Charles Darwin in "Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow"

In "Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow", Charles Darwin is quoted as saying that "Man will always tend to breed up to the limits of the moment" and "we are living like drunken sailors, like the irresponsible heirs of a millionaire uncle". This is saying that as of now, we are using up all of the natural resources that we have, without too much consideration for the future. Also, "Sir Charles is of the opinion that Man will successfully make the transition from rich ores to poor ores and even sea water, from coal, oil, uranium and thorium to solar energy and alcohol derived from plants". This probably will not be true, humans will most likely not be able to completely replace previous resources as we run out of them. We are not researching new completely renewable resources enough to have enough by the time fossil fuels and other resources we depend on most run out.

"Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow" by Aldous Huxley

The essay "Tomorrow and Tomorrow and Tomorrow" is interesting because of how accurate it is, when it was written forty or fifty years ago. This is because there are certain things that will happen, given a large enough span of time, like Huxley says, that the real difficulty in predicting the future is what will happen in the near future. This is all very true, that there will be famine, war, and prosperity in the next two hundred years, but which will happen in the next two? Huxley makes an interesting comment near the end of the essay "that we shall be discontented with our good time goes without saying. Every gain made by individuals or societies is almost instantly taken for granted." This is very true, because if one thinks about all of the inventions that have been made just since when this essay was written, how many of them does one take for granted every time they are used? Most likely all of them. Also, one last point Huxley makes is about technology, and how it will have evolved by the year 2050. All of the inventions he speaks of, cultivating alge and other plants that are not though of for food, solving the world's hunger problems by giving extra capital produced by the United States to countries that are striken with famine and whose people are starving. These solutions are very good in theory, however, they are as wild as the possiblity of creating the Marshall Plan of which he speaks.

Utopia and Dystopia

My idea of Utopia is somewhere where nature has not been spoiled by technology. It is a place where there is balance and order, but everything negative has not been completely removed, because then there would not be balance. If there was only peace, harmony, no crime, no famine, nothing negative, then the people living there would not know the difference between good times and bad because there would be no negative against which to contrast the postive. This is why my idea of Utopia is not the same as most.

Cindy Sherman

Cindy Sherman is an interesting post-modernist artist for several reasons. Her photography is intriguing because it takes so many different forms, from a beautiful woman from the 1960’s on the set of a movie, to a tattered and worn looking woman trying too hard to be beautiful, to a horrific looking clown. Some of these photographs are more cohesive with others, as her subjects vary greatly. In her early years, she took photographs of herself that were not self-portraits, but of personas that she took on. It is interesting to see them because all of her personas in this time know they are being watched and as a result are more venerable. They also as a whole tell a story, which is hard to figure out. She almost reproduced “the gaze” that was in much earlier artist’s works, for instance, some early twentieth century painters like Bouguereau.
This is a huge contrast to her later work. She changed subjects dramatically, to where they were more bizarre, more empty, and eventually, all associated with death. She always had some sexual undertones in her early work but at the end, the images of the blow-up dolls are pornographic. It is disturbing to look at, and repulses most viewers. It is hard to think what ideas she might be trying to convey in these photographs because of how disturbing they are to the average viewer. One theme that I did find from her work overall is how beauty fades, and identity is lost, and inevitable death ensues. This is a very pessimistic view on life, however that may have been how Cindy Sherman wanted her viewers to think of life.

The Man Doll

In the short story “The Man Doll” by Susan Swan, the doll named Manny is created, then comes to life and starts a revolution. The story is fairly nerve-wracking because of how human-like the robots are depicted, how they seem to have emotions and free will. It is surprising that it is possible to create a robot with such empathy, and with emotional needs of it’s own. It seems that these robots go from being just a machine to satisfy people’s sexual needs to being human.
This is one example of how fiction can become reality. When the book 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea was written, the idea of a submarine that could go to the bottom of the ocean was absurd. This is the same with “The Man Doll” and the movie “I, Robot”, where artificial intelligence has reached the point to where it can choose for itself, it does not need programming for every decision. Today, in Europe, when they are litigating in preparation for the emersion of real artificial intelligence, the laws passed resemble the laws in the movie. It is a frightening thing to think about, if eventually life will start to resemble the movie and short story, and the robots will rebel.

Identity

Identity seems all relative, when it really is not. People in different situations view me as a very different person. People view me at work as a more hard working person than any other situation. This is because I will usually act in what is considered a much more professional manner. For example, at times not letting my dislike of hard work show. At work I feel the need to be politically correct, I cannot make any drug references, be too opinionated or closed-minded, more agreeable, or characteristic that is viewed as “unprofessional”.
When I am with my friends I feel freer, as though I can object to whatever I would like to. I can express all of my feelings without the same feeling of consequences, as though my unchanged thoughts or feelings will be shared, and not give the same kind of negative results. This is a much more similar to how I am perceived on the street. However, this view is based on a much quicker perception, almost a snapshot of my personality. It is somewhat the same feeling of freedom, but there is still some of the feeling as though I need to be agreeable, I need to be politically correct. These three views are all different, but they relate to each other, with at work and with friends being the two extremes. This is not really a conscious decision, but a learned reflex that is taught to us from birth. This is the way someone can really act almost like a different person in different situations without actually compromising their ‘true’ identity.

Andy Warhol

Andy Warhol has a view on art in general and his own that is very interesting. He generally has a post-modernist view, that anything can be beautiful, even if it is a can of Cambell’s soup or a bottle of Coke. But what is very interesting is his opinion on him creating art. He says that he is a machine, that he does not really have a hand in his art, but why would he want his art this way? If viewers of his art were never affected by his art because they saw the same images every day, then what would be the purpose of his art be other than something to look at?
Another aspect of his art that is misleading is some of the subject matter. It is not a far stretch to see how his silk screens of Marilyn Monroe are really an effort for the public to see the truth behind the image, the truth being the person she really is, aside from any Hollywood interference. But why use an image of a person, and really a country mourning? Warhol’s silk screens of Jackie Onasis are puzzling because of the social etiquette that it blatantly defies. A woman mourning for her husband is generally thought of as something that should not be capitalized on. So why did Warhol choose her as the subject when him doing so is not considered socially correct? What statements could he have made about the incident that were so profound to overwhelm the viewer’s shock of whom the subject is? It can be considered, but it is hard to say what Warhol might have been thinking when he created some of his more controversial pieces.