In Anne Dalke’s discussion section, we discussed the role of humor in Adaptation and in evolution as a whole. We started off with the idea that maybe Adaptation is telling us that humor is key in evolution because it makes us more resilient. Charlie Kaufman is depicted as anxiety-ridden, miserable, constantly suffering from an existential crisis, and unsuccessful. He is obsessed with creating the perfect movie and drives himself nuts with it. Donald Kaufman is depicted as a much more carefree, fly-by-the-seat-of-his-pants guy, and (ironically?) it is his ridiculous screenplay that is successful. Perhaps it is Donald’s humor that helps him be so much happier and more resilient than his brother.

I thoroughly enjoyed the parts of the book that we read but I still have one burning question. I asked about the public and private spheres and how technology is making the private worlds of users more public. Chorost answered my question in class reasonably - I do agree with him that our lives were pretty public before. Smaller towns and communities didn't have much privacy at all and this notion of 'privacy' is something that is new and modern. However, what about data that is 'more' private? (I feel like we have to redefine what we mean by private here.... My version of it is that 'private' can be social - e.g. where you went for dinner and with whom the other night or 'more' private - things like your SSS number etc.)

We talked in our small groups this week about how "truth" is represented in the film "Adaptation." The film appears to begin as a "true story", that of screenwriter Charlie Kaufman struggling to adapt Susan Orlean's book "The Orchid Thief" into a film. As the film progresses, however, events appear to distance themselves further and further from this "true" story, becoming completely sensationalist in its sex and violence-filled conclusion. Yet this progression also demonstrates that the notion of "truth" in filmmaking is ultimately chimeric. All films, narrative films in particular, are complete constructions. The narrative cinema of Hollywood has a highly developed series of cinematic techniques that are used to convey a sense of reality in film.

Something I found interesting in Teknolust was the theme of dependence on others.  Rosetta is dependent on the SRAs in order to live a full life (she can only live the life of a science geek).  In turn, the SRAs are also relaint on Rosetta (shown when they complain when she does not have the time for them). Not until Ruby meets Sandy is she less reliant on Rosetta, yet this just creates a reliance on someone else. The SRAs are reliant on men in order to keep their immune systems healthy.  I think Rosetta is also reliant on men because not until the SRAs see her with a man do they think she can survive on her own.  Both Rosetta and the SRAs absolutely rely on technology in order to communicate (communicate through the microwave). 

Our in class conversation on Monday with author Michael Chorost's skype was certainly dynamic. Although I enjoyed the topics discussed, I found that at one point I asked the wrong question and didn't get the more appropriate one across. If I could get the chance to speak with Chorost again, I'd ask him the following:

 The film is quite bizarre. There is Susan Orlean's story in the book and then there is Charlie's story of how he is trying to incorporate her written work into the screenplay. On top of that, there is Susan's story that extends beyond her book. Adaptation is similar to the other literary works that we have read in class because of the multiple layers in the story. In Generosity, there are the characters and the storyline and beyond that, the ever present narrator reminding the reader of his/her role in constructing and deconstructing the story. In the Plague, the readers are told of a narrator who lies within the story and plot but whose identity is unknown.