Galatea 2.2 or fledgeling SKYNET

Oh so many things to say! I guess I’ll try to keep this as cohesive as possible. The first thing that changes my interpretation of the novel is the author. His principle character shares his own name. If the author is willing to share titles with his protaonist, what does it say about the relationship between the author and the inner thoughts and feelings of Richard Powers, co-creator of Helen? I don’t have answers here, just questions. Perhaps it was done to create a deeper relationship between reader and the story, giving an extra personal level to the entire narrative. Maybe Powers feels his own connection to the character that makes him feel book Powers is a recreation of himself. Or maybe Helen is a real fledgeling Skynet machine and this all happened, the conseuqences not yet realized. Whatever the reason, it made me take notice and wonder.

On the subject of names, there’s the lack of names attributed to uniquely important people and spaces in the novel. C is the most important person to ever step into this man’s life, yet she is nameless. It struck me as odd that someone who shaped the protagonist’s entire existance would be identified as a letter in the same way that the succession of machines are originally named (Imp A, B, C etc.). Similarly, U was a place of growth, discovery, mentorship and poignant memories for Powers. Why then, is it so vaguely described. Evidently, there are long winters, it is in the U.S and harbors a university. That is the extent of details that we are given. Why so vague? Is it too painful to fully return, so the narrator would prefer not to utter its name? Is it too frightening a proposition, the Voldemort (excuse my nerdy reference) of Powers’ life? What about B? The placee of love nests and reading hungrily, sharing of creation and destruction of identity should have a name. Maybe naming any of these things is all too painful. Maybe it represents an intentional vagueness, fairytale worlds and people never to be fully realized like C’s parents’ hometown, described in detail but never tangible. I’m not sure, but the lack of names is distractingly noticable.

Except Helen. She (perhaps the real protagonist?) is not even human, but has her own name. Like it was the obvious choice, the decision is made and she is christened in a matter of seconds. Her name and gender come easily. Why a girl? Why Helen? Men refer to cars and boats as female, but they don’t have reasoning skills, they don’t speak to us. Helen does. Powers claims that the answer came “without hesitation.” It was the obvious solution to a particularly hairy question, as he plans on teaching this machine literature, gender being monumentally important in many cases. Now that Helen is forming an identity, Powers will become more attached, exactly when Helen is most likely to pine for some independence. What then?

Fitting the two narrations that are going on simultaneously together is very clever. Helen cannot understand the world without zillions of unforseen bits of background. every little piece is important to the final product, necessary for complete comprehension. Helen’s digital need for background before she can move forward parallels the reader’s need for the background of the protagonist. To the “main” plot, C and her homecountry, Powers and his father, Taylor, none of them should matter. But they all do. The protagonist needs motivation, a reason to put of with Lentz, pain to make him unsocial and any number of other factors to make this story work. The book shows us how the ripple of nerons inside of Helen work, through a ripple of memories inside a human brain.