Steve Reich's Dolly

These two videos are actually two separate scenes from the same work, "Dolly," which is itself only third act of a three-part 'opera' by Steve Reich.  The three movements of this opera, Hindenburg, Bikini, and Dolly, all explore the nature of technology in an ambivalent light.  The first excerpt, which opens the act, is about cloning, and the second posted/final excerpt is titled 'Robots/Cyborgs/Immortality.'  For the libretto/text, which you can read here, Reich collected interviews with some of the most prominent people working in the fields of robotics, cyborg sociology, technology theory, and genetics, including Richard Dawkins, James Watson, Sherry Tucker, and Ray Kurzweil.  Then, using a technique that he uses in several pieces, Reich splices, repeats, and otherwise messes with the interviews (but with minimal hard/destructive editing), and notates the natural pitch and rhythm of the voices so that the acoustic instruments can double/reinforce them.

One of the things that I think draws me to this work (honestly, Reich is sometimes hit-or-miss with me) is the fear and apprehension that frames this work.  He frames this act with a religious/spiritual mysticism that appears to be inevitably doomed for failure.  In the first part, Reich intersperses lines from Genesis, 'sung' by Kismet, a semi-intelligent robot designed by Cynthia Breazeal:

 "And placed him in the Garden of Eden, to serve it and to keep it." 

In the second excerpt, bioethics philosopher Henri Atlan, with a humanoid robot in the background, recounts the story of the golem, when the prophet Jeremiah betrays God by creating a man out of mud. After being created, the golem tells Jeremiah:

"When people meet other people on the street, they will not know whether you made them, or G-d made them.  Undo me."

These lines allude back to original sin, and warn of the danger in attempting to artificially replicate life.  Yet at the same time, Reich fills the act with scenes of wonder and amazement, and we get the sense that he is trying to capture the monumental technological renaissance that we are currently experiencing.  The interviewees represent a pantheon of great men and women who are heralding a new birth/state of creative existence.  How do we reconcile our awe at the sublime awesomeness of new technology with our ethical and religious inklings that this is something that we shouldn't be doing -  something that we're not ready to do?  This is a new ethics, a cyborg ethics, in which our desire to help the world and improve our own lives through technology becomes intimately linked with our ability to destroy.  Our genius comes at odds with our inability to see the complex cultural net that all of our creations fall into.  Are we creating a new world, or destroying the one that we have?

"We, and all other animals, are machines created by our genes." - Richard Dawkins

"The script for human life... is three billion letters" - James D. Watson

By doing this, Reich is essentially weakening his subject position, which destabilizes the relationship between the listener and composer as God, the Creator, just as Kismet and cloning blur the lines between scientist and God.  He weakens the authority of the 'creator,' and strengthens the ability for the products to 'speak for themselves. And I think that it's perfect.  It's this sense of morbid fascination that drives the work.

"Once upon a time there was carbon based life, and it gave over to, silicon based life. I don't view the prospect with equanimity. Maybe I'm just sentimental." - Richard Dawkins

Ultimately, I see this act as more than just a critique, though.  I think it's a plea to take a step back and to contextualize our work.  It's a plea for a cyborg/robot ethics.  Kismet, the robo-prophet (or is it Anti-Christ?) ends the act, singing:

"Every creature has a song. What do they say?"

And the robot also sings, but will we listen?