Cued up from Hayles (2007) and Folsom (2007) I find the ponderance of databases as carefully plotted but also as wildly human, as collateral to whims and unbidden fantasy, and somehow distillable down to a character, an avatar made of code and thought and poorly translatable emotion. Can databases be alive, not because of their content but because of their inherent existence? Is there a metaphorical person meant to shoulder this content? Who lurks behind the curtain of databases? Who is the wizard that ultimately controls the narrative? (88)[MR-05]
[Hayles, 2007; Folsom, 2007, AI Generated Art from Canva, “databases made human”]
Great questions! Who is the wizard, yes, and also when is the wizard? The living quality of databases hints at something like a continuous quality. I was helping my daughter, Is., study for an AP statistics quiz last evening, and one of the important distinctions was that many data-sets are continuous. Relatedly, then, it does seem like databases urge us to consider their tomorrows, or, put another way, what is next for them, whether updates and continuations. True, too, of narrative, and the wizards of the future (or past?) who might tell a story slightly differently and differently again?