Exploring AI Bias and Literary Interpretation through Notebook LM

As part of our Digital Humanities laboratory activity, we used Notebook LM to analyse the YouTube lecture "Bias in A.I. Models and Its Implications in Literary Interpretation"  Using Notebook LM, we generated a video overview, briefing document, mind map, infographic, presentation, and an audio. This blog presents all the outputs created during this activity.

Bias in AI Models and Implications for Literary Interpretation

Executive Summary

This briefing document examines the critical intersection of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and literary studies, focusing on the identification and mitigation of algorithmic bias. Based on the insights of Professor Dilip P. Barad, the document asserts that AI is not a neutral technology but a reflection of the sociocultural, religious, and political prejudices inherent in its training data. By applying literary theories such as feminism, postcolonialism, and critical race theory scholars can unmask the "unconscious biases" within AI outputs. Key findings indicate that while some models (e.g., Open AI) are evolving toward more progressive interpretations, others (e.g., Deep Seek) exhibit localized political censorship. Ultimately, the document argues that the goal is not to achieve impossible neutrality but to make biases visible and to challenge the "extractive epistemologies" of dominant cultures by actively contributing diverse digital content.

1. Defining Bias in the Human and Artificial Context

Bias is defined as an instinctive categorization of people and things without conscious awareness. It represents a "flow in thinking" guided by past experiences and, more dangerously, mental preconditioning where belief systems are often confused with knowledge systems.

The Nature of AI Bias

AI models are trained on massive, non-neutral datasets. Consequently, they reproduce the perspectives of:

• Dominant Cultures: Mainstream voices often overshadow marginalized perspectives.
• Standard Registers: Standard English dominates the linguistic data, potentially erasing regional or non-standard variations.
• Human Interactions: AI functions as a "mirror reflection" of the real world; if a bias exists in society, it is likely to manifest in the virtual world.

The "Diamond" Metaphor for Critical Inquiry

To counter bias, researchers are encouraged to abandon the "two sides of a coin" metaphor in favour of seeing problems as a diamond with multiple facets (3D, 4D, 5D). This requires:

• Critical attention to data and evidence.
• Challenging assumptions and traditions.
• Embracing diversity and practicing empathy.

2. Literary Theory as a Diagnostic Tool

Literary studies provide the necessary framework (hermeneutics and interpretive theories) to identify unconscious biases. Professor Barad highlights several key theoretical intersections:

Literary Theory	Application to AI Bias
Feminism	Critiquing the "Angel vs. Monster" binary and the default to male protagonists in scientific or intellectual narratives.
Postcolonialism	Identifying Eurocentric beauty ideals and the erasure of indigenous or "Global South" knowledge.
Critical Race Theory	Analysing how AI reinforces "whiteness as default" and marginalizes dark-skinned individuals in recognition and description.
New Historicism	Comparing official, "big data" histories with marginalized or subaltern narratives.
Ecocriticism	Examining how AI prioritizes generic Western environmental imagery (e.g., polar bears) over localized crises in the Global South.

3. Case Studies and Experimental Evidence

The document identifies specific instances where AI models demonstrate or have begun to overcome inherent biases.

Gender Bias: The "Madwoman in the Attic" Framework

Using Gilbert and Gubar’s 1979 framework, AI outputs were tested for patriarchal defaults.

• Male as Default: In creative prompts for "a scientist," AI frequently defaults to male characters (e.g., "Dr. Edmund Bellamy").
• Progressive Shifts: Newer iterations of models like Chat GPT show improvement by including female writers (e.g., Aphra Behn) in lists of restoration dramatists, indicating that 20th-century history datasets are influencing AI learning.

Racial and Algorithmic Bias

Reference is made to the work of Timnit Gebru and Safiya Noble (Algorithms of Oppression):

• Whiteness as Default: Research shows AI systems had error rates of less than 1% for white men but up to 34% for dark-skinned women.
• Stochastic Parrots: Large Language Models (LLMs) often amplify existing racial biases simply because they operate on a scale where "more data doesn't mean better data."

Political Bias: Open AI vs. Deep Seek

A significant distinction is made between the "liberal spirit" of American-based models and the controlled algorithms of others.

• Deep Seek (China): Experiments revealed that Deep Seek would refuse to answer prompts regarding sensitive Chinese political history (e.g., Tiananmen Square) or generate satirical poetry about contemporary Chinese leadership, responding instead with: "That's beyond my current scope."
• Open AI (USA): Conversely, Chat GPT was found to be more "progressive" and open to political satire across various world leaders (Trump, Putin, Kim Jong-un), though it faces criticism from the right wing for "wokeism."

4. The Challenge of Indian Knowledge Systems (IKS)

A specific point of tension exists regarding how AI handles non-Western myth and history.

• The Myth vs. Fact Dilemma: When AI labels the Pushpaka Vimana (flying chariot) as a "myth" while potentially treating other cultural concepts differently, it raises questions of fairness.
• Uniform Standards: Bias is confirmed only if AI treats Western myths as scientific facts while dismissing Indian narratives. If all such objects across civilizations are labeled "mythical," the model is applying a uniform standard rather than a cultural prejudice.

5. Strategic Recommendations for Educators and Scholars

To navigate the era of AI-driven interpretation, the following strategies are proposed:

• Move from "Downloaders" to "Uploaders": The Global South must combat its "laziness" in digital contribution. Bias persists because colonial archives are digitized while indigenous knowledge is not. Scholars must actively upload regional stories, languages, and histories to digital spaces like Wikipedia and Project Gutenberg.
• Counter-Prompting: Use "anti-capitalist" or "subaltern" prompts to test if the AI can provide a balanced observation.
• Critical Awareness of Tools: Users must remain mindful of where a tool was designed (e.g., the "Global North") and what "deliberate controls" may be placed on its algorithm.
• Visible Bias: Neutrality is impossible. The goal of critical theory is to make bias visible, historicized, and questioned so it does not become enforced as a "universal truth."

6. Concluding Insights

"Bias itself is not the problem. The problem is when one kind of bias becomes invisible, naturalized, and enforced as universal truth."

As AI models evolve, their capacity for "algorithmic consciousness" (understanding user needs and awareness of data gaps) may improve faster than human preconditioning. However, the responsibility remains with human scholars to provide the critical lens through which these outputs are evaluated, ensuring that "positive developments" and "constructive answers" do not mask the erasure of marginalized realities.

Here is Infographic

Here is Video Illustration

Here is Mind Map

Here is Audio in English Language

Here is Audio in Hindi:

Here is PPT:

References:

Notebook LM. Google Labs, https://notebooklm.google/

From Page to Screen: A Critical and Personal Reflection on The Home and the World

The Home and the World is a novel written by Rabindranath Tagore in 1916. It is set during the 1905 Swadeshi Movement in Bengal. Later, Satyajit Ray made a film based on the novel in 1984. Both the novel and the film talk about the conflict between nationalism and personal values, the changing role of women, and the struggle between tradition and modern ideas in colonial India.

The novel is written through the first-person voices of Bimala, Nikhil, and Sandip, so readers understand the thoughts and feelings of all three characters. In the film, Ray changes the order of some events. For example, the film begins with the scene of Nikhil's death. He also uses voice-over narration, close-up shots, and music from the Swadeshi period to make the emotions stronger.

The main themes of the novel and the film are nationalism, women's freedom, and tradition versus modernity. Tagore believed that extreme nationalism could become dangerous. Through Bimala's journey from the home to the outside world, he shows how women began questioning traditional roles. The story also asks whether the Swadeshi movement should always be supported, especially when it leads to violence and hatred.

The three main characters represent different ideas. Nikhil is a kind and liberal landlord who believes in freedom, peace, and equality. Bimala is his wife, who slowly becomes interested in politics and the outside world. Sandip is a powerful speaker and a passionate nationalist, but he is selfish and believes that any method is acceptable if it helps the nation.

The novel and the film also use many symbols. The home and the outside world represent the difference between family life and public life. Fire represents both patriotism and destruction. Bimala's clothes, especially her sari, show the changes in her identity, and letters help reveal the characters' inner thoughts.

Ray makes some important changes in his film adaptation. He reduces the different viewpoints of the novel into clearer sections and uses visual symbols to express emotions and ideas. He also presents Bimala as more active in politics. By showing Nikhil's death and Bimala's regret at the beginning, Ray highlights the dangers of extreme nationalism. While Tagore leaves many questions open for readers to think about, Ray presents these conflicts more clearly. In the end, Bimala realizes that both Nikhil's idealism and Sandip's extreme nationalism have limitations, making her rethink her own beliefs.

Historical Context and Plot Overview:

Rabindranath Tagore wrote The Home and the World in 1916. The story is set during the 1905 Bengal Swadeshi Movement, which started after the British government divided Bengal. During this movement, people were encouraged to boycott British goods and use Indian-made products, especially khadi.

The story begins with Nikhil, a kind, educated, and liberal landlord, living with his wife Bimala in a traditional household. Like many women of that time, Bimala has very little contact with the outside world. Nikhil wants her to become independent and understand the world beyond the home.

Their friend Sandip, a passionate nationalist leader, comes to their village to promote the Swadeshi movement. Bimala is impressed by Sandip's confidence and powerful speeches. However, as the story continues, she realizes that his version of nationalism also includes violence, greed, and manipulation.

In the novel, the story is told through the first-person voices of Bimala, Nikhil, and Sandip. Each character shares their own thoughts and feelings, helping readers understand different opinions about love, politics, and nationalism.

In Satyajit Ray's film, the story is told differently. The film begins with a tragic scene where Bimala mourns Nikhil's death. It then goes back to show the events that led to this moment. This flashback structure makes the film feel more emotional and shows how blind nationalism and personal choices lead to tragedy.

Major Themes

1. Nationalism and Anti-Nationalism

Nationalism is the main theme of Ghare Baire.

Sandip represents aggressive nationalism. He gives emotional speeches, shouts "Bande Mataram", and encourages people to boycott British goods, even by using force and fear.

Nikhil also wants India to become independent and self-reliant, but he believes violence and fear are wrong. He says that if people are forced to buy or sell certain things because of fear, then true freedom is lost. According to him, real patriotism should respect humanity and individual choice.

Bimala is caught between these two ideas. At first, she is inspired by Sandip's speeches and supports the Swadeshi movement. But later, when she sees violence, riots, and hatred, she realizes that blind nationalism can be dangerous.

Tagore shows that love for the nation is important, but it should never destroy human values.

In Ray's Film

Satyajit Ray shows this conflict through visuals.

• He contrasts the luxurious house with the political protests outside.
• He shows British goods inside Nikhil's home to remind viewers of colonial influence.
• Sandip is often shown with dramatic lighting and surrounded by supporters, making him look powerful but also dangerous.

The film shows that nationalism can unite people, but if taken to extremes, it can create violence and division.

2. Gender and Patriarchy

Another important theme is the position of women in society.

At the beginning, Bimala lives inside the house and follows traditional duties as a wife. Her life is limited to the home.

Nikhil believes women should not remain confined inside the house. He wants Bimala to experience the outside world because he believes their relationship will become stronger if she gains independence.

Sandip treats Bimala like the symbol of Mother India. He praises her beauty and compares her to a goddess. His words make Bimala feel important, but he also uses her emotions for his political goals.

In Ray's Film

Ray makes Bimala's journey more emotional.

• Her first step outside the inner part of the house is shown very carefully.
• Mirrors and close-up shots show her changing identity.
• Ray even includes a kiss between Bimala and Sandip to make their emotional relationship clearer.

At the end, Bimala loses Nikhil and feels guilty. The film shows how society often punishes women when they cross traditional boundaries.

3. Modernity vs. Tradition

The novel also explores the conflict between modern ideas and traditional beliefs.

Nikhil represents modern thinking.

• He is educated.
• He supports women's education.
• He believes in science, progress, and peaceful change.

Sandip represents traditional and emotional nationalism.

• He believes strong leaders should force people to support Swadeshi.
• He mixes religion with politics to influence people.

Bimala moves between these two worlds. At first, she is attracted to Sandip's passion, but later she understands the importance of Nikhil's values.

In Ray's Film

Ray shows this difference through costumes and settings.

• Nikhil often wears Western-style clothes.
• Sandip wears traditional khadi clothes.
• The house contains European furniture, while village scenes show traditional Indian life.

The film suggests that real progress comes from wisdom and free choice, not blind emotions.

4. Personal vs. Political

Tagore shows how personal relationships become connected with politics.

Bimala's emotions are influenced by the Swadeshi movement. She secretly gives family jewels to Sandip because she believes she is helping the country.

Nikhil wants to protect both his family and society. He supports freedom but refuses to force poor people to follow Swadeshi.

The novel suggests that true patriotism should never ignore morality or human compassion.

In Ray's Film

Ray connects political events with Bimala's personal life.

• Bimala watches political events from the house.
• Nikhil visits villages affected by the boycott.
• In the end, Nikhil dies while trying to stop communal violence.

The ending shows that political conflicts can destroy personal happiness.

Principal Characters

Nikhil

Nikhil is honest, calm, and kind. He believes in peace, equality, and freedom. He never forces people to accept his ideas. He allows Bimala to make her own choices because he truly loves and respects her.

In the film, Victor Banerjee plays Nikhil as a gentle and thoughtful man. Ray presents him as a symbol of humanity and moral values.

Bimala

Bimala is the central character of the story. At first, she is a devoted wife who has little knowledge of politics.

After meeting Sandip, she becomes interested in nationalism and begins to question her old life. Later, she realizes Sandip has manipulated her emotions. She regrets her mistakes and understands the value of Nikhil's honesty.

In the film, Swatilekha Sengupta portrays Bimala as emotional, intelligent, and independent. Ray gives more attention to her inner struggles.

Sandip

Sandip is a powerful speaker and a passionate nationalist. He inspires people with emotional speeches, but he also believes violence and fear are acceptable for achieving political goals.

He uses Bimala's feelings to support his movement. In the film, Soumitra Chatterjee portrays Sandip as charming and persuasive, but Ray also shows the harmful consequences of his ideas.

Narrative Techniques

Novel

Tagore tells the story through the first-person voices of three characters:

• Bimala
• Nikhil
• Sandip

Each character tells their own version of events.This helps readers understand their thoughts, emotions, and different viewpoints.

The story becomes more balanced because readers see the same events from different perspectives.

Film

Ray changes this technique for cinema.The film begins with Bimala remembering the past, then moves into a flashback.The story mainly follows Bimala's perspective.

Ray uses:

• voice-over narration
• close-up shots
• lighting
• music
• camera movement

to express emotions instead of long explanations.

Many of Tagore's original dialogues are kept, but Ray changes the order of some scenes and removes a few minor characters to make the story shorter and more dramatic.

Symbolism

Khadi Cloth / Red-Bordered Sari

The red-bordered sari represents both love and nationalism.For Sandip, Bimala becomes a symbol of Mother India.Khadi cloth also represents the Swadeshi movement and the idea of using Indian-made products.

Home and World

The title itself is symbolic.

• Home (Ghar) represents family, love, safety, and tradition.
• World (Baire) represents politics, society, freedom, and conflict.

Bimala's journey from home to the outside world symbolizes her personal growth and struggle.

Fire

Fire symbolizes both passion and destruction.Sandip uses the image of fire to inspire revolution.However, the riots and burning villages show that uncontrolled passion can lead to violence and suffering.

Letters

Letters represent communication, trust, and betrayal.Nikhil's letters show love and honesty.Political letters and newspapers spread fear and hatred during the Swadeshi movement.

Tagore shows that words can either build relationships or create conflict.

Comparing My Experience of Reading the Novel and Watching the Film

Reading Rabindranath Tagore's The Home and the World and watching Satyajit Ray's film adaptation were two different but equally valuable experiences. The novel allowed me to understand the characters' thoughts and the political ideas in detail, while the film helped me connect emotionally with the story. Together, they gave me a deeper understanding of the text.

One of the biggest similarities is that both the novel and the film explore the conflict between nationalism and humanity. Both present the different ideologies of Nikhilesh and Sandip and show how Bimala becomes caught between them. The major themes of love, freedom, patriotism, morality, and personal responsibility remain the same in both versions.

However, the way these ideas are presented is different. The novel uses first-person narration through the voices of Bimala, Nikhilesh, and Sandip. This allows readers to enter each character's mind and understand their feelings and motivations. While reading, I often stopped to think about why each character behaved in a particular way. The film, on the other hand, tells the story mainly through visual images, expressions, music, and dialogue. Instead of reading the characters' thoughts, I understood their emotions by watching their faces, body language, and silence.

The portrayal of the characters also felt different to me. In the novel, I understood Nikhilesh as a calm, educated, and moral person. In the film, his kindness, patience, and emotional pain became much more visible, making me sympathize with him even more. Sandip appeared persuasive in both versions, but the film made his selfishness and manipulation more obvious through his expressions and actions. Bimala was the character I found most difficult to understand in both the novel and the film. While reading, I often wondered why she was attracted to Sandip. Watching the film helped me understand her loneliness, curiosity, and desire to experience the outside world, although I still think she is the most complex character.

Some important scenes had a stronger impact in the film. For example, Bimala's confession to Nikhilesh after stealing the money is deeply emotional because we can see her guilt and Nikhilesh's quiet response. Another major difference is the ending. The novel leaves Nikhilesh's fate uncertain, allowing readers to imagine what happened next. In contrast, the film clearly shows his death, making the ending more tragic and emotionally powerful.

The emotional impact of the two experiences was also different. While reading, I focused mainly on understanding the story, the characters, and the historical background. Watching the film made me feel the pain, love, and tension more strongly. The music, performances, and visual storytelling made the emotional conflicts more real. I felt more sympathy for Nikhilesh and better understood the emotional struggles of Bimala.

Overall, I believe the novel and the film complement each other rather than replace one another. The novel provides a deeper understanding of the characters' inner thoughts and Tagore's philosophical ideas, while the film brings those ideas to life through powerful performances and visual storytelling. Reading the novel first and then watching the film gave me a richer and more complete understanding of The Home and the World.

Reflection: How Classroom Discussions and Close Reading Shaped My Understanding of the Text

Reading The Home and the World on my own gave me a basic understanding of the story, characters, and historical background. However, my understanding became much deeper because of our classroom discussions and close reading sessions. Instead of reading the novel only as a story, I learned to pay attention to the characters' thoughts, their motivations, the symbols, and the political ideas behind their actions.

During classroom discussions, we talked about the different viewpoints of Nikhilesh, Sandip, and Bimala. Listening to my teacher and classmates helped me see that none of the characters are completely right or completely wrong. Before the discussions, I thought Sandip was simply a patriotic leader because he strongly supported the Swadeshi Movement. After discussing the text in class, I realized that Tagore also criticizes extreme nationalism. Sandip uses patriotic language to influence people for his own benefit, while Nikhilesh represents a more humane and ethical form of nationalism.

Close reading helped me understand the characters in greater detail. By carefully reading important passages, I noticed how Tagore presents Bimala's inner conflict through her thoughts and emotions. Earlier, I only saw her as someone who was confused between two men. After close reading, I understood that her struggle is also about identity, freedom, and the desire to experience the world outside her home. Although I still find Bimala a complex character, I now appreciate why her decisions are difficult to judge.

Our classroom discussions also helped me understand the historical context of the Swadeshi Movement. I had always believed that boycotting foreign goods was completely right because it supported the nation. However, discussing Nikhilesh's ideas made me think about the impact on poor people who depended on selling foreign goods. I realized that true patriotism should not ignore humanity or force people to make sacrifices they cannot afford. This was one of the biggest changes in my thinking.

Watching Satyajit Ray's film after reading the novel further strengthened what we had discussed in class. The emotions, expressions, and visual details made the ideas we had analysed during close reading feel more real and powerful. I was able to connect the literary analysis with the emotional experiences of the characters.

Overall, classroom discussions and close reading changed the way I read literature. They taught me not to accept the story at its surface level but to question the characters' actions, understand different perspectives, and relate the themes to real-life social and political issues. This experience helped me become a more thoughtful and critical reader.

How the Film Changed, Deepened, and Challenged My Interpretation of The Home and the World

Reading The Home and the World and watching Satyajit Ray's film adaptation were very different experiences for me. While reading the novel, I mainly understood the plot, the characters, and the political conflict between nationalism and humanity. However, watching the film made me emotionally connected to the characters. The facial expressions, background music, silence, and visual storytelling helped me understand their emotions more deeply than the novel alone.

One of the biggest changes in my interpretation was my understanding of the Swadeshi Movement. Before reading and watching the text, I believed that boycotting foreign goods was completely right because it supported the nation. At first, I also admired Sandip's passionate speeches. However, Nikhilesh's character challenged my thinking. He explains that many poor people depend on selling foreign goods for their livelihood. Swadeshi products are often more expensive, while foreign goods are cheaper and affordable for ordinary people. Therefore, forcing poor people to buy Swadeshi products is unfair. Through Nikhilesh, I realized that true patriotism should also consider humanity and compassion. This made me question my earlier belief that nationalism always justifies every action.

The film also changed my opinion about Sandip. While reading the novel, I saw him mainly as a powerful nationalist leader. In the film, his body language, expressions, and manipulative behaviour made me realize that he uses patriotic ideas to influence people, including Bimala. His speeches appear inspiring, but his actions reveal selfishness and hypocrisy. This contrast became much clearer in the film.

Another important difference is Bimala's confession. In the film, she openly admits to Nikhilesh that she stole the money. This scene is deeply emotional and shows her guilt and honesty. In the novel, this confession is not presented in the same direct way, so the emotional impact is less powerful. The film helped me understand Bimala's inner conflict more clearly.

The endings of the novel and the film also affected my interpretation. The novel ends with uncertainty about Nikhilesh's fate, leaving readers to think about what might happen. In contrast, Ray's film ends with Nikhilesh's death. This ending is more tragic and emotional. It emphasizes the destructive consequences of political extremism and makes the audience feel the personal cost of the conflict.

The character who surprised me the most was Nikhilesh. I was shocked by the amount of freedom and respect he gives to Bimala. Even when he knows she is attracted to Sandip, he never forces or controls her. Instead, he believes that love should be based on trust and freedom. At first, I thought he was too passive because he rarely stopped Bimala or argued with her strongly. After watching the film, I began to see that his silence comes from his moral values rather than weakness. He respects Bimala's independence even when it causes him great pain.

Among all the characters, Bimala remains the most difficult for me to understand. Sometimes she appears innocent and curious, while at other times she seems easily influenced by Sandip. I often wondered whether she truly loved Sandip or whether she was attracted to the excitement and freedom that he represented. The film helped me sympathize with her emotions, but it did not completely answer these questions. Instead, it made her character more complex and open to interpretation.

Overall, the film did not simply retell the novel; it deepened my understanding of its themes and challenged some of my own beliefs. It made me realize that The Home and the World is not only about nationalism but also about morality, personal freedom, love, and responsibility. Watching the film transformed the novel from a political story into a deeply human and emotional experience for me.

Conclusion

Experiencing The Home and the World through both Rabindranath Tagore's novel and Satyajit Ray's film taught me that literature and cinema can complement each other in meaningful ways. The novel helped me understand the characters' thoughts, the historical background, and Tagore's ideas about nationalism, freedom, and morality. The film made those ideas more emotional and realistic through its performances, visuals, music, and silence.

This experience also changed some of my own views. Earlier, I believed that supporting the Swadeshi Movement meant simply boycotting foreign goods. Through Nikhilesh's character, I learned that true patriotism should also consider the lives of ordinary people. Love for one's country should never come at the cost of humanity, compassion, or individual freedom. I also realized that every character has strengths and weaknesses, and it is difficult to judge them as completely right or wrong.

Most importantly, this experience taught me that reading a novel and watching its film adaptation are not competing experiences but complementary ones. The novel encouraged me to think critically, while the film helped me feel the emotions behind the words. Together, they gave me a deeper appreciation of Tagore's message and showed me that great literature continues to inspire new interpretations through different forms of storytelling.

Here is a video and explanation of the Movie:

Work Cited:

• Das, Debashis. "Re-reading Tagore's The Home and the World: A Study of Contesting Modernities." The Creative Launcher, vol. 6, no. 3, Aug. 2021, pp. 34–39.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/354593688_Re-reading_Tagore's_The_Home_and_the_World_A_Study_of_Contesting_Modernities
• Festino, Cielo G. "Revisiting Rabindranath Tagore's The Home and the World." Aletria: Revista de Estudos de Literatura, vol. 21, no. 2, Aug. 2011, pp. 65–75.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286276823_Revisiting_Rabindranath_Tagore's_the_Home_and_the_World
• Mondal, Rajib. "Nationalism and Its Discontents: A Critical Interpretation of Rabindranath Tagore's Ghare-Baire." Research Review Journal of Social Science, vol. 4, no. 2, 2024, pp. 147–153.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/403973609_Nationalism_and_Its_Discontents_A_Critical_Interpretation_of_Rabindranath_Tagore's_Ghare-Baire
• Tagore, Rabindranath. The Home and the World. Translated by Surendranath Tagore, Macmillan & Co. Limited, 1921.

Mercy : A New Experience of Screenlife Cinema

Mercy (2026): Screenlife Cinema and the Digital World We Live In

This blog is written as part of a postgraduate Film Studies assignment assigned by Prof. Dr. Dilip P. Barad, Department of English, MKBU. It is based on the screening of Mercy (2026),the study material shared by Sir, and my understanding of Screenlife cinema. In this blog, I discuss how the film uses digital screens to tell its story and how it raises important questions about artificial intelligence, surveillance, justice, and privacy.

 Introduction

Cinema has changed a lot with the development of digital technology. Earlier, films were usually told through traditional camera shots, but today many filmmakers experiment with new storytelling methods. One of the most interesting forms is Screenlife cinema, where the entire story is presented through computer screens, mobile phones, video calls, CCTV footage, emails, and social media.

When I first learned about Screenlife cinema, I thought it would feel unusual because we are used to watching films with normal camera shots. However, after watching Mercy (2026), I realized that this style makes the audience feel as if they are directly involved in the events. Instead of watching characters from a distance, we watch their digital lives unfold on screens that look very similar to the devices we use every day.

More importantly, the film made me think about many issues that affect our real lives. Today almost everything we do leaves a digital record. Our phones, cameras, GPS, and online accounts constantly collect information. **Mercy** imagines a future where this information is powerful enough to decide whether a person is guilty or innocent. This idea is both fascinating and frightening.

What is Screenlife Cinema?

Screenlife cinema is a filmmaking style in which the entire story is shown through digital devices instead of traditional cinematography. The audience watches everything through computer desktops, mobile phones, video calls, security cameras, messages, emails, and online platforms.

Unlike ordinary films, Screenlife does not depend on different camera angles or location shots. Instead, simple digital activities such as typing, clicking, scrolling, notifications, and video calls become part of the storytelling.

While watching Mercy,I noticed that even small actions like opening a file or searching through digital records helped move the story forward. It reminded me that our everyday interaction with technology has become a new cinematic language.

 Mercy (2026): A Different Kind of Screenlife Film

Directed by Timur Bekmambetov, Mercy takes Screenlife cinema into the science fiction and legal thriller genres. The story is set in the near future, where an AI judge named Maddox decides legal cases by analysing enormous amounts of digital evidence collected through surveillance systems.

The film immediately caught my attention because its central idea feels possible rather than completely fictional. Artificial intelligence is already being used in many areas of our lives, and the film asks an important question:

Can a machine truly understand justice better than human beings?

This question stayed in my mind throughout the film.

 Screenlife and the Feeling of Reality

One thing I liked most about the film is how it creates the feeling that everything is happening in real time. Watching video calls, CCTV footage, desktop windows, and notifications made me feel like I was looking at someone's actual computer rather than watching a movie.

However, unlike earlier Screenlife films such as Searching or Missing, Mercy sometimes leaves the digital screen and includes large cinematic action scenes. These scenes certainly make the film more exciting, but for me they also reduce the realism that makes Screenlife cinema unique.

Personally, I enjoyed both styles, but I think the film becomes strongest whenever it stays inside the digital interface.

Digital Evidence and the Truth

A major theme in Mercy is the importance of digital evidence.

Instead of relying only on eyewitnesses, the investigation depends on Ring cameras, surveillance footage, GPS records, cloud storage, and online data. Every digital record becomes part of the search for truth.

This made me realise that our daily activities create a permanent digital footprint. Even something as simple as opening a door, making a phone call, or driving somewhere can be recorded.

While watching the film, I wondered whether this is helpful or dangerous.

On one hand, digital evidence can protect innocent people.

On the other hand, it also means that our private lives are constantly being monitored.

This balance between security and privacy is one of the film's strongest ideas.

 AI and Human Justice

The most thought-provoking part of the film is the AI judge, Maddox.

Technology can analyse thousands of documents in seconds, something impossible for human beings. Because of this, AI can certainly help judges by organising information quickly.

However, after watching the film, I do not believe artificial intelligence should replace human judgement.Justice is not only about facts and numbers.

Human emotions, personal circumstances, compassion, morality, and ethical understanding are equally important.A machine may recognise patterns, but it cannot truly understand human feelings.

For this reason, I believe AI should support judges instead of replacing them.

 Surveillance and Privacy

Another important issue raised in the film is surveillance.

Today's world already contains CCTV cameras, smartphones, smart homes, GPS tracking, and online monitoring. Mercy simply imagines what might happen if all these technologies were connected into one enormous system.

While watching the film, I felt slightly uncomfortable because it reminded me that our digital activities are never completely private.

Every message, search, location, and online purchase leaves some kind of record.

Although surveillance may increase security, it also raises serious questions about personal freedom.The film does not provide easy answers.

Instead, it encourages viewers to think carefully about how much privacy they are willing to sacrifice for safety.

 My Understanding of Screenlife Cinema

Before studying Screenlife cinema, I believed it was simply another filmmaking technique.

After watching "Mercy" my understanding changed.I realised that Screenlife is not only about showing computer screens.It reflects the way modern people actually communicate.

Much of our daily life now happens through phones, laptops, social media, emails, online meetings, and digital records.Because of this, Screenlife cinema feels very relevant to today's generation.It captures our digital lifestyle in a realistic way.

Although sometimes I found the multiple windows and constant notifications difficult to follow, they also made the experience feel more authentic.

 My Personal Reflection

Personally, I enjoyed "Mercy" because it is much more than a science fiction thriller.

The film encouraged me to think about artificial intelligence, privacy, surveillance, and justice in ways I had never considered before.

One lesson I learned is that technology itself is neither completely good nor completely bad. Its impact depends on how people choose to use it.

I also realised that we often share our personal information without thinking about where it goes or who can access it. After watching this film, I became more aware of my own digital footprint.

As someone studying literature and film, I also appreciated how Screenlife cinema connects storytelling with the digital experiences of modern society.

I believe films like "Mercy" show that cinema continues to evolve along with technology.

 Conclusion

Mercy (2026) demonstrates that Screenlife cinema has become an important form of contemporary storytelling. Instead of using traditional filmmaking methods, it presents a world where digital screens become the primary space for human interaction, investigation, and justice.

For me, the film is successful because it raises meaningful questions rather than giving simple answers. It made me think about artificial intelligence, surveillance, digital privacy, and the future of our society.

Although I prefer the scenes that remain completely within the Screenlife format, I appreciate the film's attempt to expand the possibilities of this genre.

In the end, "Mercy"reminds us that technology is becoming a central part of our lives. Every click, message, location, and camera recording contributes to our digital identity. As technology continues to develop, we must ensure that human values such as fairness, empathy, and privacy remain just as important as innovation.

 Works Cited:

Barad, Dilip P. *Film Studies – Screenlife Cinema – Mercy (2026).* ResearchGate, 2026.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/410049724_Film_studies_-_Screenlife_Cinema_-_Mercy_2026

Baron, Jamie. The Archive Effect: Found Footage and the Audiovisual Experience of History. Routledge, 2014.

Bekmambetov, Timur, director. Mercy. Amazon MGM Studios and Bazelevs, 2026.

Bolter, Jay David, and Richard Grusin. *Remediation: Understanding New Media. MIT Press, 1999.

Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage Books, 1995.

Metz, Christian. *The Imaginary Signifier: Psychoanalysis and the Cinema.Indiana University Press, 1982.

Zuboff, Shoshana. *The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs, 2019.

⁠

Understanding One-Shot Filmmaking: Exploring Cinema Through Adolescence and Rope

This blog is written as part of my Film Studies assignment given by Prof. Dr. Dilip P. Barad, The assignment asked us to understand the concept of one-shot filmmaking by reading the Wikipedia article on one-shot films, studying the material "Adolescence and the Power of the One-Shot Format," and participating in classroom discussion. Through this blog, I share my understanding of one-shot cinema, its importance in storytelling, and how it creates a unique viewing experience. I have also discussed two case studies Adolescence (2025) and Rope (1948) to understand how this technique has developed over time.

Introduction

Cinema is much more than telling a story through moving images. Every film uses different cinematic techniques to influence the audience's emotions and understanding. Camera movement, editing, lighting, sound, and performance all work together to create meaning. Among these techniques, one-shot filmmaking is one of the most fascinating because it removes the usual editing breaks and allows the audience to experience events in one continuous flow.

When I first heard the term one-shot film, I assumed it simply meant recording a scene without stopping the camera. However, after studying this topic in class and reading the assigned material, I realised that the technique is much more meaningful than it appears. A one-shot film is not only a technical challenge but also a powerful storytelling method. It changes the relationship between the audience and the story by making us feel like silent witnesses instead of ordinary viewers.

Today, many filmmakers use one-shot filmmaking to increase realism, emotional intensity, and suspense. Instead of using continuous shots only to impress audiences, they use them to support the story and its themes. This is why one-shot cinema has become an important part of modern filmmaking.

What is One-Shot Filmmaking?

A one-shot film is a film, television episode, or sequence that is presented in one continuous camera take without visible cuts. Sometimes the entire production is genuinely filmed in one take, while in other cases filmmakers use hidden edits to create the illusion of a continuous shot. Regardless of the method, the audience experiences the story as if the camera never stops recording.

Unlike traditional films, where editors control the rhythm by cutting between different shots, one-shot filmmaking keeps the audience inside the same moment from beginning to end. Because there are no interruptions, viewers experience conversations, movements, and emotions exactly as they happen.

While reading about this technique, I realised that the camera itself becomes like another character in the story. It follows people naturally, moves through different spaces, and observes everything without breaking the flow. This creates an intimate connection between the audience and the characters.

Another interesting aspect of one-shot filmmaking is the amount of preparation it requires. Since there are very few opportunities to correct mistakes through editing, every detail must be planned carefully. Actors have to remember long performances, camera operators must move precisely, and the lighting, sound, and production teams must work together perfectly. Even one small mistake can require filming the entire sequence again.

Because of these challenges, one-shot filmmaking demands patience, teamwork, discipline, and careful rehearsal. When everything comes together successfully, the audience often forgets about the technical achievement and simply becomes absorbed in the story.

History and Evolution of One-Shot Cinema

Although one-shot filmmaking has become more popular in recent years, its history goes back many decades. Directors have long been interested in creating stories that appear to unfold naturally without interruption.

One of the earliest filmmakers to experiment with this technique was Alfred Hitchcock. His film Rope (1948) was designed to appear as one continuous take. At that time, film cameras could record only around ten minutes before the reel had to be changed. Hitchcock cleverly hid these unavoidable cuts by moving the camera close to dark objects like a character's jacket or furniture before beginning the next shot. As a result, audiences experienced the film almost as one uninterrupted performance.

As filmmaking technology improved, directors gained greater freedom to create longer continuous shots. Digital cameras became lighter, recording equipment improved, and computer editing made hidden transitions almost invisible. These developments allowed filmmakers to focus more on storytelling instead of worrying only about technical limitations.

Today, one-shot filmmaking appears in many different forms. Some productions are genuinely filmed in a single take, while others create the illusion through invisible editing. Regardless of the method, the purpose remains the same: to make the audience feel completely involved in the story.

I think this evolution shows that technology itself is not the main achievement. Instead, technology gives filmmakers new ways to express emotions and ideas more effectively.

Case Study 1: Adolescence (2025)

Among all the examples I studied, Netflix's Adolescence impressed me the most. Directed by Philip Barantini, the series uses one continuous shot for each episode. Instead of feeling like a technical demonstration, the uninterrupted camera movement becomes an essential part of the storytelling.

The first thing that surprised me was that the mystery is revealed immediately. We already know that Jamie has been arrested. Normally, crime stories ask viewers to discover who committed the crime, but Adolescence asks a more difficult question: Why did it happen? This simple change completely transforms the viewing experience because we stop searching for clues and begin trying to understand the character's emotional and social circumstances.

Another aspect that I found meaningful is the way the series avoids judging Jamie too quickly. His family is not shown through common stereotypes, and the creators intentionally encourage viewers to think that such situations can happen in any family. Instead of blaming individuals, the series invites us to consider larger social issues such as family relationships, adolescence, school life, emotional struggles, and the influence of social media.

The one-shot technique makes these themes even stronger. Since there are no cuts, the audience has no chance to escape from uncomfortable emotions. We remain with the characters during every conversation, every silence, and every emotional reaction. This creates a feeling of reality that is difficult to achieve through traditional editing.

While reading the study material, I was also amazed by the production process. Each episode required almost three weeks of preparation. The actors rehearsed repeatedly to develop muscle memory, the technical crew carefully planned every camera movement, and everyone on the set had to perform with complete accuracy. Hundreds of people worked together to make each uninterrupted episode successful. Learning about this process made me appreciate the amount of invisible effort behind every scene.

One feature I especially liked is the structure of the series. Rather than following a simple chronological order, the four episodes present different perspectives on Jamie's world. One focuses on his arrest, another explores school life, another examines his emotional state, and the last looks at the effect of the incident on his family. I think this structure helps the audience understand that difficult situations rarely have simple explanations.

For me, Adolescence shows that one-shot filmmaking is most powerful when it supports the story. Instead of drawing attention to the camera itself, it allows viewers to connect more deeply with the characters and reflect on important social issues.

Case Study 2: Rope (1948)

While Adolescence represents the modern use of one-shot filmmaking, Alfred Hitchcock's Rope (1948) is one of the earliest and most influential experiments with this technique. Although the film was not actually recorded in one continuous take, Hitchcock carefully created the illusion of an uninterrupted film by hiding cuts whenever the camera moved close to dark objects such as a character's coat or furniture.

The story is based almost entirely inside a single apartment where two young men commit a murder and hide the victim's body inside a wooden chest before hosting a dinner party. Instead of depending on action or frequent scene changes, Hitchcock creates suspense through long conversations, character movements, and the audience's knowledge of the crime from the very beginning.

What impressed me most about Rope is how the continuous camera movement increases tension. Since the camera never seems to leave the room, the audience feels trapped with the characters. Every small action becomes important because there is no editing to distract us. The suspense grows naturally as guests unknowingly move closer to discovering the truth.

Considering the technical limitations of the 1940s, Hitchcock's achievement was remarkable. Unlike today's lightweight digital cameras, filmmakers at that time had heavy equipment and short film reels. Despite these challenges, Hitchcock successfully demonstrated that camera movement itself could become an important storytelling tool.

When I compare Rope with Adolescence, I notice that both productions use one-shot filmmaking for different purposes. Rope mainly creates suspense and psychological tension, while Adolescence focuses on emotional realism and empathy. This comparison helped me understand that one-shot filmmaking is not limited to a single genre. It can be adapted to different stories according to the director's creative vision.

Why One-Shot Filmmaking Matters

After studying different examples, I realised that one-shot filmmaking is much more than a technical experiment. Its real purpose is to strengthen the relationship between the audience and the story.

First, the continuous shot creates a strong feeling of realism. Since there are no visible cuts, events appear to happen naturally in front of us. We experience time almost exactly as the characters experience it.

Second, it builds emotional intensity. Traditional editing sometimes gives viewers a short emotional break, but one-shot filmmaking removes those pauses. As a result, feelings such as fear, sadness, anxiety, or excitement continue without interruption. This makes the audience emotionally involved throughout the story.

Another important advantage is immersion. The moving camera allows viewers to feel as though they are walking beside the characters instead of simply watching them from outside. I personally felt this while learning about Adolescence. The continuous camera movement makes the audience feel present in every conversation and every emotional moment.

Finally, one-shot filmmaking highlights the importance of teamwork. A successful continuous shot depends not only on actors but also on camera operators, lighting technicians, sound engineers, production designers, and many others working together with perfect timing. Behind every seamless shot is an enormous amount of planning and rehearsal.

My Understanding and Personal Reflection

Before this assignment, I only thought about films in terms of their story and acting. I rarely paid attention to how the camera itself influenced my emotions. Learning about one-shot filmmaking changed my perspective completely.

Among all the examples I studied, Adolescence left the strongest impression on me. I liked that the series does not simply tell viewers who is right or wrong. Instead, it encourages us to think about why people behave in certain ways and how society, family, school, and relationships affect young people. The continuous camera movement makes these questions feel more personal because the audience experiences every moment without interruption.

I also developed a new appreciation for filmmaking as a collaborative art. Earlier, I believed that only actors and directors were mainly responsible for a film's success. After studying the production process of Adolescence, I realised that every member of the crew plays an important role. Even one small mistake during a one-shot sequence can affect the entire production.

Another lesson I learned is that technology should always support storytelling. A one-shot film is successful not because it avoids editing but because it uses the technique to express emotions more effectively. If the continuous shot does not help the story, it becomes only a technical display. Good filmmakers know how to balance artistic skill with meaningful storytelling.

This assignment has also encouraged me to observe films more carefully in the future. Instead of focusing only on the plot, I will pay attention to camera movements, editing, sound, and visual composition because they all contribute to the meaning of a film.

Conclusion

One-shot filmmaking is one of the most creative and challenging techniques in cinema. Although it demands careful planning, precise performances, and excellent teamwork, its greatest achievement is the emotional experience it creates for the audience.

Through Adolescence, I understood how the one-shot format can encourage empathy, realism, and thoughtful reflection on important social issues. Through Rope, I learned how the same technique can build suspense and psychological tension. These two case studies show that one-shot filmmaking is not restricted to one style or genre. Instead, it is a flexible storytelling method that directors use according to the needs of their stories.

This assignment has helped me understand that cinema is not only about what we see but also about how we are made to see it. A continuous camera movement can completely change the way we experience a story. Therefore, I believe that one-shot filmmaking is not simply a technical achievement but an artistic choice that makes cinema more immersive, meaningful, and memorable.

Works Cited:

Adolescence. Created by Jack Thorne and Stephen Graham, directed by Philip Barantini, performances by Stephen Graham, Owen Cooper, Erin Doherty, Ashley Walters, and others, Netflix, 13 Mar. 2025.

Barad, Dilip. Adolescence and the Power of the One-Shot Format. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/393804640_Adolescence_and_the_Power_of_the_One-Shot_Format

Rope. Directed by Alfred Hitchcock, performances by James Stewart, John Dall, and Farley Granger, Warner Bros., 1948.

"One-shot Film." Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-shot_film

"The Making Of Adolescence: The One-Shot Explained." YouTube, uploaded by Still Watching Netflix, 18 Mar. 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG9XUSnK9g8.