‘Black Mirror’를 보고-“진짜는 아니지 그치만 도움은 돼”‘Black Mirror’에서는 우리가 무비판적으로 수용하고 있는 과학문명에 대해 생각해 보아야 할 이슈를 다루고 있다. 허구의 시스템과 채팅을 하고 통화를 하다가 급기야 죽은 사람을 3D매핑기술로 되살린 로봇을 구입한다. 고인이 생전에 작성했던 수많은 SNS상에서의 기록을 조합하여 그 사람을 흉내 내는 로봇이 과연 그 사람을 대신할 수 있을까? 그리고 이들은 같은사람일까? 이에 대한 명쾌한 답을, 장례식장에서 주인공의 친구가 해주었다고 생각한다. “진짜는 아니지 그치만 도움은 돼”이 드라마를 통해서 시스템을 처음 접했을 땐, 과학기술이 아무리 정교하게 발전해서 인공지능이 성공한다 할지라도 사람의 감성까지는 절대 따라갈 수 없으며 사람과 사람이 함께 공유했던 그 많은 세부적 기억과 감정들을 표현할 수 없다는 생각을 가지고 있었다. 또한 사랑하는 이와의 이별이 죽을 만큼 절망적일 테지만 누구나 시간이 흐름에 따라 정상적인 삶을 회복하기 때문에 사랑하는 이가 그리워 그를 다시 ‘만들어’내고 내 곁에 둔다 한 들 그게 언제까지 유지가 될 것인지도 의문이 들었다. 여자주인공이 복제인간에게 “You are nothing! 넌 아무것도 아니야!” 라고 울며 소리치는1화의 마지막 장면처럼, 정말 그 사람이 아니라고 느낀 순간 그 때의 절망감은 또 다른 큰 상처로 돌아올 것이기 때문이다. 또한 만약 기술이 더 발전해서, 이 드라마에서 '인공지능의 한계'가 모두 개선된 더 나은 인공지능이 탄생한다고 할지라도 그리움이 끝난 인연을 대신할 수는 없고 생각했다. 사람은 망각의 동물이기에 그 대신할 수 없음에 괴로워하면서도 서서히 잊어가는데 사진이나 편지, 동영상보다 더 그 사람에 대한 기억을 남기는 SNS와 기록은 어쩌면 망각이라는 축복을 막는 고문일지도 모른다는 이유 때문에서였다.하지만 다시 곰곰이 생각해보니, 죽은 이의 모습을 말과 습관까지 완벽히 재현한 복제인간을 곁에 두는 것이, 사랑하는 사람이 죽은 뒤 그가 쓰던 방을 치우지 않고 그대로 보존하며 그를 추억하는 것과 무엇이 다를까 하는 생각이 들었다. 후자는 추억이고 전자는 괴이한 일일까? 아마도 후자는 오랜 시간 인간에게 있어왔던 일이지만 전자는 아직 일어나지 않은 일이기 때문이라고 생각한다. 기술이 발전하면 미래에는 가능할지언정 아직은 상상력으로만 존재할 뿐이기 때문이다. 발전된 기술로 미래에 너도나도 고인을 꼭 닮은 복제인간을 하나씩 가지고서 그를 추억하고 슬픔을 덜어낸다면 더 이상 후자가 괴이한 일이 되지 않을 것이다. 이러한 복제인간, 인공지능이 슬픔을 극복하는데 도움을 준다는 점에서 긍정적인 시각을 가지고 있지만 아이러니하게도 그가 여전히 진짜라고 생각하지는 않는다.인격동일성에 관한 견해들 중 가장 설득력 있다고 생각하는 기억이론에 따르면, 과거의 나 와 현재의 내가 같은 사람인 근거는 ‘심리적 연속성’에 있다. 그런데 복제 애쉬의 말과 행동 즉 사고는 철저히 그가 생전에 SNS와 이메일을 통해 의사소통했던 자료를 통해 구축된 것이다. 때문에 즉 그의 생각은 경험하지 않은 것에 대한 가짜 기억(착각)이며 그는 문자 그대로 ‘진짜’ 애쉬는 아닌 것이다.모든 과학 기술이 그러하듯, 기술에 대한 지나친 의존은 여러 심각한 문제점들을 야기할 수 있다. 하지만 이 시스템을 통해 도움을 받은 친구의 사례처럼, 필요에 따라 적절히 사용해 한 사람의 인생에, 더 나아가 인류에게 도움이 되는 방향으로 흘러갈 수 있다면 굳이 ‘진짜’에 대한 엄격한 잣대를 들이밀며 반대할 이유가 없다.
Understanding of ‘The Flea’-the reading of John Donne’s This poem is all about the persuasion, the secular persuasion that the speaker trying to convince his lover to make love together. In this process of persuasion, he is using the image of a flea. How could ‘Flea’ work, as an excuse of arguing that the two of them should have a love affair, which seemingly have no relations?Since the flea sucked first his blood, then her blood, so that their blood is mixed together (three lives in one flea sphere), he says that they have already been made as one in the body of the flea. Besides, the flea pricked her and got what it wanted without having to appeal to her. The speaker is arguing “how little” the thing that she denies him of, that is is trivial as a flea bite. He makes it clear that flea bite and the sexual affair are the same. The speaker uses the bite that he and the woman have sustained to justify their being joined together. Inside the flea, they are mingled; and that mingling cannot be called “sin, or shame, or loss of maidenhead. Thus flea is not guilty but rather an innocuous and even sacred being, because he paints the flea as a holy thing. Flea is the marriage bed and marriage temple since the creature sucked their bloods. By using these words like ‘marriage temple’ we see that he started with something very secular but generally dignifies the idea. The reference to the Christian concept of "three lives in one” helps with it too. Besides arguing for the sanctity of the flea’s life, the speaker is also arguing that he and the lady have already bypassed the usual vows of fidelity and ceremony of marriage.However, he fails in his defense of the flea, because “Cruel and sudden,” his lover has now killed the flea, “purpling” her fingernail with the “blood of innocence.” The woman’s disdain for him and his suit becomes more apparent as he claims she is “apt” to kill him following her habit of killing fleas, but he offers that she should refrain from harming the flea because in so doing she would add suicide by destroying the vessel holding her blood too. In fact, he says, she would be guilty of “sacrilege, three sins in killing three”. clearly uses this insect as a metaphor for a sexual relationship between a man and a woman. And by act of killing a flea, she attempts to unravel the speaker’s argument that the flea represents a sacred bond between them; the flea is simple to kill and nothing has been lost, and the single drop of blood will not be missed. Thus there is no reason to have love relations.BibliographyIntroduction to English literature, Ewha institute of American studies, 2013“The Flea Summary”. Sparknotes, 12 June 2015
Reading of Edward Said's "Culture and Imperialism"In Culture and Imperialism, Said focuses on three major metropolitan cultures British, French and especially American to show how even their current identities are the product of power. Though the formal age of empire has ended, its sustaining ideology and political practices persist. Thus, though not in a direct way, imperialism still continues. It is more evident when you look at the relationship between the States and the Arab world.Some readers may disagree to Said's belief, saying that “today’s world has a highly developed social media and transportation, that there couldn’t be one-direction effect anymore”. However, I strongly disagree with those critics. When you take a closer look at the media, it would be easy to see that the mass media is being played by the ‘rule of the States’. Broad range of media as cinema, radio and television, are still largely from the U.S. production with the U.S. ideology. For example, let’s say that Hollywood produces a film about the Gulf War. They would likely show the patriotic U.S. soldiers dying, fighting for their nation and even for the world, describing how brave Americans are. By casting world famous movie stars and making fabulous graphics, the impression of the movie would definitely be multiplied. Of course, those cruel scenes would be excluded for sure. Then those people around the world watching the film would unconsciously get the perception of the States as good and justice, whereas the other, bad and barbaric. This is how the indirect imperialism still works.Even though I have been growing up as a Korean, my perspective on world relations was more likely of a Westerner’s, probably because of the effects of media I’ve been exposed. This After reading “Culture and Imperialism”, I was able to have a chance for newglobal vision.
Understanding of the Place ‘Yalta’-the reading of Anton Chekov’s In the story, there is a male character Dmitri Gurov who is a Moscow bank worker, married but having an unhappy relationship within. While vacationing in Yalta, he encounters the young lady with a little dog, Anna Sergeyevna, also vacationing, while her husband remains at home. They are both married couple respectively, but they are soon engaged in an affair, and spend most of their time together. As time goes by, they’ve got to leave Yalta and say good bye to each other. However, even after returning to Moscow and his daily routine, he’s not able to stop thinking of Anna and does not able to stand the daily life anymore. So he travels to Anna's house and seeks her out again. Gurov realizes that he’s truly in love with her and wonders how they can continue. While they talk of finding a plan, the story ends without a resolution.How come everyday routine in Moscow became so hard for Gurov, after coming back from Yalta? All this change of awareness, the moment of epiphany comes from the special place ‘Yalta’. What role does this place called ‘Yalta’ play of ?Yalta is the place of freedom, while making a complete comparison with Moscow. While Moscow represents a place of everyday life, the former presents something creative, as we can be a totally different person at the vacation spot. Even the freezing wheather of Moscow symbolizes the life that is mundane and tedious, incapable of appreciating the beauty of life. Yalta, however is a place of epiphany to Gurov, because he finally gets his enlightenment there after having long years of meaningless and empty life. This change of awareness comes from the scene of terrifying nature, after the first love affair with Anna. Encountering with the sublime beauty of nature, he feels himself as really fragile and vulnerable being, and all those thoughts he had until just before, becomes very trivial and insignificant. He finally gets to know his inner strength, ‘a human nobility’ which is the power of appreciating beauty and aspiring to be something great. That is the very reason why in Moscow, Gurov feels lonely and cold and isolated. He longs for Anna and finds himself dissatisfied with the life he's living. Anna is a ‘coessential’ being with Yalta to him. Because Yalta, there are the colors, scents, and sounds of love, possibility of human greatness everywhere. Again, the reason that Anna becomes so important for him is contributed by Yalta at some extent. As the place is packed with the romantic and majestic scenes between the two lovers.Yalta is the setting that is all about the deviation, because Gurov experiences totally different moments compared to Moscow. In addition, as Patrick Kennedy a reviewer states, this place combines Gurov and Anna together and make them become everything to one another; Checkov’s grand imagery makes us experience the depth of their emotions.
I found Act3, scene 1 as very intriguing moment of complex reversal of gender and East identity. : As soon as a Western man comes into contact with the East- he's already confused. The western has sort of an international rape mentality towards the East. Basically, "Her mouth says no, but her eyes say yes." The west think of itself as masculine-big guns, big industry, big money-so the East is feminie-weak, delicate, poor... but good aat art, and full od inscrutable wisdom- the feminine mystique.