Category: Literature

I saw an advert the other day for an AI powered writing service: it promised blog posts for any website quickly and on-demand. While I would hope that it would be SEO friendly and have the technical side of things in order (after all, what’s the point of machines if not to make drudgery and technicalities easier?) mostly it just made me sad.

I suppose that if someone were to be running a purely marketing focused blog, or something where blind and abundant content is the point, then maybe such a thing would be useful, but for anyone else, I just don’t understand a bot writing in place of a person.

I don’t find writing a chore. In fact writing is one of the purest pleasures I have. I love arranging words just so, and making sentences to craft coherent paragraphs joining up to make something unique to present to the world, and hopefully fun to read as well. I love imagining that I am talking with someone, albeit a little one-sidedly perhaps. Writing is communication, a transfer of ideas and thoughts from one person to another. It is personable, immediate, and effervescent. No matter when I write, or when another person reads my words, communication is possible. The conversation can carry itself across time and space.

To replace that human interaction with a bot, a machine, no matter how sophisticated, would defeat the purpose. Until we have true AI, true intelligence, then why would a person want to talk to a robot? Call me no luddite, I embrace new technologies and machine shortcuts to an easier life, but this isn’t that. This is a cheat, a scam, a flim-flam. It is an advanced algorithm spitting out words without soul, without heart, without any real meaning behind them.

I grew up reading Isaac Asimov’s robot stories, and in particular was delighted by the stories of Andrew Martin (no relation) and R. Daneel Olivaw, two robot persons. The first was the robot who became, at great and ultimate cost, a true person. The second is the robot detective who solved some of the most famous murders across the galaxy. These are the machines I would love to talk to, to engage with, and to communicate with. These are AI in their purest form: brand new beings constructed mechanically and artificially, but who are, nonetheless, real intelligence (though R. Daneel might disagree with me). However, these are only stories thought up by a grandmaster of science fiction. This blog writing “AI” is nowhere close to these two mechanical men I mention.

I hid the ad and blocked it from ever showing up in that particular feed ever again, but with the advent of machine learning and these rudimentary “AIs” it won’t be long before more and more artificial writing services pop up and seek to garner money and interaction. Count me among the ones who will never use or pay for such a service. My words will always be home grown, purely human fashioned. From my mind to the page or screen and into another’s mind, without artificial intermediary.

I love words too much to sully them with the metallic taste of machinery. Far from being warm, soft, and delicious, they would smack of oil and metal and angles too harsh to swallow. I was taught that language, especially written language, should seduce and envelope the reader like a luxurious bed in a warm room on a cozy day. Writing should delight and entice. I don’t believe in spewing words on a page in order to merely create content. That galls me and irritates my senses, hardly a delight or a wonderful seduction. As long as I am able, I will write my own damn words. When I am no longer able, I hope to die in peace and leave my words behind for another to read.

To this end, I have taken a step towards what may be an ongoing community of writers around me: I have signed up for my first event through Art House Dallas. “For the Love of Words” will be held in a month at a coffee shop nearby, and is for and by writers. I am nervous. I don’t normally put myself out into new and unfamiliar situations. I don’t just go and do things like this. But I seriously want to write, and be a “Writer” and part of that is learning from and rubbing shoulders with other writers. I must get out of myself and into a wider group of people who are doing what I do: write. I have the escape valve of “if it doesn’t work, I can always leave” and that gives me some comfort. The event, while ticketed, is free, so I haven’t paid much out for this experience. But I am excited. I think this will be a good thing for me and my writing growth. Out of the vacuum of my own space and into the world of other minds focused on the singular goal of crafting the written word.

Of course, there is no telling what the future holds. I may fail at this grand experiment of writing; I may run out of words or ideas, or fail at making them communicate with others I may never meet. That isn’t really up to me. What is my domain is doing the work to put the words out there on a regular basis, and to toil diligently to shape those words as best I can. The results will either be productive or fall flat, but I believe that if I do my job well, something must come of it. I would love to make a career out of writing, to earn a living smithing ideas. I am aware that is more difficult that it may seem, and with the influx of writer bots it may be hard to rise above. Ultimately, I also believe the human generated word will become more valuable than the algorithmic essay. To be clear: AI is not going away. The robotic cat is out of the virtual bag. However, that only gives authentic artisans a greater chance to shine. Far from being an obstacle, this is an opportunity.

Opportunities are to be grasped. Challenges are to be accepted, and overcome. I’d put my sentences up against any fabricated conglomerate of phrases any day. I am not the best or the most polished writer, and that may be what shows me to be a real one. Computers are good at doing things perfectly, within their programming, but cannot, and I don’t think ever will, create with authentic flaws. And that is what will set human art apart from that of a computer every single time: the little imperfections that reflect the truest soul of humanity. None of us are perfect, but we are each of us unique. And that singularity is what is at the heart of human expression and what makes any person want to hear from another in the first place. Since my dream is to communicate well with others, I believe I am in a good place to do just that.

“Madness, as you know, is like gravity. All it takes is a little push.” – the Joker, The Dark Knight 

Batman is one year removed from his 75th anniversary (as of 2013). First glimpsed in the shadows of 1939, Bruce Wayne’s alter ego is arguably the second most well know “super” hero, second only to his DC Comics colleague Superman. He is ubiquitous. Batman is as popular as Star Wars, as multi-generational as rock and roll, and as intricate as quantum physics. First appearing in comic books, Batman has stalked through newspaper strips, novels, television shows, movies, video games, and he even guest starred on one of Superman’s radio shows. What accounts for this incredible longevity and popularity? Probably the fact that Batman is no super hero. He is as human as any of us, he is unaltered by any fantastical phenomenon or alien technology. Unlike his Marvel counterpart, Iron Man, Batman does not rely on any implanted technology. Where Tony Stark achieves his crime fighting skills through a combination of dash and design, Bruce Wayne endures by way of discipline and hard work. Both men are multi-billionaires, both are geniuses, both wear elaborate suits, but where Tony fails to match Batman is in Batman’s sheer determination. Ultimately, Iron Man is unreachable. It would be impossible to recreate Tony Stark’s suit of armor, based as it is on fictional science technologies. Batman, however, remains within the grasp of any one of us. Given enough money, and the requisite stamina, anybody could become Batman. It wouldn’t be easy, but it could be done. And, where Tony Stark suffers from a medical condition that makes most of his tech necessary, regardless of its applications, Bruce Wayne suffers from grief and chooses freely to be Batman.

Given nearly 75 years of history and development, Batman, while fictional, is as fascinating as any living, breathing human being. Batman is an avatar of the human condition. Despite the seemingly outlandish nature of his universe, ultimately the character is as grounded in reality as anyone. Struggling with pain, loss, and anger and fighting madness and the darker impulses Batman catwalks across the night, riddling out the bad jokes of life and death. Obstacles that are the bane of happiness are foes to be crushed by a hero. Investigating the bat-detective, then, yields clues to our own psyches.

Fortunately, an actual student of the human condition has delved into the bat cave and emerged with a few answers and observations. Dr. Travis Langley, tenured professor of psychology at Henderson State University, is a bit of a nerd. Having been fascinated by the Batman his whole life, he recently published the only psychological exploration of the character that exists today: Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight. Fittingly, Langley is known as a superherologist*, one who studies super heroes.

Batman and Psychology is divided into several sections. The person, the suit, the symbolism, the environment, and the associations of the Batman are all examined in detail, and set against the criminals that oppose him and the world the defines him, and all pass under the microscope of real life, modern psychology. Langley begins by discussing the historical Batman, and narrowing down all the different iterations and manifestations of the character, who, after all, comes from a comic book world in which death and life are fluid concepts, as is the nature of the multiverse itself. The great benefit of studying a character that has been around so long is that the student can take both a longitudinal and a cross-sectional approach. Usually when Langley refers to “The Batman” he means the 75 year old character, the most concrete and unchanging person that is Batman. After all, whether he is back from the dead, back from an alternate earth, or freshly rebooted, some things about Batman never change. But, Langley also often zooms right into a very particular instance, a very exact moment in Bat-time to examine a revelation or to make an observation, whether it is Adam West’s lampooned Batman, Christian Bale’s ultra-realistic Batman, or some comic book version. The juxtaposition of the two research techniques allows Langley, and the reader of his book, to compare and contrast yielding a multi-faceted view of an incredibly complex individual.

After establishing a few parameters and definitions, Langley subsequently evaluates the trauma (the death of Bruce Wayne’s parents, a constant of the Bat-narrative) and the persona (arguably, the defining characteristic: the Bat of the Man). This comprises most of Langley’s focus, and rightfully so, it is the heart of the character. Bruce Wayne endured one of the most horrific tragedies that a person can experience, and made a rather extreme choice that most people do not make. Why is the premier question, and answering it yields the most tantalizing information.

Following from that, Dr. Langley briefly discusses the nature of evil, that is, crime and punishment in Gotham City. Here most of the psychology is brought to bear as various psychological disorders, conditions, and issues are defined and debated as they relate both to Batman and his rogues gallery. This is the technical part of the book, full of the multi-syllabic terms one expects from a doctor of psychology.

Batman is not an island, and he must be viewed in his familial context: his surrogate sons (Robin and other sidekicks), his female associations (most notably: Catwoman), and his surrogate fathers (Alfred, among others). Human beings are social creatures and our company says as much about us as does our actions or appearance. No analysis of a person would be complete without such consideration, and that analysis Langley provides.

Dr. Langley does offer a Bat-diagnosis of sorts at the end of his book, concluding that Batman is most definitely not deranged, even if he is a little “crazy”. I mean, even Bruce Wayne would agree that “a man who dresses up like a bat clearly has issues” however, those issues are not really any different that those which affect ordinary people. Bruce’s issues are perhaps more magnified than most, but what do you expect from a guy who lives in a comic book?

I found Batman and Psychology very rewarding, in both scope and psychology. While I am not any sort of acolyte into the profession, I am a student of humanity and quite interested in the psychological field. I must say, however, that while the technical parts of the book aren’t incomprehensible, they could be confusing. [Author’s note: I don’t know if that constitutes a flaw with the book, or with the educational system of America. I have studied more psychology than the average Jane, so I don’t really know how someone with limited familiarity with psychological concepts would grasp the psychology presented.] I was also satiated with the banquet that Langley cooked up, in terms of the villains that he referenced and the many, many aspects of the Bat-universe that he referenced. Despite that, I occasionally felt like I was reading two separate books: one about Batman, and one about his antagonists. No book about Batman would be complete without at least talking about his number one adversary, the Joker, but I felt that a companion book that was focused on the rogues would have been better suited to an analyzation of their psychology and humanity. What was provided was simultaneously enough to make the point and not enough to do justice to the various characters. Granted, the Joker could be a series of books, but I felt he deserved a little more than he got, even in a book primarily about Batman. [Author’s note: I use the Joker here only as an example: he may be primary, but Batman’s other villains are just as convoluted.]

Batman and Psychology: A Dark and Stormy Knight is a fantastic read, and a great dissertation on a popular superhero, and I fervently hope that Dr. Travis Langley doesn’t stop here. There is much more to be said about the world of Gotham, and the worlds of Metropolis and the greater comic book multiverse. Hopefully a “Superman and Psychology” is coming soon, because if there is another guy with serious daddy/abandonment issues, it’s Clark Kent.

*You can follow Dr. Langley on twitter as the @Superherologist. [Author’s Note: Dr. Langley is my boss. This review was neither asked nor paid for by Dr. Langley. My reviews and opinions are entirely my own, and cannot be influenced by anyone.]