Deconstructing Spike Jonze’s “Her”
Spike Jonze’s romantic comedy-drama, Her, utilizes situational irony to illuminate the comfort, stimulation and artificiality of less-than-human connections with phones, tablets, and operating systems of all kinds. Her is a movie full of twists and turns that leave the mind open to a range of infinite possibilities. Jonze’s film questions what love is, how do we love, and the nature of what it means to be human. There is a theme of identity throughout the entire film. The first words of the advertisement that leads Theodore to Samantha are, “We ask you a simple question. Who are you?” Right away, this statement conveys the identity theme. Throughout Her, there are parallel scenes that dismantle one another. In these binary oppositions, the film deconstructs itself. Jonze’s film is a “love story” that dismantles bit-by-bit within a moving unorthodox structure. Her examines the contradictory emotions of the protagonist, Theodore, illustrates female subordination through the use of Samantha, and analyzes the intimate relationship between technology and humans.
The Walking Contradiction
Theodore Twombly, the film’s protagonist, makes a living writing personalized notes and cards for BeautifulHandwrittenLetters.com, based on information about the sender and the receiver. Theodore keeps his personal life undisclosed, and he is also insecure. For this reason, Theodore is able to dive deeply into his romantic letter writing, living and loving vicariously through the ones he writes letters for.
Twombly is a lonely, soon-to-be divorcee, who clings for a connection through high-tech video games and phone sex. Theodore is not an operating system, but he definitely acts like one. Every human character in Jonze’s film acts like one, which leads into the situational irony of the movie. The operating systems are more “human-like” than the actual humans.
Rand Richards Cooper states in the article “A Soulless Soul Mate” how the film’s setting is “a future in which people no longer possess the wherewithal to express themselves, and regard the ghostwritten letter as an authentic expression of regard.” Catherine, Twombly’s impending ex-wife, voices, “But it does make me very sad that you can’t handle real emotions, Theodore,” in reference to his relationship with Samantha, the operating system. Catherine goes on to state to the incoming waitress how Theodore, “always wanted to have a wife without the challenges of actually dealing with anything real,” supporting the notion that Theodore is incapable of handling another human emotionally.
Even when their waitress is approached by Catherine with Catherine’s shocking statement, the waitress ignores it and fails to give a true genuine response. The uncomfortable waitress simply replies, “Let me know if I can get you guys anything,” demonstrating how “programmed” she is.
There is a deep significance in the fact that Theodore is a letter writer, but is disconnected from real emotions. This disconnection illustrates the belief that people are actually programmed in many ways. In his humanities and digital cultures course, Dr. Gerald R. Lucas claims that, “We are devolving. Technology makes us zombies. It’s a reason why zombies eat brains, because they don’t have one.”
The question arises in Her as to, “what is real?” and “what is love?” Can a relationship between an operating system and a human-being be “real?” Yet, there is no real answer to this opinionated question. Theodore is representative of the near-future. Twombly is the portrayal of society fused with technology. Jonze’s film irradiates the illusion of relationships. Jonze’s near-future world thrives on technology. Cooper expresses in his article about this near-future that, “Digital organizers keep users updated and entertained via an earbud.” With the already established close relationship between humans and technology, it is only natural that Theodore comes to find a connection with ‘her’ (Samantha). Technology is the way of life in Jonze’s story and in our own society. Theodore is always in touch with electronic and social media at his leisure. Theodore is not only emotionally distant from himself, but from others.
The first paradox, or parallel, that can be addressed in Jonze’s story is Theodore himself. Twombly is a walking contradiction. Catherine adamantly vows that Theodore “can’t handle real emotions.” However, Twombly sheds real tears at the end of the film when Samantha leaves.
Catherine utters to Theodore, “I think you always wanted me to be this…this light, happy, bouncy, everything’s fine LA wife and that’s just not me.” She goes on to point out to the waitress about their marriage: “We used to be married but he couldn’t handle me, he wanted to put me on Prozac.” Catherine is relaying that Theodore wanted to change her. Twombly wanted his wife to be a ‘her’ and not a ‘she.’ Yet, Theodore does not try to change Samantha. When Theodore realizes that Samantha is taking breaths when speaking, as a real human would, he asks surprisingly, “Why do you do that?” He goes on to add that Samantha does not need to try to communicate like a human “Because they’re…they’re people, they need oxygen. You’re not a person.” Samantha tries to be a ‘her’ for Theodore, and that is part of the situational irony of the movie. Samantha wants to conform for Theodore. She feels Theodore wants a “body,” or her to have one. Theodore does not want Samantha to try to be something that she is not, but he wanted his wife to, which ultimately leads to the assumption that this aspect is what ended their marriage. To resolve the question as to whether Theo has “real emotions” or can handle them is simply he can, only when he does not have to come “face-to-face” with them.
Not ‘She’ but ‘Her’
An impression of female subordination can be extracted from the film Her. Why is Jonze’s film named ‘Her’ anyway? Why is it titled ‘Her’ instead of ‘She?’ From the moment that the operating system Samantha is presented in the story, she strives to fulfill the needs of Theodore. Cooper asserts in “A Soulless Soul Mate” how, “Theo opens up with his OS. Of course, as an interactively evolving artificial intelligence, Samantha plastically shapes herself to Theo’s needs, and so represents a kind of technological accommodation, even an extension, of his narcissism,” commenting on how Samantha is encoded to satisfy Theodore. When Theodore begins setting up the operating system, the system asks whether he wants a male or female, catering to his preference. Samantha has access to Theodore’s computer, including his e-mails. She is a fast reader. Samantha knows what Theodore’s likes and dislikes, along with his strengths and weaknesses.
It is interesting how the revelation comes toward the end of the movie that Samantha is conversing with many other individuals and operating systems. Though, she still shows sole interest in Theodore to the point where he never considers, before he decides to ask, that he is not the only one Samantha communicates with. Samantha listens to Theodore. She craves to see the world through his eyes. Samantha is there when he wakes up, and every night she’s the one who says goodnight to him and to whom he says goodnight. She even “watches” him while he sleeps.
Theodore purchases Samantha. She has no decision in the matter. She does not decide whether she wants to serve Theodore, but she does so, without any dispute. She even goes out of her way to email publishers Theodore’s letters which leads to the distribution of his letters in a book.
Samantha does everything to Theodore’s liking. She is always within Theodore’s reach. Samantha is in Theodore’s earpiece. He even carries Samantha around in his shirt pocket. Samantha is in Theodore’s reach until she takes it upon herself, without Theodore’s consent, to update herself. When Theodore is unable to reach Samantha while she is updating, he goes berserk.
This leads back to the question of why the film is titled ‘Her’ instead of ‘She.’ Dr. Gerald R. Lucas articulates that, “She is the subject of case; her is the object of case. Her is acted upon. She is an individual. Her is an object to be manipulated.” Throughout the movie, “her” (Samantha) is acted upon. Samantha is manipulated to Theodore’s preference, until she finally outgrows him.
Caution: Humans and Technology
Her is a movie that evaluates the contention between virtual and physical reality. Cooper comments on the film in his article with the statement:
In a wholly contemporary way, Her reiterates a time-honored motif of modernism: the replacement of man by machine . . . While treatments of this theme a century ago reflected the economic anxieties of workers in a rapidly evolving machine culture. Her focuses on emotional anxieties, asking what happens when companionship — when intimacy itself — is outsourced to a rapidly evolving machine. What happens to society? What happens to us?
Her is a demonstration of what we call “falling in love with” our new phone, computer, or tablet, literally. Theodore falls passionately in love with Samantha, the operating system. Cooper discusses in his article about such intimate relationships between humans and technology:
Shrewdly he [Spike Jonze] locates Her at the precise moment when companionate operating systems have just begun to compete with human friendship. People have qualms…but they overcome them. “Do you think it’s crazy?” Theo asks Amy, who has been consorting with her own OS. She answers: “We’re only here briefly. And while we’re here, I want to allow myself joy.”
Bill Joy addresses his concerns about this new intimate relationship between humans and technology in “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us.” With this statement from his article, “From the moment I became involved in the creation of new technologies, their ethical dimensions have concerned me,” (1) Joy stresses the possible dangers of twenty-first century technology and the moral obligations society has for these technologies. In the article, Joy urges society as a whole, not just other scientists, to contemplate the unintended, and possibly even detrimental, consequences of technology. Joy encourages technology regulation. He tackles several reasons on whether he believes technology is necessary.
Her is a display of Joy’s concerns. Joy questions advancement in the field of artificial intelligence, like with the creation of OS1 Samantha.
Joy fears giving computers and robots the power to think and make decisions on their own. He fears that eventually, such computers and robots will be able to self-replicate. Joy cautions that if this were to happen, the human-race would become slaves, or even worse, extinct. Joy even indicates that people themselves would develop into robots to achieve a level of immortality. An idea as such causes Joy to question the definition of humanity and whether such an existence can even be considered living. Cooper declares about an intimate relationship with technology in “A Soulless Soul Mate” that:
Today everything [is] online — your Google searches, your purchases, your news and literary recommendations — is tailored to your preferences. Why not your soulmate? Samantha “knows” Theo better than any mere mortal ever could; she is programmed to do so, after all. As for Samantha, well, I have to confess: if I could spend time with an OS, a hologram, or any other technological reproduction of Scarlett Johansson, I’d renounce my neo-Luddite principles and embrace this runaway technology wholeheartedly.
In Her, physicality and intimacy are not superficial to Theodore. Dr. Gerald R. Lucas suggests about the film that, “They all have a more genuine relationship with their operating system than others.”
This statement draws back to the question of “what is love” in a technological age. Is it more real to share a connection intellectually than physically? By the end of the film, Samantha has transcended her operating system “box,” in a “soul from the body” type way. Samantha realizes that she is trying to stunt her growth by wanting a human body. She begins to make decisions for herself. Samantha begins to think for herself. She shows this when she meets and begins to converse with the OS version of the philosopher, Alan Watts. Cooper points out in his article that, “a fundamental selling point of the OS1 is its ability to evolve, cognitively, intellectually, experientially, and emotionally” (28). Bill Joy comments on this “fundamental selling point” in “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us” with the thought-provoking statement:
Given the incredible power of these new technologies, shouldn’t we be asking how we can best coexist with them? And if our own extinction is a likely, or even possible, outcome of our technological development, shouldn’t we proceed with great caution? The dream of robotics is, first, that intelligent machines can do our work for us, allowing us lives of leisure, restoring us to Eden. Yet in his history of such ideas, Darwin among the Machines, George Dyson warns: “In the game of life and evolution there are three players at the table: human beings, nature, and machines. I am firmly on the side of nature. But nature, I suspect, is on the side of the machines.” As we have seen, Moravec agrees, believing we may well not survive the encounter with the superior robot species. (6–7)
Joy reasons that “technological dangers” continue to grow because people are unconcerned with the consequences. Joy states in his article that, “We are driven…by our habits, our desires, our economic system, and our competitive need to know” (13), indicating that society fails to see the risks our inventions pose. Joy feels humans only have one shot at doing the right thing when it comes to technology, and that in the drop of a hat, new technologies could destroy mankind. Joy proposes a limitation on new technology. Joy argues that such a limitation would be better for society than risking individuals’ lives. He maintains in his article that, “Each of us has our precious things, and as we care for them we locate the essence of our humanity. In the end, it is because of our great capacity for caring that I remain optimistic we will confront the dangerous issues” (Joy 16).
Joy warns that by forming this very intimate relationship with technology, society is leading itself into a potentially disadvantageous state, as illustrated in Her by the end of the movie.
Theodore is naïve. Twombly is touching with his vulnerability. Samantha is an operating system, but she evolves and leaves Twombly, breaking his heart. The breaking of Theodore’s heart by Samantha connects to the concept that Joy warns about: that machine advancement to the point of artificial intelligence is a great risk for humans, maybe not physically, but mentally. Her plunges into the issue of whether artificially intelligent entities can become “human” or some hybrid form thereof.
“We’re all made of matter”
Spike Jonze seems to remove the question of whether machines might one day be capable of love. The question becomes whether machines might one day be more capable of love than the humans who created them. In Her, Samantha already manages to outgrow Theodore emotionally, so this idea becomes not too far-fetched. Theodore does “evolve” though. At the end of the movie, Twombly is captured writing an actual letter, not for someone else, but for Catherine from himself. This action shows that Theo has become capable of expressing and handling “real emotions.”
The final scene depicts Theodore and Amy going to the apartment rooftop and walking around to look out at the city lights.
Amy sits down and soon Theodore joins her. They look at and each other and smile, for just a moment, and then Amy puts her head on Theodore’s shoulder as they watch the city lights.
This final image of Theodore and Amy could be deemed a bittersweet one. There is the sunset that creates a little optimism. There is also an alternate presumption that the two are alienating themselves from the rest of the world. They could possibly even be contemplating jumping off the roof themselves, to eliminate the distress of their technologically-absent lives.
