Jorge BM
Aug 12, 2024
Droids and Diversity: Reimagining Technology Design Through Star Wars
Have you ever wondered how you communicate with AI assistants like ChatGPT or Alexa? Do you say hello? Do you say, "Please"? Do you have the politeness to inquire, "How are you"? Or do you simply command what you require? That is what two MIT researchers asked themselves in order to have a deeper understanding of the interactions between machines and people that are causing human societal concerns. I’d like to illustrate their work using the most famous robots ever imagined, the Star Wars droids.
A Social Machine that falls into dominion categories
First of all, the concept of a social machine was not randomly chosen by Kelly Wagman and Lisa Parks in their study titled “Beyond the Command: Feminist STS Research and Critical Issues for the Design of Social Machines “ [1]. The researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) deliberately envisioned a machine as an object meant to develop and engage in social relationships with people, since this object is aware of social inequities or social prejudice. After all, technological designs embed the human properties implemented by its designers and developers. In this sense, Wagman and Parks, using the example of robotics, defined four dominant categories in which the human-robot relation can be categorised. The first one is to consider “robots as tools”. This category falls on the emphasis of technical functionality, therefore, there is an implicit hierarchy as the human dominates and controls the robot. But, for the sake of Star Wars fans, I will use the term “droids” when referring to the Star Wars universe [2]. Let’s put the example of R2-D2. The famous blue and white astromech opened heaven knows how many blocked gates to allow Luke and others to get through when battling empire soldiers. Or, in simpler words, it was being used as a tool to open doors, basically a key. Of course, this droid was not a mere object, as he had some temper that got him into trouble on a few occasions but, the domination and control from the human characters are imprinted subtly here. However, at least R2 was showing some signs of defiance, but when referring to C-3PO, our golden protocol droid, this was the epitome of anthropomorphising; also known as “Robots as human-companions”. This category is exemplified as C-3PO symbolised the most accurate anthropocentric projection of a human, trying to make him look more humanoid. In this regard, the underlying message can lead to an unintentional (or maybe not) oppressive hierarchy and relations. Again, how many times Han Solo, Leia, Chewie and Luke ask the droid to turn himself off? In fact, the golden droid got its fair share of social bias, as he was discriminated against when he could not translate into “Sith” language for not being a galactic republic language and being programmed to not do so (Ok, this is from the new movies and there are quite a few things that do not make sense [3]). Besides, mostly everyone was very mean to C-3PO, continuously demonstrating an illusory superiority. But let’s remind readers that the golden tin speaks 6 million languages, so a bit of credit should be given.
Similarly, there is the category of "Robots as animals and creatures". This is well-represented in Star Wars droids, as ingraining animal or creature identities into robotics has the ability to reinforce notions of human control in interspecies relationships. For instance, let’s consider the "imperial probe droid" dispatched to the freezing planet Hoth to find the rebel alliance's hidden stronghold. This droid looks like a monster with five manipulator arms. Additionally, also from the Empire forces, the box-shaped "mouse droid", which was discovered racing through the hallways of the Death Star headquarters and star destroyers, emulated the mice-like behaviour in being a timid creature patrolling around avoiding direct contact [4]. However, it is true that Star Wars does not frequently reproduce particularly recognised model creatures, as there are various civilised species on all planets in the universe with different features and qualities. Nonetheless, the rights and needs of these species or creatures are rarely addressed in Star Wars droids.
(Left: Mouse droid - Right: Imperial probe droid)
However, there is an even more shocking domain category in robotics that illustrates that we, humans, can be an oppressive force in social relations with droids. This is called “Robots as slaves”. This category involves master-slave dynamics, that embed a pattern similar to the “robots as tools” category. However, although both concepts are etymologically linked since they allude to machines conducting forced mechanical work [5], there is still a prevalent menace in which humans also learn how to treat other humans less kindly. This is widely referred to in Star Wars droids. For instance, the Tatooine-based Jawas species have highly developed Sandcrawlers for scavenging, which they use to sell droids in the marketplace. Also, some droids are made to torment other droids, as the “8D8 skeletal smelter droid” tortures the battery-like “GNK power droid” in the Return of the Jedi film. Finally, we also have the “Pit droids” from “The Phantom Menace” prequel, which are handy for fixing podracers, but are exposed to the dangers of overheated engines, flamethrowers and technically illegal podracing in the galactic republic.
C3PO and R2D2 from Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope.
Improving Human-Machine relations
After realising what a hard time some droids had in the films, I wondered, as Wagman and Parks, are we assuming how our mental models of designing technological objects speak of our oppressive history of power dynamics, labour and enslavement? To assert that the design of social machines is more flexible, less preset, and not totally dependent on human projection or control, the researchers created a conceptual model. This model is based on three basic relations: agency, equitability and the category of “other”. The first relationship, agency, relates to how the social machine functions on its own, engages with others, and brings up or influences change. Put another way, human behaviour occurs because an object has the ability to define the social environment. The second relation illustrates the limitations of human knowledge, power, control, or invincibility and discusses the equitability that a social machine should possess. This concept aims to prevent a power dynamic in which one entity eventually dominates the other. Finally, the third relation is the other category, in which social machines are a conceptual category distinct from people and animals, creating a place to perceive machines other than slaves, tools, human companions, etc.
In this sense, I have identified how most recent Star Wars films portray droids in a less oppressing way, and, in some cases, embed the non-anthropomorphic figurations and mutuality described by Wagman and Parks. For instance, the new Star Wars sequel trilogy brought us BB-8, the big bug eye, football-shaped and orange astromech that, let’s be honest, is one of the most saveable elements of the new movies. Anyway, this droid, despite his playful personality, also has scenes during the films in which he is more than just a human-companion or tool. Actually, contrary to what it may seem, Poe, the pilot of the resistance corps, is not considered the owner of BB-8, as the droid has the autonomy to decide who is the companion, instead of the other way around. Surprisingly, there are some moments in which Poe differs from the stereotypes of the human-droid relation as this is based on trust, kindness and mutuality. For example, in the scene below [6], when Poe, Finn, and BB-8 reunite, the machine is accepted as a collaborating "other," implying a more nuanced integration of the agency and demonstrating that the droid has a complex sociotechnical relationship in the shape of a friendship that indicates mutuality.
Finally, another example from a recent series of the galactic saga is the droid appearing in “The Acolyte”, called “Pip”. This droid is customised by Osha with a wide array of tool attachments with integrated personality. However, despite portraying the droid as a handheld repair tool, there is an intentional non-anthropomorphic figuration as seen in some scenes of the series when Pip complains about not being maintained properly, or when Osha tells the droid that she loves him. This is an example of an acknowledgement of a human and a droid mutuality going both ways.
I believe there is a practical outcome in the design process that we need to experiment with, as these are not simply machines that we use, these are the projection of ourselves
Pip is a handheld repair droid that Osha has customised with a variety of tool attachments - The Acolyte - Star Wars
Crafting social machines
All of these are examples of design solutions for fictional robots that embed particular human aspects, appearances or traits projected onto machines. However, Wagman and Parks go one step further and provide a novel strategy with their social machines model to overcome the current power dynamics and reductive stereotypes. From the start, this proposal demonstrates engrained hegemonic beliefs as well as the obstacles of unconventional thinking in the social machine design area. In doing so, I consider there are opportunities to rethink technology design acknowledging the human dynamics inbuilt with objects. These objects are being used daily, and, in the same way that there is a projection of your human condition when you command ChatGPT to get you answers, it is interesting to discover how these mediated relations would perform integrating agency, equitability and the “other” conceptual category.
In this sense, I wonder if most of us are simply oblivious to these design challenges, as there may be more imperative needs when developing technology, however, Star Wars left a mark on legions of fans, thanks, in part, to their vision on droids and technology. I believe there is a practical outcome in the design process that we need to experiment with, as these are not simply machines that we use, these are the projection of ourselves, and, as our species have done in the past, we have always pursued a better future. Optimistically, with these small fundamental and conceptual integrations of social machines, there is a new hope….
Resources
1. Wagman KB, Parks L. Beyond the Command: Feminist STS Research and Critical Issues for the Design of Social Machines. Proc ACM Hum-Comput Interact 2021 Apr 13;5(CSCW1):1–20. doi: 10.1145/3449175
2. Coggan D. The droids of the Star Wars universe, ranked. 2023. Available from: https://www.cbr.com/star-wars-rise-of-skywalker-c3po-sith-block/
3. Caicoya B. Star Wars: C-3PO’s Biggest Limitation in Rise of Skywalker Makes NO Sense. Available from: https://www.cbr.com/star-wars-rise-of-skywalker-c3po-sith-block/
4. Star Wars Fandom. Star Wars encyclopedia. Available from: https://starwars.fandom.com
5. Online Etymology Dictionary. Robot Etymology. Available from: https://www.etymonline.com/word/robot
6. Star Wars Soundtrack. Finn And Poe Reunite - 4K Ultra HD - Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lkRYw0-IJ4
