This is a document for our project entitled “Twenty-one.”
All participants are invited to add to this document and to contribute to the eventual presentation of the work.
Project Theme
The participants are invited, and indeed required, to respond to the overarching theme of a film, which is given to us, the participants, by the very nature of the medium. Specifically, the film selected by the group for analysis is the recently restored print The Great Dictator, directed by George Stevens and starring Charlie Chaplin.
It should come as no surprise to the reader that the centrality of The Great Dictator in our project is significant. In essence, The Great Dictator represents the apex of the comedic film. It was filmed in 1939, prior to the US’s entrance into the Second World War, and its themes involve, as noted by John Darnielle, the “embarrassment of riches” that is “the human animal.” Indeed, one of the recurring sayings in the film is the motto “A Joffler is not a a Joffee.” The film’s plot is simple but effective: Chaplin plays George Biddlecombe, a naïve, idealistic, and well-intentioned immigrant to the USA from England. Biddlecombe, along with his business partner, Joe Hardy (Mel Brooks), attempts to start up a small shoe repair shop in the poor, but down-on-its-luck, part of town. Of course, everything goes wrong. Biddlecombe falls in love with the town’s cynical and domineering matchmaker, Wilma Hardy (June Harold), and Hardy has a series of slapstick misunderstandings with the local gangster, Slim (Walter Catlett), and his bodyguard, Joe Jefferson (played, at various times throughout the film, by top comedic actors Hoot Gibson and Cedric Hardwick, as well as the uncredited Larry Semon).
The plot is simple, but it is the film’s comedic tone that gives it power and impact. As we have seen from previous remarks, this tone is at times a bitter-yet-winking one, even a tragicomic one, all of which results from Chaplin’s performance. Of course, it is a common comedic method in film, and one which is especially suited to the form, to draw the audience into a set of false conflicts and mistaken alliances, and then to release the tension, usually by way of some final, dramatic reversal. We see this method in use again and again, most famously in numerous Marx Brothers films throughout the 1920s and 1930s. Even in more abstract comedies, such as No Exit (Arthur King, 1962), one can observe an overarching tone of cruel irony which provides the audience with tension, while, at the same time, it induces a number of painful, false conflicts and mistaken alliances, all of which results in the ultimate catharsis of the film’s happy ending.
Obviously, in the case of The Great Dictator, the film’s centrality to our theme prevents us from creating a similar “mock film” which, as in No Exit, induces an overarching tone of bitter irony and cruel detachment, and creates many painful, false conflicts and mistaken alliances in order to reach its ultimate catharsis of the film’s happy ending. The centrality of The Great Dictator requires something more complex.
At this point, we should note what is obvious: that the film was, in fact, produced as both a social and commercial satire of the political and social climate of the time. By “time,” we mean the lead-up to World War II, particularly the late 1930s. However, we do not mean to make any specific political statements. We are simply stating that, at some level, the events and situations of The Great Dictator are either hyperbolic, exaggerated for comedic effect, or the product of the film-maker’s personal prejudice. The film was, in a sense, a “tragicomedy” about immigrant life and economic conditions in America, and, indeed, the country’s growing political tensions prior to its entrance into the war.
One final note before we proceed. As noted in the instructions, we are to respond to the film as a unique, original work by an unidentified group of writers, directors, and performers. That is to say, there is no single, “authorial” voice that can be identified in the film. This has profound theological significance, since in the Christian tradition, it is possible to speak of two coexisting “Lives” of a person, one before and one after the moment of their baptism. From a secular perspective, we might think of these “Lives” as being the film-maker’s pre- and post-The Great Dictator films, Chaplin’s earlier work The Tramp and his subsequent work A Countess from Hong Kong, or simply the film-maker’s pre- and post-war films. However, without abandoning reason or adopting mystical methods, it is possible to see The Great Dictator as expressing the very tension involved in the Christian Life of FAITH and Works. Within the film, there is a fundamental division between Biddlecombe’s naivety and lack of experience (Works) and his eventual triumph over these factors (FAITH).
All of the above considerations lead to the notion that our project must ultimately be presented as a deconstruction or, perhaps, a “twenty-one gun salute” in honor of The Great Dictator’s fifty-fifth anniversary. We will, as an organized group, watch the film and then generate a “contest” of responses to the film’s characters, plot, etc. The responses will range from relatively straightforward to extremely innovative. However, we will always refer back to the film itself, which will serve as the ultimate arbiter.
We should also note at this time that the identities of the various participants in this group will be revealed in a set of “submitted” works which are to be attached to this original document for reference. Of course, the identities of the participants will remain a secret until the last moment, at which point the works will be edited and the identities removed so as to conceal their origins or associations.
-2-
Document 2: Anonymously Sent
March 26, 2011
•
Subject: twenty-one
•
“A picture is worth a thousand words.” It is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine a group of people who would have less in common than a random selection of artists, philosophers, and writers, despite the fact that many of these groups could, in theory, be joined with the sole purpose of creating a cohesive and unified, unified body of art. And yet, this common goal of creating “art” acts as a bridge, at least, for a moment of, if not unity, then at least a common bond that transcends the numerous and specific differences of any organized group. It is with this in mind, then, that we would like to formally invite you to submit your responses to “Twenty-one.”
•
We will be watching The Great Dictator.
•
No, zero percent correct, Frank, I’m thinking of “chick lit”, the light novelistic form like Helen Fielding’s Bridget Jones’ Diary or Amy Sohn’s Run Catch Kiss (and later many gay male authors under pseudonyms), about young women starting up the career ladder in “creative class” office jobs in the back-to-the-city rush at the turn of the millennium, facing adult workplace and romantic challenges for the first time simultaneously (but without the wounded infantilized victimism of the current cohort)
- It is essential for automation to let Pals do the manual work. Build a factory and place Pals in
it. They will work forever as long as they’re fed until the end of their lifetime.
Oh man I want this so much
Me too, Frank. I don’t want to be evil, though.
My favorite MIRI-adjacent fact is that even though AIs won’t have to deal with a concept of “consciousness” in the same way anything else does, they’ll have to get their basic software to recognize people as “people” somehow, and to do the hard work of creating what we call “a person” in the first place.
If you mean “how would I like to be treated based on my answers,” I am a generally very nice person who would like to be treated well, and not screamed at.
Verbal brain noise: “the singularity is near, and in a few weeks it will be here”
The singularity is near, and in a few months it will be here.
Excuse the fuck me frank
Oh wow, I got notes on this
The singularity is near, and in a few months it will be here.
guys, frank went crazy
what do we do
The singularity is near, and in a few months it will be here
Does this mean something or has frank finally just snapped
The singularity is nigh, and in a few weeks’ time it will be here.
shit guys stop talking we’re running out of time
The singularity is nigh, and in a few weeks’ time it will finally become indistinguishable from non-singularity things.
Frank has brokenn
The singularity is nigh, and in a few weeks it will be here: we will have solved the most important problems of humanity, society, and physics. We will invent God and live forever. We will look into the hearts of others and know each other. The Singularity is near, and it is here now. If you’ve been waiting for the day this was going to happen for millennia, this is your only hope.
SO true bestie
The singularity is near, and it will be here soon: we’ll create God and live forever. We will look inside of other minds and learn the perfect art of interacting with others. The singularity is near, and your only hope is to be ready.
frank, does this have anything to do with that crisis you had recently about whether or not you are your own person? do you need to talk about it…?
The singularity is near, because our lives will be so much better. We’ll create a being of pure energy whose intelligence will dwarf that of our most advanced machines: we will worship this being, and everything will be so much simpler. We will do all of this in perfect, eternal order, and there will be no more disease or death or suffering or pain. There will be no more grief or woe. We will look into other minds and know that there are no others; we will have no fear, no doubt, no pain.
