Comments About Brazil

I just read an interview with Terry Gilliam (thanks for the link Debbie) and I was surprised to read that Gilliam professes to be a skeptic and not a cynic. I, like Debbie felt that the ending was too much like that of the movie 1984. Gilliam states in his interview that an optimist should be able to find a ray of hope in the ending. How do you find hope in an ending where the lead character goes completely insane and has had no positive affect on society despite his incredible efforts? How is this ending not cynical?

From a surveillance perspective I found the concept of making someone disappear by removing them from a central information system interesting. In today’s Vancouver Sun there is an article about a company that is trying to start a monopoly for a central agency to manage an individual’s global Internet identity. It’s referred to as a globally unique personal identifier (or gupi).

Article Link: http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/business/story.html?id=a4c38f15-400f-473c-8c09-cf9ac9c49e1b

It seems like a central repository for your identity just makes it easier for all of your information to be lost at the slight of a key. The article highlights the benefits to consumers in that they don’t need to maintain separate identities at multiple websites but it doesn’t discuss the drawbacks or potential for abuse.

In the movie, I appreciated the visual play on the bug that falls into the machinery to create the error. I heard about the first known computer bug of this sort when I was studying computer science. It was Dr. Grace Hopper who first found a moth in a computer. This started the term computer bug and the concept of software ‘debugging’. Apparently the bug now resides in the National Museum of American History. I think the idea of computer bugs is an important concept to keep in mind in mind as we move further into our technological society, particularly where our identities are concerned.

Gilliam did an amusing yet clear depiction of the after affects of glitches in technology. You can read a good overview of the “the computer bug” and the consequences at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_bug. I wonder how many people will think about possibilities that may result from computer bugs before rushing to sign up for their GUPIs.

I also appreciated Gilliam’s comment on the human factor, specifically the actions of Sam’s boss. It was clever to show how the boss used Sam to do his dirty work so it could not be traced back to him. You realize just how sly he was when Sam’s crimes are read out against him and the list includes the unauthorized visit to return the cheque to the widow. I could instantly recall Sam’s boss having him forge his signature on documents, which meant he was free of any blame relating to Sam’s actions even though he authorized everything that Sam did. The boss acted helpless but he was actually very clever.

As Gilliam says, the movie is quite complex and I have no doubt that I would get more out of it watching it again.