Skip to main content

Taking the Red Pill – Glenn Yeffeth (Ed.) ****

It’s an odd one, this. The book is a collection of essays inspired by the 1999 movie, The Matrix. It’s not going to be for everyone, but it can be appreciated by a much wider audience than just movie or science fiction fans. That’s because The Matrix itself is cleverer than the average SF action film, and is an ideal starting point for popular discussions of science and philosophy. Having said that, it’s pretty important to have seen the movie first before reading the book (see links for DVDs below).
As is usually the case with a collection of essays, it’s a mixed bag, so the impressive four star rating includes some 5 star gems, some 3 star so-so pieces and at least one dud. Even so, overall it’s a good mix. There are fascinating explorations of the different themes and inspirations that the writers very cleverly wove together in the The Matrix. Perhaps most interesting are the science/science fiction themes, particularly around artificial intelligence (don’t be put off if you don’t like science fiction – think of this as speculative science). A number of authors point out that the most obvious enormous hole in the science of the film (using human beings as living “batteries”, where actually the net energy flow would be in rather than out) could be interpreted as a misunderstanding – we are told this is what is happening by one of the characters, but he could have got it wrong, and the suggestions in the book are much more sensible. (Of course, what actually happened is the writers got their science wrong, but it doesn’t mean you can’t unpick the situation after the event.)
Also surprisingly effective are a couple of essays that go into the post-modernist influences of the movie. They are strongly present when explained, but won’t be noticed by most in the audience (this reviewer included) – but why should they? What’s great is the essays provide the first explanation of aspects of literary post-modernism that make sense, rather than the usual, much-mocked flow of meaningless jargon lifted from science with little comprehension. You may not agree with the ideas about modern society being obsessed with models of reality rather than reality itself, but it is understandable and interesting, and obviously of very direct relevance to The Matrix.
Perhaps less successful are a couple of religion-oriented essays. The Matrix certainly has strong religious overtones, both in the central figure as reluctant messiah, and many of the discussions that take place – but this is religion as story or myth, rather than driving force for living. Particularly weak is the Buddhist entry, partly because about half the long essay is just explaining Buddhism, and partly because the parallels drawn are so vague you could apply them to practically any movie. And there’s also a piece on the selfish gene (suggesting that our genes control us in the same way the Matrix controls its human inhabitants) that totally misunderstands genetics – perhaps because it’s written by an economist. But, of course, the great thing about an essay format is you can skip over a chapter and it makes no difference to the flow of the book.
Taking the Red Pill was published between The Matrix and its two sequels hitting the screen, so some of the speculation is a little out of date. For instance, it’s pointed out that one of the possible interpretations of the original movie is that even the “real” world outside the Matrix could be another computer simulation – how could they tell? This potential storyline comes up in the second film, where a strange event suggests it is true, but then the writers lose their bottle, and never make use of it. Similarly, there is a lot made in the book about parallels with messiah figures, but it isn’t obvious until the final movie that the writers were very strongly influenced by Frank Herbert’s Dune books, where the central “chosen one” figure suffers the same injury as Neo, the hero of The Matrix, an injury that should cripple him but in fact seems to make him stronger.
Despite this, though, it’s a fun collection of essays that help bring out aspects of a very cleverly constructed film and inspires thought on aspects of science, philosophy and morality – which can’t be a bad thing!

Paperback:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

David Latchman - Interview

Professor David Latchman, CBE, is a leading UK academic and author of a number of science titles, currently holding the position of Vice-Chancellor of Birkbeck, University of London.  As Vice-Chancellor, Professor Latchman is the chief academic and administrative officer, and has been responsible for the development of the university since his appointment in 2003.   Professor Latchman serves as Chairman of the trustees of the Maurice Wohl Charitable Foundation, an organisation dedicated the empowerment of the Jewish community through education, employment, medical advancement, and welfare. He also serves as a trustee of the Maurice and Vivienne Wohl Philanthropic Foundation, as well as a number of other committees centred around education, and scientific and medical research in the UK and Israel.  This interview is for National Book Lovers' Day (August 9th). Why should books be important to us? Books have always been a big part of my life, and for many reasons. My love for them sta

Hothouse Earth - Bill McGuire ****

There have been many books on global warming, but I can't think of any I've read that are so definitively clear about the impact that climate change is going to have on our lives. The only reason I've not given it five stars is because it's so relentless miserable - I absolute accept the reality of Bill McGuire's message, but you have to have a particularly perverted kind of 'I told you so' attitude to actually enjoy reading this. McGuire lays out how climate change is likely to continue and the impacts it will have on our lives in a stark way. Unlike many environmental writers, he is honest about the uncertainty, telling us 'Despite meticulous and comprehensive modelling, we just don't know how bad things will get, nor can we know.' But any climate change deniers seeing this as an escape clause entirely miss the point. The uncertainty is over how bad things will be, but not over whether or not things will be bad. As we are told, 'tipping poi

Philip Ball - Four Way Interview

Philip Ball is a freelance writer and broadcaster, and was an editor at Nature for more than twenty years. He writes regularly in the scientific and popular media and has written many books on the interactions of the sciences, the arts, and wider culture, including H 2 O: A Biography of Water, Bright Earth: The Invention of Colour , The Music Instinct , and Curiosity: How Science Became Interested in Everything. His book Critical Mass won the 2005 Aventis Prize for Science Books. Ball is also a presenter of Science Stories, the BBC Radio 4 series on the history of science. He trained as a chemist at the University of Oxford and as a physicist at the University of Bristol. He is also the author of The Modern Myths . He lives in London. His latest title is The Book of Minds . Why science? As the pandemic has shown, there has never been a time when an understanding of science is essential for making informed decisions. But Covid-19 has also revealed the process of science in action, with