A couple of days back, I read this story that has been there for quite a while now, in my list of 'to-be-read' (Actually it's quite a long list!). I'm not a great fan of Asimov's novels, but I love his short stories. His short stories have extremely original ideas and are very thought provoking and many times inspiring, and this is one such story.
For people who have not read this story, it is about a robot which starts to learn things on its own - seems a very standard sci-fi story right? But, Asimov's genius is in the way he takes the story forward. It is not the usual cliched theme of a robot that begins to think, turns against its creator and ends up in a man vs machine climax. No. The robot never deviates from the now famous Asimov's three laws of robotics!
So what then is the story? The robot, Andrew, starts learning, tries new things, and its ultimate goal is to fit in to the society of humans - simple but profound concept. In spite of it being a short story (more a novella than a short story actually), the theme unravels beautifully and Andrew evolves in a gradual, natural manner.
There was one idea in the story which I particularly wanted to talk about. A small background of what happens in the story before I come to the point I want to make - Andrew is a robot that is owned by the Martins. Andrew refers to the family members as 'Sir', 'Ma'am', 'Miss' and 'Little Miss'. Little Miss orders Andrew to make a pendant for her from a piece of wood and Andrew obliges. When Sir sees the pendant, he is very surprised that Andrew could make such a piece of art, as he was not designed to do so. When Sir asks Andrew from what he copied the design from, Andrew replies saying, "It is a geometric representation, Sir, that fits the grain of the wood". Sir is very impressed and from then Andrew is made to read a lot of books about woodwork and furniture designs and he is encouraged to make cabinets and desks! The following is a part of the story which I am quoting -
This is exactly the way humans identify feelings! When I was a kid, I did not know what hunger is - meaning I did not know which feeling is referred to as hunger. But as I grew older, I realized that there is this feeling in my stomach which goes away after I eat and hence that must be hunger. Coming to think about it, this is how humans learn everything!
It is actually interesting to note that we can never be sure if people experience the 'same' hunger. This was another thing I used to think of as a kid. (ya, I used to think a lot even as a kid.. :-) ) When a guy says that he has a headache, does he feel pain the same way as I do? Do people see colours the same way as I do? Our brain maps different patterns to different wavelengths of the visible light and it is that pattern that we perceive as colour. But the mapping of patterns to wavelengths for each individual need not be the same! The pattern that I think of when I say 'blue' might be completely different from the pattern that someone else thinks of!
There is another bad habit that I have - when books are made into movies, I watch the movie almost immediately after reading the book, and invariably I am extremely disappointed with the movie! I go through the entire ritual in spite of knowing for sure that the movie can in no way match up to the level of the book - don't know why! I have wondered why most people feel this way about books made into movies, but I am going to save it for another post.
(Updating my blog after a gap of about 2 years! So a bit rusty. Thanks to Divya for inspiring me to write. :-) )
For people who have not read this story, it is about a robot which starts to learn things on its own - seems a very standard sci-fi story right? But, Asimov's genius is in the way he takes the story forward. It is not the usual cliched theme of a robot that begins to think, turns against its creator and ends up in a man vs machine climax. No. The robot never deviates from the now famous Asimov's three laws of robotics!
So what then is the story? The robot, Andrew, starts learning, tries new things, and its ultimate goal is to fit in to the society of humans - simple but profound concept. In spite of it being a short story (more a novella than a short story actually), the theme unravels beautifully and Andrew evolves in a gradual, natural manner.
There was one idea in the story which I particularly wanted to talk about. A small background of what happens in the story before I come to the point I want to make - Andrew is a robot that is owned by the Martins. Andrew refers to the family members as 'Sir', 'Ma'am', 'Miss' and 'Little Miss'. Little Miss orders Andrew to make a pendant for her from a piece of wood and Andrew obliges. When Sir sees the pendant, he is very surprised that Andrew could make such a piece of art, as he was not designed to do so. When Sir asks Andrew from what he copied the design from, Andrew replies saying, "It is a geometric representation, Sir, that fits the grain of the wood". Sir is very impressed and from then Andrew is made to read a lot of books about woodwork and furniture designs and he is encouraged to make cabinets and desks! The following is a part of the story which I am quoting -
"These are amazing productions, Andrew," Sir soon told him.
"I enjoy doing them, Sir," Andrew admitted.
" 'Enjoy'?"
"It makes the circuits of my brain somehow flow more easily. I have heard you use the word 'enjoy' and the way you use it fits the way I feel. I enjoy doing them, Sir."
This is exactly the way humans identify feelings! When I was a kid, I did not know what hunger is - meaning I did not know which feeling is referred to as hunger. But as I grew older, I realized that there is this feeling in my stomach which goes away after I eat and hence that must be hunger. Coming to think about it, this is how humans learn everything!
It is actually interesting to note that we can never be sure if people experience the 'same' hunger. This was another thing I used to think of as a kid. (ya, I used to think a lot even as a kid.. :-) ) When a guy says that he has a headache, does he feel pain the same way as I do? Do people see colours the same way as I do? Our brain maps different patterns to different wavelengths of the visible light and it is that pattern that we perceive as colour. But the mapping of patterns to wavelengths for each individual need not be the same! The pattern that I think of when I say 'blue' might be completely different from the pattern that someone else thinks of!
There is another bad habit that I have - when books are made into movies, I watch the movie almost immediately after reading the book, and invariably I am extremely disappointed with the movie! I go through the entire ritual in spite of knowing for sure that the movie can in no way match up to the level of the book - don't know why! I have wondered why most people feel this way about books made into movies, but I am going to save it for another post.
(Updating my blog after a gap of about 2 years! So a bit rusty. Thanks to Divya for inspiring me to write. :-) )
Hehee :) Good to know i can inspire someone to do something urupadi!
ReplyDeleteGreat to see u back in action and something non cricket-y. Not that I've anything against cricket but technicalities or statistics theryaati,or andha particular match paakala na appreciate panna mudiyadhe.
Anyway a few comments abt this post:
1.I can see how endhiran grossly meerified those laws.I miss sujatha.
2.Your post reminds me of "whose reality is more real?" from 15 park avenue.:)
3.Special kudos on saying "colour" and not "color"
4.Finally to quote koundamani "nee romba i think panni dhan un mandai ippdi aachu" :P
Good one! Keep writing da :)
Actually, it is interesting to bring in 'endhiran'. Because in that movie - Rajini (human) will say "it is built according to Asimov's principles" ... but it will violate them in the test. That is kind of slippery. More slippery is the reason for which they will reject it from use in armed forces.
ReplyDeletek
Proust and the Squid - The story and science of the reading brain by Maryanne Wolf. You HAVE to read it.
ReplyDeleteDivya - yes, it was a conscious effort to not write about cricket. :-)
ReplyDeleteDivya and Kt - About endhiran, i was gonna write about it in my next post, but since you started it here i'll just mention one clarification. The scientist Rajni actually says the robot is NOT built according to Asimov's 1st law because he wants to send it to the Indian army where it will have to kill people! What is stupid is that Rajni the scientist is completely surprised when the robot almost attacks him. As the guy who designed it, he MUST know that the robot will obey any command including a command to cause physical harm! This is just one of the absurdities in the movie.
Swetha - Yes I'll try to get hand on it. I have seen the book through stumble and wanted to read it. It sounds fascinating
Talking about movies made from books, I remember reading Roger Ebert's comment on this one - When Robin Williams is in a metal case for a while and when he comes out, the script turns robotic!
ReplyDelete