There’s something wholly human about Jennifer Egan. She’s a master of her craft, but humble. Well-spoken, but soft. Curious, but afraid. Any and every chance I get to hear speak, I listen with wrapt attention.
She recently spoke with Dan Harris on his podcast, Ten Percent Happier. Their conversation covered a range of topics, from discovering one’s unconscious thoughts to the fetishization of authenticity. But my favorite exchange found Egan and Harris discussing ChatGPT and the cultural conversation surrounding AI.
Egan begins by doing something rare–undermining her expertise. “I should start by saying I’ve never used ChatGPT. So, am I even qualified to say a word? All I comment on is the freak out.”
I would make the case Egan is exceptionally qualified. Her latest novel, The Candy House, explores the societal ramifications of a technological advancement that allows individuals to externalize and share their thoughts, memories, and entire consciousness. While a work of fiction, this interlocking collection of short stories serves as a complex metaphor for the rise of social media and performative authenticity.
As far as her thoughts on AI, Egan opines that there’s a large missing piece in the cultural conversation: an optimistic picture of the way forward.
“Where is the utopian vision of what this is going to do for us?” she asks. “Because usually, that’s what leads and the unintended consequences follow, sometimes on a very long timetable…The dystopian seems to be leading. And that’s a little bit of a change. That’s interesting to me. I’m not quite sure what to make of it. It may just be that we have really stopped believing. I mean, we collectively as a culture are so wary of technology at this point that we are perceiving the potential negative almost before or alongside the promised positives.”
Dan Harris interjects to agree, although commenting he is also “not qualified to opine.” But his statements are just as insightful.
“We now know enough from looking at waves of technological revolutions,” Harris says. “From the industrial revolution–which was amazing on some level, but also led to massive income inequality and lots of negative externalities–the internet and social media, which appeared to have mental health ramifications that are quite negative…Over and over, we see that the utopian visions are, if not totally wrong, at the very least accompanied with something at the opposite end of the spectrum.”
“I’m just wondering if there might be something healthy about the reaction to AI,” Harris concludes. “[Something] like, “Okay, let’s really reckon at the front end here with all that could be wrought as a result of this technology, rather than getting sucked into a utopian story and not dealing with it until several generations later.”
As I find myself sitting in the eye of the hurricane that is the Hollywood Writer’s Strike, a major component of which is the role AI will play in generating written material, Egan’s words offer a little bit of comfort.
While we as humans are historically good at adapting, we’re notorious for not implementing the lessons of the past. As we sit on the cusp of several potential apocalypses, wrought by the unintended consequences of our own technological advances, perhaps there’s hope to be found in the way so many of us would rather pump the brakes instead of step on the gas.
Of course, the question remains: has Pandora’s box already been opened?
joshua chamberlain 