I would like to preface this by saying that I am under no circumstances an expert in anything related to artificial intelligence or even technology for that matter. I did, however, play an AI robot on stage recently in Yuval Sharon’s new production of Così fan tutte at the Detroit Opera. Whether that gives me any illusion of authority to speak on the matter of robotics remains to be seen. I did my best to method-act my way through it, but I’d argue that even Meisner himself may have found it challenging.
To set the scene, I attempt to summarize the premise of Yuval’s production as succinctly as possible without giving too much away. Here goes:
Tech giant Don Alfonso has been working hard on his latest product from SoulSync Technologies, an autonomous AI romantic companion, and is ready to present it officially for public purchase. The performance itself is the product launch where Alfonso explains how the technology works, answers questions, and allows the audience to see the AI partners in action. The three “girlfriend” models are named Fiordiligi, Dorabella, and Despina. They are designed by men for men, eradicating any potential uncomfortable, unnecessary conflicts or pesky nagging by amplifying what artificial intelligence does best, i.e. reflect back the information it is fed to create the illusion of perfection.
On day one of their existence, these “girlfriends” are clunky, not only in a physical sense, but in their ability to fluidly move from one projected emotion to the next. As they observe other humans and robots, they absorb the behaviors surrounding them and replicate them, exactly as AI does in reality. Eventually, these “ladies” genuinely experience real human emotions and break out of their manufactured robotic confines. I won’t give the end of the production away, but as viewers, we end up rooting for the AI-er’s precisely because they exhibit such deeply human characteristics: shame, temptation, love, jealousy, and lust.
There isn’t just one moral to this production and months after the premiere, I’m still thinking about all the ways in which it continues to resonate with the development of this technology. Despite what some may want, AI isn’t going anywhere anytime soon and nor should it, perhaps. Within the arts community, given that the technology hasn’t been able to satisfyingly replicate a human voice or even adequate photo editing, we are in a unique position to navigate what it means to live with the aid of AI and to help us collectively understand how it can help us. I think the most important question to ask ourselves is what for? This helps us stay in the driver’s seat. If AI can create a monthly budget for me, organize my emails, sort data, and correct my grammar, have at it. Why wouldn’t we embrace these advances? In the Western world, we’ve made productivity our personality so it seems entirely on brand to me.
But the question of what for? reminds us that the extra time we free up by economizing the number of tasks we have to complete in a day allows us to spend more time being human. What if we chose to engage with these new tools in a way that helped us reclaim our humanness? Instead of spending that extra time doomscrolling, what if we read books, started a new hobby, or just sat there without a screen? If we ditched the idea that being human means being as productive as possible? If we called a friend in order to get a dose of empathy and a different perspective about these doubts we’re experiencing, instead of resorting to an online chat with an algorithm designed specifically to tell us what we want to hear, but not necessarily what we need to hear?
Yes, we absolutely need to monitor the dangers of AI. Yes, we need to make sure we safeguard vulnerable people against some of the horrific accidents we’ve seen on the news recently. But in all reality, AI isn’t going away. We know now that how we as consumers engage with products informs how they are developed, marketed, and sold. Our communal attention determines where the money goes. If we choose to engage with AI for the purpose of freeing us up to spend more time being faulty, imperfect, un-streamlined, always-learning humans, we may just be able to influence how it continues to develop. Let our priorities be that it solve cancer and figure out the physics of renewable energy! I’ll let it do that while I finally figure out how to hold a handstand without the help of ChatGPT, simply because I can choose to do so.
And if all of this optimism turns out to be completely misled, at least we will have enjoyed the last few years of our free lives being undeniably human before the robots truly do take over.
Photos by Austin T. Richey / Detroit Opera
