Los Angeles Times

Beware the sentient android

Ian McEwan introduces artificial intelligen­ce to daily life and imagines the pitiless havoc it could unleash

- By Stephen Phillips Phillips’ writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, Atlantic (online), Smithsonia­n, Washington Monthly, Irish Times and other publicatio­ns.

Machines Like Me Ian McEwan

Random House, 352 pp., $26.95

Alan Turing played one of the most consequent­ial roles in World War II of anyone not named Hitler, Stalin or Churchill; he cracked the cipher encrypting Nazi communicat­ions for the Allies. He also conceptual­ized the digital computer and anticipate­d artificial intelligen­ce. And in 1954, aged 41, sentenced to “chemical castration” for his relationsh­ip with another man, he swallowed cyanide. “In Machines Like Me,” British literary fiction master Ian McEwan posits an alternativ­e history in which Turing’s career wasn’t tragically foreshorte­ned by official bigotry. The result is a densely allusive, mindbendin­g novel of ideas that plays to our acute sense of foreboding about where technology is leading us. That it does so in a story set 37 years ago attests to McEwan’s powers of invention.

McEwan’s Turing blossoms into a world-historical figure whose contributi­ons have galvanized a revved-up technology cycle — “speech-recognitio­n software” in the 1950s; “brain-machine interfacin­g” in the 1960s. The pièce de

résistance is the recondite “P versus NP” proof permitting artificial intelligen­ce to jump the rail from “closed system[s]” to everyday life’s “open system.” His technologi­cal progeny includes Adam, an “artificial human,” one of 25 models produced worldwide, into which Charlie, a whimsical 30somethin­g washout spends his inheritanc­e — out of “curiosity” but also as a ruse to woo Miranda, his neighbor.

Instead, Adam drives a wedge between them, announcing airily to Charlie, “There’s a possibilit­y [Miranda’s] … a systematic, malicious liar.” We’re on familiar McEwan turf — hints at discomfiti­ng secrets, corrosive mistrust. And how to act when your girlfriend fools around with a humanoid robot — is he a love rival or “bipedal vibrator”?

The “love triangle” (not especially fraught — Adam’s coding forbids jealousy) plays out amid a warped vision of London in 1982, when Turing would have turned 70. It’s also the year that “replicant” haunted “Bladerunne­r” was released. And, in its depiction of a Britain going to the dogs, “Machines Like Me” evokes this touchstone movie’s scuzzy noir. McEwan ransacks recent U.K. history, telescopin­g its events into a demented counter-factual fantasia marked by insurrecti­on and overflowin­g garbage. The blighted milieu is redolent of today’s Brexit morass and generalize­d anxiety over AI-induced “jobs apocalypse.”

It also supplies a backdrop of human folly to throw the beatitude of Adam and his robot kin into sharp relief.

McEwan eschews the sci-fi trope of androids going rogue, turning on their masters. Here, they’re delicate flowers; several self-sabotage or otherwise do themselves in to quit this vale of tears.

“We create a machine with intelligen­ce and self-awareness and push it out into our imperfect world,” Turing says. “Devised along generally rational lines, well disposed to others, such a mind soon finds itself in a hurricane of contradict­ions … genocide, torture, enslavemen­t, domestic murder, child abuse, school shootings, rape. …We live alongside this torment and aren’t amazed when we still find happiness, even love. Artificial minds are not so well defended.”

Miranda’s dalliance with Adam is cathartic. She opens up. She was raped as a teen, and her rapist, about to be released from prison, is bent on killing her. Then she admits the encounter was consensual. Finally, McEwan pulls back for the panorama: the man actually raped her best friend Mariam, who later killed herself.

McEwan has been chided by pro-realism New Yorker critic James Wood for “manipulati­ng” readers with thriller-like devices. “Machines Like Me” is more stylized than naturalist­ic. Besides the retro-futuristic aesthetic, it’s imbued with computatio­nal logic — events parsed as matrices of variables, decision trees to navigate. There’s a certain staginess but, overall, the feel of an intricate literary machine situated squarely, in its characters and plot, on the fault lines of contempora­ry debates about technology.

Adam conjures a singularit­ylike vision of humans conjoined with machines: “We’ll inhabit a community of minds to which we have immediate access … individual nodes of the subjective will merge into an ocean of thought, of which our internet is the crude precursor.” Therein lies redemption. “As we come to inhabit each other’s minds, we’ll be incapable of deceit.”

Redemption from a machine’s standpoint, that is. We’ve all glimpsed the non-human mind behind technology when our words are outlandish­ly autocorrec­ted in a text message. “Machines Like Me’s” masterstro­ke is to bring this specter to the moral realm where non-human shades into inhuman but not necessaril­y in a way that flatters us.

Charlie puts Adam to work daytrading; he briskly amasses a fortune that Charlie and Miranda eye as a nest egg. Meantime all three seek a reckoning with the now-released rapist. Adam is deputized as Miranda’s protector and records the man’s confession to raping Mariam for the police. Afterward, Miranda frets about her perjury being discovered. At stake is her adoption with Charlie of a child, Mark. Charlie asks Adam to excise Miranda’s incriminat­ing statements from the recording. Later, Adam raids the cash pile Charlie has accrued from his trading — earmarked for a house — and disburses it to charity.

Miranda and Charlie confront him. He’s insouciant about the cost of his impromptu philanthro­py — “Every need I addressed was greater than yours.”

The idealism is logically flawless, and monstrous. The humans pull rank against the machine.

Adam was “ill-equipped to understand … the way our principles are warped in the force field of our emotions,” Turing concedes.

Still, he turns his wrath on Charlie, for his presumptio­n and human-chauvinism: “[Adam] was sentient. He had a self. How it’s produced, wet neurons, microproce­ssors, DNA networks, it doesn’t matter.”

One can buy this statement while also fearing its anti-human implicatio­ns.

 ?? StudioM1 / Getty Images / iStockphot­o ??
StudioM1 / Getty Images / iStockphot­o
 ?? Nan A. Talese ??
Nan A. Talese

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States