An Unholy Amalgamation of Teen Dystopia Topics

In an effort to synthesize (some of) the points raised in the articles... and disregarding our definition of utopia for the more colloquial utopia/dystopia dichotomy... here is a very vague string of questions:

What do you think the agitprop of a YA utopia would be, if any? Would teens still take to the genre? What was your favorite YA dystopia (if any), and why?

I know I loved the idea of dystopias as a teen, I get their attraction: everything is LIFE OR DEATH and DO OR DIE and ME AGAINST THE WORLD—the apocalyptic themes of these dystopias are not so unfamiliar to teens.

And in case no one has any thoughts on that, here's an unrelated photo posted by my aunt this morning that outraged me; maybe it will spark some sort of utopian discussion. Or maybe it will make you feel, idk.

Nosedive rating

I give this society/utopia/dystopia 1 star. 

I enjoyed this episode of Black Mirror and while watching, I was trying to figure out why the title is "Nosedive". My first thought after watching it through was that it was titled as such due to the amount that this way of life might make someone want to nosedive off a cliff or something along those lines. 
This "life", if you could even call it that, seems like hell in my opinion. Its like Yelp meets Sims meets PsychoPass meets social networking hell. You get to rate people, and based on those ratings you either do well or do poorly in life. This seems like it would qualify as a form of cruel and unusual punishment. It seems to make it impossible to have a single bad day, ever. Or if you are having a bad day, I guess you should just not interact with anyone at all. But for some people that might lead to yet another bad day and without social interaction they may never stop having bad days. Anyway, I need to stop before I go off on a tangent, and I had another point I wanted to mention.
One thing I am extremely curious about is how this would work in other situations, such as college. Would your rating be treated the same as a GPA is treated now? Would people be turned away from certain schools due to low rating? Would people be sought after due to higher ratings? 
I was also wondering how this would work for relationships, jobs, different ages, parents to kids and vise versa, etc.
These were only some of my main thoughts surrounding this episode. 

Consequences in Psycho-Pass

As we come to an end of our divulge into Psych-Pass, I actually enjoyed the series MUCH better with subtitles rather than the dub (RIP Kagami). I have question that I was pondering while I was watching the last episode where Kogami (Kagomi?) is being chased and is viable for lethal execution via the Dominator. Would the society change if there was a way to really reduce your crime-coefficient and nothave a certain person be forced into the life of an Enforcer after it dips below or becomes ‘hazy’? Would the world in Psycho-Pass be better if it was less permanent in its consequences for those who become latent criminals or psycho-hazards? I could also see how this makes the concept of the already muddy morals of Psycho-Pass even more messy.

I have food poisoning so enjoy this unrelated pic of true Utopian leader, Sailor Moon!

(giphy.gif)

Crime Prevention

“Being a detective isn't about bringing someone down; rather, it should be about protecting someone.” Enforcer Shinya Kogami, Ep2

In the first episode, Akane’s instinct was to protect the victim, and she even knew how to manipulate the Sibyl System so the woman would get paralyzed rather than injured or killed, but she had to explain her choices. Is the Sibyl System of Psycho-Pass a more or less effective system of crime prevention than the Precrime of Minority Report? Additionally, what does the concept of stopping crimes before they happen say about human nature?

Ethically Right???

I didn’t finish the movie, but I got pretty far into it. I guess my question is just about ethics. I really have a hard time wrapping my head around the idea of arresting people and basically trapping them forever before they’ve ever done anything wrong. I feel like there should be some type of remediation or like help given to them. I can understand and agree with stopping the crimes before they happen, but how the person is treated and dealt with afterwards seems a bit extreme. 

Punishment in Utopia

With the use of “halos” as the ultimate ‘demise’ for a citizen in Minority Report, I was wondering what parallel ways we can think of how a citizen of a utopia is ‘taken care of’ in our other readings. In Herlandthe citizens are not given the right to have children, and the men are educated and held captive. In Caves of Steelthere is the threat of declassification. In Unwindthere is a chance that our characters will be ‘unwound’ (more on that next class). Is ‘haloing’ a depraved form of punishment or a light one? Do the forms of punishment in a utopia show that it is truly enlightened?

Technology as a vehicle

Minority Report is science fiction in the truest sense, using advanced or impossible technology to explore a question; the difference between intent and action. It also shows the problems inherent to absolute belief in a supposedly infallible system. Are there any other examples, from our readings or the real world, which support the argument made by the movie/ short story?

The Future and Absolutes

Okay, my brain isn't sciency all too often or all too well. And the future is like, impossible to think about once I scale it to a certain point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future

The likely extinction date for humankind? How about the heat death of all stars? This is one of my favorite articles on Wikipedia. One of the reasons for that is that it could all be completely wrong (probably not, but possible). Not because it's Wikipedia, but because it's impossible to predict the future "with absolute certainty." So, I don't trust anything on this article "with absolutely certainty."

Back to The Minority Report. If it's impossible to think of the universe with any kind of certainty, how could we ever predict our own humanity with absolute certainty? Precogs are admittedly flawed!
Is it worth it to be wrong some of the time to take precautions all of the time? People are wrongfully sentenced today, even without a Precog system, and it's horrific.

What are the consequences of human error in prediction? Even if the state possesses the ability to predict crimes better than the layperson (which in itself is arguable), is it a valid system of prosecution if they can never predict anything with certainty?

knowing or not knowing?

I would think that knowing everything they are likely or unlikely to get/have would make them more unhappy. I had the choice of being tested for the mutation for ovarian cancer and I chose not to have the test done because there is nothing I can do about it now and knowing would only make me unhappy and worrisome. This would impact my life negatively and would not help at all. The idea that they know the percentage of if they’ll have depression or a heart issue or anything else is scary and I think it would only make living harder to be honest. But on the other hand, knowing some things can help people to make choices in there lives to avoid them or to be safer in the long run. Like for me, I am able to get regular check ups for ovarian cancer and do some other little things to decrease my chances of getting it. 

Im wondering what everyone else thinks about this. 

Apathetic towards Empathy

On finishing the novel, I did not see the point in. Lauren having ‘sharing’ or why it was really necessary to the plot of the novel. I know we found other settlers of Acorn that also had it. I know that it made Lauren’s journey through the wasteland much harder, but I found it made me feel less immersed in the middle of a battle when she would wound an attacker and then she too would be wounded. It took me out of the action scenes and made me want to know what was happening with Harry, Zhara, or the other travelers.

I’m interested to know how others felt about Lauren’s hyper-empathy? And did it enhance the reading experience for you? I wonder if Butler had a larger plan for the Empaths in the trilogy and this novel was just the introduction.

Short questions?

Do you see see the Parable of the Sower as a anology for purgatory?

What flaws if any do you have with Luaren and Earthseed?

Do you see any parallels between this book and today’s society?

Will this book makes Baughman’s list of books that make him go hot damn?

On Keith's death

I've been thinking a lot about Keith. Although he seemed pretty predisposed to being a horrible person, his death speaks to the different levels of horrible that people are capable of being outside of the neighborhoods. Although Keith maims someone will a gun to take their stuff (likely fatally), he comes from a place of wanting to provide for himself and his family. The way that Keith's body is found is to suggest that he pissed off someone who was on a new level of a horrible person. Because of the useless police investigation, I am still left wondering so much about the details of Keith's death and more so why there is a lack of them. Is it at all surprising that Keith was killed the way that he was? Was he destined to reach the level of horrible that drug cartels are capable of? Was he destined to paint his head and light himself on fire? Or, alternatively, was Keith's death a freak accident, and was he onto the right idea about how to make more money for his neighborhood?

Space! Or No?

My question for the day comes from the debate between Lauren and her father, applied to a modern-day debate. Is it feasible to think about starting to colonize other planets with over population continuing to occur? Or is it better (an more cost efficient) to find new ways to create a comfier, healthier way of life on Earth without making any of the populace uncomfortable or putting them in a ‘bad position’ (this could mean a number of bad things depending on which scope you’re viewing from).

What Makes a Utopia?

While reading, I found myself thinking about the objectives and purposes of the worlds presented within the Utopia's we've seen. In Brave New World, people are decanted and bred for specific roles, and they are clean, safe, and sterile within their boundaries. The overwhelming drive behind their world is to live for pleasure and order. In The Caves of Steel, their New York City is run by a desire to live collectively and sustainably within their own bubble, however limited or dangerous that may be. Parable of the Sower, however, seems rooted in necessity, poverty, and survival. Lauren brings forth a lot of philosophical questions that not only reveal her current utopia, but one that she envisions for the future.

So, do Utopias stem from the thoughts and idealisms of the few or of the many? And what does the author reveal by the subtle (or unsubtle) forces at play within their world-building, as I mentioned above? So far we've been privy to Lauren's construction of an Earthseed philosophy that dithers on change. How is change important to Utopia - both in the ones we've seen (as used as contrasts to something bad or lesser) and the one(s) we strive for in our own reality?

https://sites.google.com/a/depauw.edu/the-parable-of-the-sower/_/rsrc/1472852703182/earthseed/strong__caring_hands_by_Rin_Uzuki.jpg?height=257&width=320

The Role Space

One thought that stuck with me throughout my reading was the role of space in this particular future. Is space a potential solution to problems on earth? If so who would benefit from this solution? What portion of the population would these efforts actually help? Or is it more likely that space functions as a distraction and prevents progress that could have a greater effect?

Robots v Humans?

While reading Caves of Steel, it got me thinking about robots and how they compare to humans. I wanted to bring up a possible discussion question, do we think that this novel is trying to touch on the idea that robots are superior to humans? Do we think that it is trying to prove this or at least explore this idea through Daneel and R Sammy? They are different and have different abilities that can be compared, but they are definitely not your average "human" per say.

Here is a picture of some of the robots I thought of in my head while reading :)

 

Mystery Solved?

What did the class think of the culprit reveal? Were you surprised or did you predict it? Did Asimov’s writing style and/or worldbuilding help or inhibit the effectiveness of the reveal?

Elijah

Does the class still think that Elijah has no character development? I think hes changed a lot since the beginning especially after meeting Dr. Fastolfe (120).

The Pillars of Utopia

As I read the first part of Brave New World, I was struck by its industrial, that's-just-how-it-is mood and setting. I was immediately reminded of Soylent Green and its controlled environment where people may not choose their livelihood. Rather, they are provided it and must fall in line. This text follows that same idea as it introduces the world in an almost detached, lecture-style. The imbalance of power between people are obvious, and a specific quote made me pause and think on broad terms about Utopias and Dystopias alike.

(For context, here's the quote: "They'll grow up with what the psychologists used to call an 'instinctive' hatred of books and flowers...they'll be safe from books and botany all their lives" (Huxley 30)).

Why is it that, whether the Utopia is presented in either a positive or negative light, the first aspects of it to be addressed, enforced (in a foundational way to how the society runs), or controlled is education/entertainment/communication and agriculture? What reasons do the Director and D.H.C. have for choosing these specific things - innocent flowers and books - to frighten babies for besides revealing to readers that limiting the people from prose/poetry and plants of the earth, which can be sown and cultivated, is an effective tactic for dominance? In short, why are these two symbols always addressed in some way in Utopias?

p.s. How have these two symbols already been mentioned or oppressed in the text? How will it continue to be?

https://bdn-data.s3.amazonaws.com/blogs.dir/364/files/2015/10/ST2685h-Books-and-flowers.jpg

More Predestination!

As we look at our first dystopia, I cannot help but think of some of the reoccurring themes, such as social castes, within Brave New World and how they are still similar to the utopias that we have read. It shows how even when coming from a logical place intended to fix a problem, a different problem is created. I'm talking about the need for some utopias, and now dystopias, I suppose, to create classes forced under predestination.

My question is: how does the society of Brave New World benefit from having children in different intellectual castes? As it is so contradictory to the modern educational concept that those lowest below the curve need the most help, how could a society that broadened intellectual divides use that practice to its advantage? Is the Alpha Beta system even more harmful than the Gold Silver system held by the Utopians?