Yesterday, I wrote to question the limits of taking on other people’s voices in the first person as a poet, as if the poet had actually experienced the topic to know rather than just imagined it? That is, how legitimate is it for a poet to write about others’ experiences in their own voice, as if s/he could represent the collective voices of humanity? Today, I write to ask questions about a slightly different, but much more limited, poetic collective writing approach. What if the poet still wrote in the first person under the voice of another, or others, but that they had some connection to the poet? That is, collective in this sense means a very finite collective of people, rather than humanity or some segment of it as a collective. Put it another way, instead of the poet writing in the first person as if they were anyone in the human race collective that they pleased, rather than in the third person to tell about it, here, the poet is writing for all members of some small collective, like each member of a family, or both members of a couple, etc. They’d not only be a collective poet to some extent, but would also be writing collective poems where there are contributions from more than one person, all in the first person voice. How acceptable would that be, whether in general or depending on the situation?
There are enough artificial intelligence (AI) robots being designed these days that within a few years, you’ll probably not be far from one at many times in your lives, especially if you live in a city. Some of these robots elicit a positive reaction from people. Others, not so much. Some of this is due to what they do, but a lot of it is due to what they look like. Yes, we’re humans. We judge a lot of things, or form a lot of our judgement of things, including people, unfortunately, by their looks. We also seem to feel threatened in getting replaced by robots if they were too much like us. So what can one do to create a more visually appealing robot? Here are some thoughts.