access/poverty.html
The 48 Contiguous States and DC
Persons in family
Poverty guideline
1
$10,830
2
14,570
3
18,310
4
22,050
5
25,790
6
29,530
7
33,270
8
37,010
For families with more than 8 persons, add $3,740 for each additional person.
One side note even those who are promoting free access for information technology it is not high-speed broadband. However, it is not dial-up either. It is about ten times faster than dial-up but, by no means, can it be compared to high-speed access.
Accessibility to information technology is possible. However, the drawback is slower connections, as compared to their wealthier counterparts.
Now looking back at what digitaldivide.org, ymca.net, and now what the Washington Post supposes, “Proponents argue that bringing high-speed internet to low income groups can bring economic, educational, social benefits to people who would otherwise be deprived.”
Rey Ramsey - Chief Officer of a non-profit group called One Economy Corp, has also said it,
http://www.one-economy.com/press/report/archive/2008/06/19/oe-report-may-2008
“Information is King... What’s important today is having access to broadband at an affordable price.”
Which goes back to another quote from ymca.net, “Despite isolation and lack of opportunity, young people can be engaged through information technology in ways that transform their local reality into new opportunity.”
My conclusion would be that the three opinions postulate several common themes:
Everyone should be afforded effective, cost efficient, and availability to information technology and digital access.
Digital access can lead to a greater accessibility between low-socio-economic regions and those of more affluent to moderate means; which would allow for a re-connection between the classes, which also would promote more community participation amongst all class levels.
In addition, it would bridge the gap between those of financial disadvantage as compared with those who are not. It would also aid in the development for more advantages such as employment, business or educations opportunities.
Nevertheless, it would seem when comparing all three opinions one-draw backs seems to be clear – the private sector needs to inherit a more philanthropic attitude that would support low economic areas for the betterment of financially disadvantaged urban areas, rather than only seeing to their profit margins and shareholders dividends.
There also seems that there could be a ‘connect’ between profitability and philanthropy.
If big business would see that to promote and engage in affordability or free access to information technology it would enable a more perceptive technological employee – which in turn would support greater shares in their profitability margins.
So if anyone is in support of these main points in this podcast, please call, email, or write to your local State Representatives or Congress people and tell them that you feel everyone should have access to information technology, and for those in low-socio-economic area should be offered some form of free digital access.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Kristen Franks
George Orwell 1984
By, Kristen Franks
A brief look into “1984”
George Orwell 1984
New American Library, New York, NY, 1-128
First Printing by Signet Classic in July 1950
Winston Smith is just a run of the mill guy, a member of the ruling party in Oceania (former London). One of the party’s agenda is to create a new language, “Newspeak which omits anything odious or considered offensive to the party.”
Thought crimes equal death; Winston has opened the doorway to such a fate by writing his personal thoughts in a diary – which are forbidden. He is a low-level member of the ruling party and works in the Ministry of Truth re-inventing so-called facts to suit the party’s purpose.
One person brings sanity to Winston’s life; O’Brien a member of the Inner party whom Winston is convinced is a member of The Brotherhood (so he thought). Winston now has a beautiful woman in his life, and he is looking forward in meeting O’Brien and his hopes is that O’Brien will bring a purpose to his mundane life.
One fateful day, Winston does in fact get his chance to meet O’Brien. However, Mr. Charrinton the owner of the flat and O’Brien’s landlord, who is actually a spy for the thought police – turns him in. Needless to say, it does not look good for Winston, Julie, or O’Brien or was it good for O’Brien?
I will not give anymore of the plot away, it is an easy and great read, and I highly recommend 1984.
Themes of 1984
Totalitarianism (in 1949 Communism was still looked upon favorably ‘The Cold War’ was in its infancy).
Orwell supposed that if the West did not resist such conformity to government inclusion the scenarios he wrote in 1984 would come to reality.
Manipulation
Telescreens were in every citizen’s room, those machines aided in the support of mind control and that was a necessary tool for the party to keep the reigns on the people in Oceania. Big Brother is Always Watching You!!!
Control
It was the fear of every citizen that their own body’s involuntary reactions would give away their true intentions. A twitch of the eye and or a dismayed look could be construed as a blemish to the party’s character. Physical Jerks - a morning exercise was monitored by the telescreens. The Department of Historical Truths omits previous truths and re-submits current truths as the ultimate truth. So information is ever changing, if one tidbit of information is deemed offensive to the party it is rewritten in all types of written or visual media.
Language
The party omitted words that did not suit them. It seems that language and or the use or issue of it was a strong point in 1984. How replacing and modifying language can have long and detrimental effect for decades if not millennia to come.
Patterns
Doublethink – holding contradictory thoughts at the same time.
Urban Decay – In totalitarianism, the top only sees to their own needs, they offer very little to their constituency but demand everything. The few have much, the masses have very little.
Ideas
Big Brother – a person cannot do, say, think, go, wear, and feel without being watched by the party.
The place where there is no darkness, “a prison where the light is never turned off.”
Quote:
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Who Controls the Past, Controls the Future
Who Controls the Present, Controls the Past
Genre: Negative Utopian, or dystopian fiction written in England in 1949.
One question haunted Winston. Why?
O’Brien’s answer: power for the sake of power.
SFReader.com Paul Kane review,
“The year – even the century – may have come and gone, but 1984 is about so much more than just a date. It’s about who we are, who we might be and who we definitely should not be.”
Privacilla.org (Pro-Technological Perspective)
“Orwell wrote 1984 to caution against the power of governments much more than to warn about the future of lost privacy. There is an inverse relationship between privacy and government power, of course, but it is excess government that creates lack of privacy, rather than the reverse.”
A brief look into “1984”
George Orwell 1984
New American Library, New York, NY, 1-128
First Printing by Signet Classic in July 1950
Winston Smith is just a run of the mill guy, a member of the ruling party in Oceania (former London). One of the party’s agenda is to create a new language, “Newspeak which omits anything odious or considered offensive to the party.”
Thought crimes equal death; Winston has opened the doorway to such a fate by writing his personal thoughts in a diary – which are forbidden. He is a low-level member of the ruling party and works in the Ministry of Truth re-inventing so-called facts to suit the party’s purpose.
One person brings sanity to Winston’s life; O’Brien a member of the Inner party whom Winston is convinced is a member of The Brotherhood (so he thought). Winston now has a beautiful woman in his life, and he is looking forward in meeting O’Brien and his hopes is that O’Brien will bring a purpose to his mundane life.
One fateful day, Winston does in fact get his chance to meet O’Brien. However, Mr. Charrinton the owner of the flat and O’Brien’s landlord, who is actually a spy for the thought police – turns him in. Needless to say, it does not look good for Winston, Julie, or O’Brien or was it good for O’Brien?
I will not give anymore of the plot away, it is an easy and great read, and I highly recommend 1984.
Themes of 1984
Totalitarianism (in 1949 Communism was still looked upon favorably ‘The Cold War’ was in its infancy).
Orwell supposed that if the West did not resist such conformity to government inclusion the scenarios he wrote in 1984 would come to reality.
Manipulation
Telescreens were in every citizen’s room, those machines aided in the support of mind control and that was a necessary tool for the party to keep the reigns on the people in Oceania. Big Brother is Always Watching You!!!
Control
It was the fear of every citizen that their own body’s involuntary reactions would give away their true intentions. A twitch of the eye and or a dismayed look could be construed as a blemish to the party’s character. Physical Jerks - a morning exercise was monitored by the telescreens. The Department of Historical Truths omits previous truths and re-submits current truths as the ultimate truth. So information is ever changing, if one tidbit of information is deemed offensive to the party it is rewritten in all types of written or visual media.
Language
The party omitted words that did not suit them. It seems that language and or the use or issue of it was a strong point in 1984. How replacing and modifying language can have long and detrimental effect for decades if not millennia to come.
Patterns
Doublethink – holding contradictory thoughts at the same time.
Urban Decay – In totalitarianism, the top only sees to their own needs, they offer very little to their constituency but demand everything. The few have much, the masses have very little.
Ideas
Big Brother – a person cannot do, say, think, go, wear, and feel without being watched by the party.
The place where there is no darkness, “a prison where the light is never turned off.”
Quote:
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Who Controls the Past, Controls the Future
Who Controls the Present, Controls the Past
Genre: Negative Utopian, or dystopian fiction written in England in 1949.
One question haunted Winston. Why?
O’Brien’s answer: power for the sake of power.
SFReader.com Paul Kane review,
“The year – even the century – may have come and gone, but 1984 is about so much more than just a date. It’s about who we are, who we might be and who we definitely should not be.”
Privacilla.org (Pro-Technological Perspective)
“Orwell wrote 1984 to caution against the power of governments much more than to warn about the future of lost privacy. There is an inverse relationship between privacy and government power, of course, but it is excess government that creates lack of privacy, rather than the reverse.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
