From Human Choices to Machine Intelligence: A Reflection on AI and Digital Learning

My Experience with the Moral Machine: A Reflection on Ethics, Choice and Human Values

Here is PDF of screenshots

Here is my result

Recently, I participated in an activity called Moral Machine. Before doing this activity, I thought that making a decision between two options would be simple if the number of people involved was clearly different. However, when I actually started answering the situations, I realized that moral decisions are not always simple.

The Moral Machine presents different situations involving a self-driving car. In each situation, the car faces an unavoidable accident, and I have to decide what the car should do. Sometimes the choice is between saving the passengers or pedestrians. In other situations, the people involved are different in terms of age, gender, profession, physical fitness, or whether they are humans or animals. The activity is designed to understand how people make judgments in difficult life-and-death situations.

For me, this activity was not just a game. It became a way of looking at my own thinking and asking myself: “Why did I choose this person to survive rather than the other?”

My First Reaction

When I started the activity, I initially looked at the number of people in each situation. My first thought was that if I could save more people, I should choose that option. But as the scenarios continued, the decisions became more complicated.

For example, there were situations where the car could either continue straight or change its direction. Both choices would result in someone's death. In some cases, there were differences between children, adults, elderly people, athletes, executives, homeless people, and animals. This made me think about whether one life can really be considered more valuable than another.

The most difficult part was that there was no completely comfortable answer. Whatever option I selected, I knew that someone else would die. This made me slow down and think about my values rather than simply clicking an option.

How I Made My Decisions

While making my choices, I noticed that saving a larger number of people was one of the strongest factors for me. My final result also shows a very strong preference for saving more lives.

I also noticed that I did not give the same importance to every characteristic. For example, my results show a very strong preference for humans over pets. This made me realize that I naturally place human life above animal life when I am forced to make such a choice.

My result also shows a strong preference for fit people over large people and for people with higher social value over lower social value. These results made me uncomfortable because they forced me to question whether I was unconsciously judging people's worth according to their physical condition or social position.

The Most Difficult Part

The hardest part of the activity was not choosing between two numbers. It was choosing between different kinds of people.

For example, when a situation involved younger and older people, I had to think about whether age should matter. When it involved people following or breaking the law, I had to think about whether someone who breaks a traffic rule deserves less protection.

Similarly, when the activity presented people with different professions or social positions, I had to ask myself whether a person's profession should determine whether they live or die.

These questions are difficult because, in real life, we normally do not decide who deserves to live. We believe that every human life has value. But the Moral Machine deliberately creates situations where I am forced to make such a comparison.

What My Results Revealed About Me

The results were interesting because they showed me some of my own preferences more clearly than I had expected.

My strongest preference was saving more lives. I also gave relatively low importance to protecting the passengers compared with the other possible factors. My result for avoiding intervention was also on the lower side, which suggests that I was more willing to accept an active decision rather than simply avoid intervention.

My gender preference leaned toward males, but my age preference was much less extreme. This made me realize that even when I believe that I am making a logical decision, personal preferences can still influence my judgment.

The most important learning for me was that my moral decisions are influenced by several factors at the same time. I may think that I am simply trying to save the maximum number of people, but the characteristics of those people can also influence my thinking.

Ethics and Technology

The activity also made me think about the relationship between ethics and technology.

A self-driving car is a machine, but it operates in a world where human beings have different values, beliefs and expectations. If such a car faces an unavoidable accident, someone has to decide what principles the machine should follow.

This raises an important question:

If humans themselves cannot agree about the right moral decision, how can we expect technology to make the perfect moral decision for us?

The Moral Machine made me understand that technology is not completely separate from human values. The decisions programmed into technology can reflect the values and assumptions of the people who design it.

The activity itself is a research project concerned with people's judgments about difficult moral dilemmas involving life-and-death situations.

What I Learned from the Activity

There are several important things that I learned from this experience.

First, moral decisions are complicated.

There is not always one correct answer. Two people can look at the same situation and make completely different choices because they have different values.

Second, our decisions reveal our hidden biases.

I did not realize how much factors such as age, gender, physical fitness, social value and species could influence my decisions until I saw my results.

Third, numbers are not everything.

Although I strongly preferred saving more lives, some situations made me think about whether saving a larger number is always morally right.

Fourth, technology needs ethical thinking.

Artificial intelligence and self-driving technology can make decisions that directly affect human beings. Therefore, technical development should also include ethical discussion.

Finally, the activity taught me to question my own thinking.

Instead of asking only, “What did I choose?”, I started asking, “Why did I choose it?” I think this second question is much more important.

My Learning Outcomes

After completing the Moral Machine activity, I can identify the following learning outcomes:

1. I developed ethical awareness by thinking about difficult life-and-death situations.
2. I became more aware of my own biases and preferences.
3. I learned that moral decisions can have multiple perspectives.
4. I understood the importance of critical thinking before making a decision.
5. I understood the connection between ethics and artificial intelligence.
6. I learned to question my own decisions instead of assuming that they are automatically correct.
7. I became more aware that technology can reflect human values and social assumptions.
8. I learned that there may not always be a perfect solution to an ethical problem.

My Final Reflection

The Moral Machine activity was a short activity, but it made me think much more deeply than I expected. At the beginning, I treated the situations like simple choices. But after answering several questions, I realized that every choice represented a moral position.

The most interesting part was seeing my final results. They showed me patterns in my decisions that I had not consciously noticed while completing the activity. For example, I strongly preferred saving more lives and humans over pets, while some other preferences were less straightforward.

I also realized that making a moral decision is different from making an ordinary decision. In an ordinary decision, I can often choose an option that satisfies me. In these scenarios, however, every option has a negative consequence.

The activity therefore taught me something important about myself: before judging someone else's decision, I should try to understand the values behind that decision. Different people may choose differently not because one person is good and another is bad, but because they may prioritize different moral principles.

In the end, Moral Machine did not give me a simple answer about what is right or wrong. Instead, it gave me something more valuable—a chance to question my own values, understand my decision-making process, and think critically about the ethical challenges that technology may create in the future.

My experience with Moral Machine was both challenging and educational. It showed me that even a simple-looking digital activity can raise serious questions about human life, morality, law, technology and social values.

The biggest lesson I take from this activity is that ethical thinking is not about finding an easy answer; it is about understanding the consequences of our choices and being honest about the values behind them.

That is what made this activity meaningful for me.

Deep Dive into the Three Presentation Parts

Part 1: Decentring the Subject and the Nature of Hypertext

This section defines hypertext as a system of linked digital data including images, text, and sound stored in the cloud and accessed via a web browser Unlike traditional books, which Prof. Barad describes as "dead text" because they do not react to user interaction (like zooming or clicking), hypertext is living and linked

• Decentring: Drawing on Silvio Gaggi’s theories, the presentation argues that digital pedagogy makes the "Subject" defined as the core content, the teacher, and the taught unstable, fragmented, and decentred
• Loss of Authorship: In the computer era, traditional notions of individual authorship are often lost as readers become decentred through interactive digital networks
• Pedagogical Model: A strong digital foundation requires Content Management Systems (like Google Drive) and Learning Management Systems (like Google Classroom) to organize and deliver content effectively

Part 2: Practical Strategies for Digital Language Teaching

The second part addresses the practical challenges of teaching language and literature online, such as maintaining engagement and handling network issues

• Addressing Network Issues: To solve the problem of audio breaking due to poor connectivity, the presentation suggests using auto-transcripts and live captions (tools like Tactic or Scribble) so students can read what was spoken during the session
• The Glass Board: Prof. Barad introduces the "Glass Board" a transparent LED-lit panel that allows teachers to maintain eye contact with students while performing "board work" (like writing grammar formulas or drawing stick figures) during live or recorded sessions
• Collaborative Learning: The use of Google Docs and Spreadsheets is highlighted as a way to engage students in real-time. For example, students can collaboratively describe images, write dialogues, or practice active/passive voice in a shared digital workspace

Part 3: Generative Literature and Digital Assessment

The final part focuses on the shift toward generative literature texts produced by algorithms and Artificial Intelligence rather than human authors

• The Machine as Author: Modern AI can write poetry so convincingly that it is often difficult for humans to distinguish it from human-authored work
• Big Data in Literature: The presentation mentions using Corpus Linguistics (such as the "Click" project for Charles Dickens) to study literature through a "big data lens"
• Digital Portfolios: Prof. Barad advocates for a shift in assessment. Instead of traditional "exit exams," students should create digital portfolios where they curate and archive their work (blogs, videos, and websites) to demonstrate their academic journey and digital literacy

For a deeper dive into these concepts, you can watch the full video recording of the International Faculty Development Programme session below

• Barad, Dilip. “Pedagogical Shift from Text to Hypertext: Language & Literature to the Digital Natives.” Dilip Barad | Teacher Blog, 18 Sept. 2021,https://blog.dilipbarad.com/2021/09/pedagogical-shift-from-text-to.html
• Moral Machinehttps://www.moralmachine.net/

 Exploring Corpus Stylistics through CLiC: A Digital Humanities Learning Experience

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.

⁠