#this part really resonated with me like | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

commsroom · 2 years

Text

'Beyond This Power of My Nature': Hera’s self-perception and relationship to humanity

Okay, this is something I’ve wanted to make a proper post about for a long time now: what evidence we have for how Hera sees herself in canon, why I think it’s important to acknowledge she is written with an element of physicality, and how I think, keeping the themes of Wolf 359 in mind, Hera as an AI Character comes across very differently from a lot of other AI Characters. The idea that she is fundamentally human has different implications in the context of a show that is so focused on humanity, and specifically on the way that its characters (at various points) navigate, reject, desperately try to hold onto, and are repeatedly denied recognition of their humanity. There’s so much more I could say on the topic, but. This post is already over six thousand words, so it will have to do.

tl;dr: Hera’s identity is not representative of AI Identity in any broader sense, even just within Wolf 359. Hera has a defined internal self image that is singular, and distinct from the Hephaestus or any systems she runs. There is an aspect of physicality to the way she is written, performed, and treated by the text, and she canonically experiences physical loneliness. Her feelings of isolation and the ways she is othered, even by herself at times, are reflective of very real human experiences - in particular, I have to touch on how I feel Hera can be read as a trans character. Hera struggles with the feeling that she is inherently different from everyone around her, and therefore intrinsically doomed, and it is only by letting go of those fatalistic notions, realizing she and her friends are more alike than different, that she can start to move forward and imagine a life for herself.

A couple of disclaimers:

For the purposes of this post, assume that ‘personhood’ (recognition as a full and equal person to any other person) and ‘humanity’ (the quality of Being Human, however nebulously defined) are separate, albeit related, concepts. Assume that ‘personhood’ is a given for all sentient beings as far as the text is concerned, even if other characters within the text may not extend the same courtesy.

I’d also like to say that I know the subject of Humanity as it relates to AI characters can be a touchy one - I’m also coming at this from the perspective of someone who finds it a little distasteful to ascribe a Human Identity to characters who already have their own, complete, distinctly non-human identities, or to place Humanity on a pedestal in a sci-fi context where humans are the peers of other sentient beings. I don’t think these concerns apply to Hera, or to Wolf 359 as a show, but just to be clear: everything I want to say here is about Hera, specifically. It’s not meant to apply to other AI characters, even within Wolf 359, and it definitely isn’t meant to be viewed through the lens of real-world AI development. I believe Wolf 359 is a character drama above anything else, and I believe it is especially concerned with its exploration of humanity - something I’ll talk more about later. With that said:

i. ‘some do. i don’t.’: other examples of AI identity in wolf 359

How much do we know about general concepts of AI identity in the universe of Wolf 359? The short answer… not much. The slightly longer answer:

When Minkowski introduces herself to Hera, there’s this exchange:

(Ep. 61: MINKOWSKI: Yes, they, uh, briefed me about you. I just... Unit 214, I presume? / HERA: Oh, no, no. Hera. Definitely Hera. / MINKOWSKI: Oh, sorry. I'd heard Sensus Units prefer to go by their serial - / HERA: Some do. I don't. If that's all right, Commander?)

Minkowski says she “heard Sensus Units prefer to go by their serial [numbers]” and Hera responds, “Some do. I don’t.” … It’s entirely possible that both Minkowski and Hera are going off of Goddard propaganda here, or that Hera doesn’t know what other Sensus Units might think at all and she’s just trying to defer to Minkowski before making a request of her. But for all we know, maybe that’s true? Maybe some Sensus Units really do prefer that. And whether it’s true or not doesn’t really matter. In saying it, Hera acknowledges that all AIs may not feel the way she does, but that this is how she feels about her name.

In Change of Mind, we have this exchange between Eris and Lovelace:

(Suddenly, behind her, there's a soft WOOSH! Lovelace spins around and - finds herself face-to-face with a YOUNG WOMAN. / ERIS: Hi. / Lovelace blinks. Confused. / LOVELACE: Hi? What - who - / ERIS: It's me. Eris. / LOVELACE: But... I thought you were an A.I. / ERIS: I am. This is how I see myself. Well, how I see a version of myself. As long as we're both in a mental state, we can interact this way. Remember, you're not really here either. / LOVELACE: But... look at you. You're - / ERIS: Yeah. I know.)

I’m not going to speculate on exactly how Eris appears in this scene, but: “This is how I see myself. Well, how I see a version of myself.” is interesting to consider, both in the context that Eris has an internal sense of self (presumably human in appearance, as far as the stage notes go) and the suggestion that there are other ways she sees herself that might be equally ‘her’ - does this mean Eris as in the Eris we know in Change of Mind, or does it imply that each iteration of Eris, in each of the training modules Goddard uses her consciousness for, perceives herself differently? Both? Neither?

And I think it’s revealing to show these two lines next to each other:

(LAMBERT: Rhea says... “It’s just the way they programmed her, back off.”)

(Ep. 7: EIFFEL: C’mon, Commander, you can’t really hold that against her. It’s just her programming! / HERA: Oh, stop. Do you have any idea how condescending that is? Just chalking everything I do to my programming? What if I just went around blaming every stupid decision you made on... “biology”? / EIFFEL: Hera... / HERA: “Why are they doing that, isn’t that a bit dangerous?” Oh never mind, that’s just their biology. “That’s a terrible idea, don’t they know any better?” Just that pesky ol’ biology, we really should’ve sprang for the more expensive model.)

… Which. I kinda think the difference in philosophy there speaks for itself. Sure, Rhea’s line is in defense of Eris, while Hera doesn’t appreciate ‘it’s just programming’ being used as a defense of herself, but I find it hard to imagine she’d ever see it as anything but condescension.

It also might be worth noting that none of the other AIs we know (despite how little we know about them) seem to be people Hera would really get along with: Enlil is the exact “willing to roll over for any bozo in a lab coat” type of AI who gets the “cushy job flying jet liners over the Atlantic” she shows such disdain for; if Hera met Eris it would likely be under circumstances where Eris was a threat to her friends + despite Eris’s ‘rogue AI’ aesthetic, she is designed to serve that purpose by Goddard and serves her role (and accepts her fate) without much resistance; and we don’t know much about Rhea, but from her defense of Eris, and what we can interpret from her limited interactions as a sense of professionalism, she and Hera also… likely would not see eye to eye.

All of that to say: we don’t know much about AI identity as it broadly exists within the setting of Wolf 359, but I think we do know enough to fairly assume it’s as varied and individual as identity would be for any other group of people. Which… of course it would be. I think it’s entirely possible that some AIs would have a sense of self-identity that is entirely divorced from human categorization. And all of this presents a ton of questions that I don’t really have answers for, that I don’t think we even have enough information about in canon to properly speculate on, but I think it’s important groundwork to lay out to further emphasize: when I talk about Hera’s identity, I am talking about Hera’s identity. How she sees herself, how she wants to be seen, what she values, etc. as an individual person. So.

ii. ‘you’re remembering this wrong’: what the subjective reality of memory can tell us about hera’s self-perception

If there was only one scene I could call attention to here, one piece of evidence re: Hera’s identity and self-perception, it would be the opening scene from Memoria. If you want to, please just go listen to that scene again, right now. Notice how it’s framed, and what the audio cues might suggest in a visual medium - in her memory, Hera perceives herself at the table with the rest of the crew. Physically present.

So much of Memoria is about subjective reality, memory as the product of the world through your own personal filter, your perspective and biases. “Everything before memory is about the world around you. Everything after it is all in your head.”

So looking at how Hera remembers things, more than anything else, I think can tell us a lot about how she perceives herself. Even when she doesn’t realize it. ‘Minkowski’ in Hera’s memory says… well. We get this scene:

(Ep. 41: MINKOWSKI: You're remembering this wrong. You weren't here with us. / HERA: I... I wasn't? / MINKOWSKI: No, Hera. We were over here, and you... / The soundscape shifts. There's a WOOSH, followed by some DIGITAL PROCESSING. It subsides, and when Minkowski says - / MINKOWSKI (CONT’D): ... you were over there. / - she sounds like her voice is coming through a SPEAKER. And it GLITCHES. We hear her the way we normally hear Hera. / HERA: Oh. Right. I'm here. I'm here.)

But here’s the thing. Minkowski - the real Minkowski - would never say Hera wasn’t there with them, because from Minkowski’s perspective, she was. This is Hera’s perspective - Hera feels as if she wasn’t there. And to quote @the-empty-man, from a similar conversation we had a while back: ‘in the actual reality of that Thanksgiving meal, she was there with them in the sense that she could directly see them and hear them and interact with them in various ways and (if we think of her as being located in the Hephaestus) she was kind of sharing the same physical space as them. In the reality of that memory, she was as "there with them" as she ever has been with anyone (excluding weird mind-space things) but that didn't feel like enough for her. If she doesn't think she was fully there with them then (or at least a part of her doesn't), then she's never felt like she's been fully there with anyone (again maybe excluding mind-space weirdness). It's like she's got this longing for something that she barely even has a frame of reference for.’

I think that’s just it. Hera experiences physical loneliness. The wording of “over there.” The shift in sound design, and the implication that Hera hears the others the way they hear her - that she’s not an equal presence in a different form, from her own perspective, but physically somewhere else on the other side of an impassable barrier that the others don’t even recognize exists. She has an image of herself in her mind that most other people never see.

Still, ‘how does Hera see herself?’ is a difficult question, and not one I’m going to be able to answer all at once. For now, it might be useful to first point out how Hera definitely, canonically does NOT see herself - she does not see herself as the Hephaestus.

In her own memory, she imagines herself as singular, physical, (by all indication) human in appearance. Without the awareness that ‘mind-space weirdness’ is even possible, that appearance is for no one but herself. And the Hephaestus, I think, is an entity in its own right, and one that Hera is bound to for most of the show, but she exists within it, not as an inherent part of it. Her connection to the Hephaestus, the functions she performs, are her job. The further into the show you get, and the more Hera asserts her own autonomy, the more the text distinguishes between Hera, the systems that she runs, and even her hardware. And, of course: “Or end up in other places. Doing things not because you're good at them, but just because of what you are. Has it ever occurred to you that there might be jobs for which the only requirement is having no pulse?”

iii. ‘i know what’s waiting for me back there’: when and why hera rejects humanity

It’s important to note that Hera’s identity absolutely is informed by the fact that she’s an AI, and the way she navigates the world and her relationships because of it. At times, this creates something of a double bind for her - it’s frustrating to have others acknowledge her situation, when it others her and creates or emphasizes a reminder of the distance between them, but it’s also frustrating when they don’t recognize she can’t always do the things that they can do, or that she has other physical/safety/etc. concerns that wouldn’t occur to them.

Consider the part in Theta Scenario where Eiffel has them vote on whether or not to return to Earth and sheepishly has to add, “and, uh… all those without hands?” The progression of this scene is a good illustration re: Hera’s alternating refusal of and embrace of humanity: she blames her loneliness on her programming, her attachments, her humanity - she chooses to separate herself from these things without ever making an affirmative statement as to what part of her would be Her in their place. That’s because it’s coming from a place of hurt. And remember that she’s still dealing with Maxwell’s betrayal. This is an emotional reaction, which I suppose is worth noting in itself: when Hera is hurt, her judgment is clouded, and she can be confidently wrong. Consider how convinced she was that Hilbert was making everything about Decima up, while she was at the height of her anger with him.

When Hera is hurt, when she is feeling betrayed, and frightened, she tends to self-isolate - she leans into the idea that she is fundamentally different and therefore intrinsically doomed. It’s only by letting go of these preconceptions and allowing for real connection that she’s able to heal. It’s true that the only people who have hurt her have been humans - but so are the only people who have ever helped her, who she’s had any meaningful relationships with at all. She has to believe she isn’t fundamentally different from the others, because ultimately that’s what allows her to return home with them - to think maybe there could be something for her on Earth after all. And by choosing to believe in Eiffel’s promise to her, that whatever happens when they get back to Earth, they’ll go through it together… That's a start.

iv. ‘i know where this train goes, i've been on it before. "she'll hurt someone. she can't be trusted. it's okay - she isn't even human.’: hera, lovelace, and real-world alienation

I think it’s also worth noting, however, that while Hera’s identity is informed by being an AI, the implication of Being an AI in the world of Wolf 359 specifically manifests in ways that are directly applicable to real-world human experiences. The double bind that I described, the lack of life experience compared to your peers and the embarrassment associated with that, the feeling of alienation and isolation, even the feeling of being ‘not quite human’ through repeated dehumanization and othering - these are things that real people experience. In the same way that Lovelace is an alien clone, yes, but more importantly just a person with PTSD… Hera is an AI, but she’s also a person with anxiety and chronic pain - and with experiences that I think can be directly drawn to neurodivergent, disabled, and trans experiences in various ways. I’ll try not to get too into that aspect of it here, but I do think it’s worth noting - Wolf 359 is a show about humanity, about people whose humanity has been denied to them in various ways, interpersonally and/or systemically, and I think it’s important to consider Hera’s character arc and the ways she chooses to assert her autonomy and self-identity within that framework.

And of course, speaking of Lovelace, it’s impossible to ignore that Hera is the most staunch and immediate defender of Lovelace’s humanity, following the realization that Lovelace is herself an alien clone, because Hera recognizes the way others react to her perceived differences with fear, distrust, etc. and how they will use those feelings to justify dehumanizing her. Lovelace’s humanity and Hera’s humanity are directly linked in the text.

v. ‘it’s like you’re making a movie’: why i think it does hera’s character arc a disservice to approach it with general biases regarding AI characters

You know that thing about how Wolf 359 leans into sci-fi tropes? How Eiffel is the wisecracking everyman, Minkowski is the by-the-books Commander, Hilbert is… well, you know. And so on. But instead of being subversions of these common archetypes, the characters in Wolf 359 are as intricate and contradictory and dynamic as they are because a central tenet of the show’s character writing is to ask ‘why would a real person behave this way?’

If we extend that logic to Hera and interpret her as an example of the ‘AI who is more human than some humans’ archetype, then the answer to the question is simply… because she is fundamentally human. The failure of that trope, in my opinion, is that it often sets up an AI character in the position of ‘becoming’ human, suggesting humanity is something greater and aspirational, and often directly equating ‘being a person’ with ‘being human’, even in settings where other non-human and equally sentient forms of intelligence exist. There’s something self-aggrandizing and patronizing in that.

But this is NOT the case with Hera; she is just as human at the start of the show as she is by the end of it - her struggle is not in ‘attaining humanity’ but in navigating the biases of others, the way repeated dehumanization has affected her own self-perception - to get others to see her the way she sees herself.

vi. ‘such a big, big universe...’: isolation, the ‘big picture’, and what the contradictions in am i alone now? tell us about hera’s priorities

Here’s a line I think about a lot. Specifically, I think about how often this line is used to represent Hera… “Such a big, big universe, and you only gave yourselves the tools to think about a tiny portion of it.” It’s fascinatingly ironic when you put it back into context: consider the way this monologue is framed. She’s telling all of it to Eiffel, but she isn’t, really. That’s the conflict. She wants to be able to tell him these things in the same way she wants to be able to describe what she sees to him, to get him to understand her experience, because she can think about so many more parts of that big, big universe at once, and what does it get her? She can’t do anything with it. She can’t tell anyone. She ‘tells’ Eiffel anyway - she chooses to talk to him, even when she isn’t actually talking to him. She can’t make that connection, but she wants to, so badly.

She thinks she’ll be left alone up there, sooner or later. It’s a feeling she learns to let go of, little by little, until something else finally seems possible.

There’s a theme throughout Wolf 359: the ‘Big Picture’ as an antagonistic force, whether it’s alien and unknowable, or corporate and uncaring, or some combination, and how its counterpart is Personal Connection. That’s something I’d like to get into in more depth in another post, but it’s worth touching on here because I think keeping that in mind reframes so much of Hera’s monologue in Am I Alone Now?

Think about how much of it is those Big Ideas in contrast with the familiar and immediate - that she wants to tell these things to Eiffel. “Some days I wonder if I’ll miss you, after you go away forever… I doubt it. But you never know.” The subtext is in the contradiction. The lonelier Hera is, the more she denies her humanity, but in her denial, in her loneliness, that humanity becomes all the more apparent.

Sometimes I see people take ‘I doubt it’ at face value, as evidence of eventual character/relationship growth, suggesting she gets more attached to him over time… I don’t think that’s true. She watches a star die 13.7 light years to the left and she thinks of him. She watches the swirling, raging solar winds in colors she has no name for, and wishes she could share that with him. She’s not talking to anyone, but she still chooses to talk to him. Of course she would miss him. Of course she would.

vii. ‘even hilbert never sunk that low’: how hera is treated by the show’s antagonists

It might be interesting to note that almost all of the antagonists do acknowledge Hera’s personhood, and that the way they treat her is almost always a reflection of how they treat other, flesh-and-blood people. The only antagonist who seems to honestly see her as less than a person is Hilbert, and even in his “tell me you’re not mourning that appliance” levels of cruelty towards her, there’s a way that it’s not so different from his general disregard for human life and ability to see people less as individuals, and more as expendable assets to be used in pursuit of a Greater Cause.

With that said, he’s not particularly relevant to the discussion of Hera’s self-image. The characters who are: Maxwell and Pryce.

viii. ‘i can totally rewrite a memory’: hera and maxwell

I think this is where the distinction between personhood and humanity becomes most relevant. Because I think Maxwell believes very strongly in AI Personhood, and I believe she generally prefers the company of AIs to human people, and I think… those facts allow her to help Hera in a way no one else could have, but they work against her understanding of Hera as an individual. Let me try to explain.

From the moment Maxwell gets on board the Hephaestus, she starts altering things in Hera’s programming - little things, like Minkowski’s title, that Hera can ignore because the larger things that Maxwell is able to fix for her genuinely improve her quality of life. And Maxwell, despite showing compassion for Hera, uses more mechanical terminology to refer to her than almost anyone else. But the thing is… while the SI-5 certainly have no qualms about blatant and intentional cruelty when they deem it necessary, I don’t know if Maxwell realizes what a violation some of these things are. She helps Hera, sure, unquestionably. But she also betrays her in what might be the worst possible way.

Think about the way Cutter threatens to delete and alter Hera’s memories - in Decommissioned, and in the live show. It isn’t fundamentally all that different from what Maxwell wants to do in Memoria, but Maxwell seems incapable of understanding why the concept is so upsetting to Hera. I don’t think we have enough information to make any claim for certain, but I do think it’s possible that other AIs may not perceive themselves in the same way Hera does, or value the same things. There’s a chance this is not malicious at all, but just a failure to recognize Hera’s priorities as an individual do not align with Maxwell’s previous experiences. With that acknowledged, Hera defends Maxwell against the idea she might turn her against the others, saying, “Doctor Maxwell understands better than anyone how much of a violation that would be. She would hate herself.” … but does she? Would she? Does it matter, when she does it anyway?

Hera is distraught over her realization that she never really knew Maxwell, but I guess I like the idea that maybe Maxwell didn’t understand Hera as well as she thought she did either. That maybe Hera’s unpredictability is something beyond programming, something closer to the same messy, complicated human quality that the rest of the crew survives on - that Hera was able to catch Maxwell off guard and win against her for the same reason they all triumph over Pryce and Cutter in the end. Because human unpredictability is the one thing that Goddard’s Big Picture can never factor for.

ix. ‘you don’t look like me’: hera and pryce

And if there’s any relationship that can tell us about Hera’s self-image, it’s this one. Pryce is fully aware of Hera’s humanity. Pryce’s collar program (and Maxwell’s, for that matter - another link between them) serves a similar function to Pryce’s restraining bolts, but as far as Pryce is concerned, I think it’s actually preferable to her that Hera is aware of it. “They could be whatever she wanted them to be - and as real as she wanted them to be - and they never left her behind... and they never talked back... and they were never afraid of her. Except when she wanted them to be.” …

Likewise, Hera’s attachment to her own identity is necessary for Pryce’s methods of control to be effective. Pryce is able to hurt Hera by dehumanizing her, by degendering her, by taking away her name and her autonomy, by reminding her that even her own voice isn’t her own - because those things matter to Hera.

So then you have that line in the finale, where Pryce sees Hera in Eiffel’s mind and she says, “You don’t look like me.” I think there are a few different ways you could read that.

One, the more common interpretation: that Pryce expects Hera should look like her because she is functionally ‘designed in her image’ and that Hera, over time, intentionally shifted her internal sense of self away from that. And I like this, I think there’s a power in it, especially alongside headcanons where Hera adopts some features of the people she loves to incorporate into her own - but I think it might be the less likely option. While I think it’s entirely believable that Pryce would give Hera her appearance in the same way she gave her her voice, and while I think there is an intentional cruelty (and given that Pryce herself was probably isolated for much of her life, perhaps a kind of awful retribution in her mind) to Hera having human desires without human physicality, I don’t think all of that is just Pryce’s design. I think that’s giving her too much credit.

The other possible interpretation: canonically, Hera is able to be in Eiffel’s mind by interfacing with Pryce’s neural imaging processor, which is presumably configured for Pryce. She is intentionally running a whole bunch of extra code to appear as herself instead. I don’t know. There’s something about that idea, to me. That by default, more easily, she could choose to appear the way Pryce does, but that it matters to her that she doesn’t.

(I also kind of like the idea - given the transhumanist nature of Pryce and Cutter - that the way Hera appears in the finale is distinctly human. I think it works well with the themes of the show - that where Pryce rejects her innate humanity, considers it weakness, considers herself above it, tries to transcend it… Hera recognizes the strength in her own humanity, for all the ways it fails her, embracing it has allowed her connection to others that she would’ve thought impossible, has made her more free, has made her more herself.)

And again, if there’s anything that tells us about Hera’s self-image, it’s this: we know from later events in the finale that there are ways she could’ve interfaced with the machine without appearing in Eiffel’s mind, but she wanted to. She wanted to be there, as herself, as ‘physically’ as possible, and be seen. If you don’t count her punching Pryce in the face (which… I guess it counts as a type of interaction), the only direct physical interaction Hera ever has with another character in the entire show is the stage note that says: Hera and Eiffel stand together, his arm around her shoulder.

x. ‘[gritted digital teeth]’: physicality in the way hera is written and performed, and how that informs her as a character

A bit of a tangent, but speaking of physicality. One thing I always like to point out is how, in the live show, they chose to have Hera on stage with the others, but just… far enough away from them, physically. And the only person who ever crosses the stage to interact with her directly is Eiffel. Of course, you can’t take any of that as a literal expression of… anything, but I do think it’s worth considering in the context of Hera’s physical loneliness expressed in Memoria, the way Eiffel consistently tries to bridge the gap between them via emotional connection, and, finally, Hera’s lone physical interaction in the show being with Eiffel in the finale.

There’s also the (albeit mostly circumstantial) detail that Michaela Swee recorded a lot of the show remotely, with the notable exceptions of Memoria and Brave New World - the two episodes where Hera has ‘physical’ appearances.

And if we’re going to talk about the way choices in the writing/acting impact the way Hera’s character comes across, there’s this screenshot I managed to dig up from Gabriel Urbina’s now-defunct blog. I think it’s worth noting that, as well as expressing physicality within the text of the show, she is also admittedly written with, performed with, and informed by those aspects of physicality, even when it’s not visible to us - in that sense, from a metatextual perspective, you could even argue she has just as much physical presence as any other character in the show.

(Someone says, “Okay so I was a little wary of watching the live show, mostly because of Hera. I didn’t want her personified. But the way Mikaela [sic] Swee portrays her character, puts Hera on that stage, is perfect.” to which Gabriel responds, “A perfectly understandable concern, but hopefully one that’s not too prevalent after you watch the show. There is so much of Michaela’s mannerisms and physicality in how we write Hera and the vocal performance that hopefully seeing her perform it will amplify the character that she’s created rather than narrowing it down.”)

xi. ‘i know plenty’: challenges to hera’s identity, self perception, and connection to humanity

So, why am I so caught up on the humanity part of this? Because I think Wolf 359 is, before anything else, a show that is concerned with humanity. I think it is a show about very human people (in some very flawed and tragic ways) trying very hard to retain their humanity in inhumane circumstances, and often with people actively trying to dehumanize them, whether interpersonally or through corporate alienation, human experimentation, the treatment of prisoners, etc. But that leads into a whole other topic, so instead I’ll share these three things:

This exchange from Out of the Loop, where Hera’s argument with Jacobi hinges on humanity - her accusation that he “works so hard at being inhuman” and her anger and offense at his retort that she wouldn’t know what that means:

(Ep. 49: HERA: You are despicable, Jacobi. I have never met someone who worked so hard at being inhuman. / JACOBI: What do you know about being human? / HERA: I know plenty.)

This line, from Quiet, Please, where Minkowski defends Hera’s autonomy directly and refers to her as a woman, which I promise will be relevant:

(Ep. 58: Minkowski SLOWLY, maintaining her VICE-LIKE GRIP, PULLS HIS EAR DOWN, bringing Jacobi's face down to her eye-level. / MINKOWSKI (low, deadly): Shut. The Hell. Up. That woman? For the last two weeks, she was the only person who even tried to resist what Pryce and Cutter were doing to us. So you are going to show her some goddammed respect, am I clear?)

And because I’m incapable of writing lengthy meta about Hera without bringing up this quote from Sarah Shachat in some capacity:

“What I can tell you is that the fact Hera that clearly has a human gender in her speech and conscious perspective, yet lacks human physicality, is something she definitely does think about. She isn’t removed from it, or taking the view of some sort of Hyper Advanced Future Machine for whom human binary constructions are funny, if a bit quaint. She’s been placed on a spectrum the same way she was placed aboard the Hephaestus. Her journey so far has very much been about dealing with that, about trying to assert her unique sense of self given the limitations placed on her and to communicate with these other idiots who don’t share her experience.”

While this is about Hera’s relationship to her gender in particular, I think the fact that she sees herself as a woman specifically is relevant. The fact that she has a human gender and she cares about that, and that human concepts of identity in general do apply to her. She doesn’t consider herself separate from or above them.

And that leads, perhaps, to one more question. Is it possible that Hera sees herself as human not because of an innate desire for the attributes of humanity, but because all of the people she knows are human - because once you conflate personhood and humanity on a societal level, is it possible she feels that she will only be seen as a complete person if she is also human? And, I mean… Maybe? It’s possible. But I don’t think it changes the outcome.

I’m asking this here because I think this is also analogous to a trans experience. If you have social expectations of what a woman is, and you feel that you are a woman, and so you choose to conform to those social expectations (to whatever degree) because it allows your womanhood to be recognized… as long as the desire for those attributes comes from a genuine place, can you really tell if you would feel differently about it if society viewed womanhood differently? At some point socialization, societal expectation, and personal preference do get muddled up to a certain degree, and while it’s worth examining to make sure you’re doing what makes you most comfortable, whatever that may be… I think at a certain point ‘I feel better presenting this way than not’ is the only real answer you can find.

I think this also applies to Hera, in her connection to humanity and her expressions of/desires for a kind of physicality. We have a sense of how she canonically perceives herself, and how she struggles to be perceived by others, and with that in mind it’s largely irrelevant to me how she might feel about her identity with social pressures removed. Identity is shaped by connection, and while I waver on how much I want to say that Hera is human, full stop, no qualifiers… She is a person with human desires who wants to be close with and share experiences with her human friends. She is an AI, and that informs her identity and the way she navigates the world, but I don’t believe those things are mutually exclusive.

(I’ve written a little more about why I think Hera’s character arc reads as a trans narrative here.)

More than anything, I have a hard time believing that Hera would want to be seen as fundamentally different from the people she loves, when struggling to overcome that difference both within her own self-perception and in her interactions with others, is such a significant part of her character development. There are times where Hera being an AI does mean she has to consider things that the others might not, and it’s important that the people in her life are aware of and respectful of that. But to emphasize her differences in circumstances where it’s not relevant only serves to other her.

Or, let me put it this way. Whether or not Hera would want a body, if she could have one, is a whole other set of questions, but if Wolf 359 is a show about humanity, about connection, about the value of small, personal things over the Big Picture, then I think if Hera was able to hug her friends, if she was able to go somewhere by herself, entirely by herself, and put her hands in the water, and feel it… even the fact alone that she might have the desire for those things… Well, maybe there’s a way that Wolf 359 is about that, too.

xii. ‘if this is it? i’d rather go as me, thank you very much.’: conclusions

I often see people say that we have ‘no way of knowing’ how Hera might want to be seen, or even that she definitely wouldn’t want to be seen as human, or that it wouldn’t occur to her to want [whatever thing] because she’s ‘not human’ and I just… I don't think any of those things are true. I think there’s plenty to go off of in canon, and I think it all points more in this particular direction than not.

I once saw someone say - as a criticism - that Hera was less of an AI character and more of just “a person in the walls” and that stuck with me because… well, because it was such a funny way of phrasing it, but also because. That’s not a weakness of the writing or a failure of imagination. That’s the point of her character! There are so many other sci-fi stories that are interested in more speculative questions re: how AI characters might be different from us and prioritize different things. That’s not Wolf 359! Hera is not meaningfully different from the others, she just thinks she must be because she has different life circumstances and has been treated differently.

And I understand why people are wary about ascribing ‘human’ qualities to AI characters, given the track record of a lot of science fiction, and the reasons a lot of people might relate to AI characters in particular. I really do. I just believe that in this particular case, with this particular character, and the themes in this particular show, it would be doing Hera a disservice to ignore these aspects of her self-identity that she so clearly canonically struggles to come to terms with, when her physicality in the finale in particular is so much a culmination of this fight to be seen - in both a literal and metaphorical sense.

I believe the tragedy of Hera as a character is that she is written to be fundamentally human, with physical desires, physical loneliness, an internal self-image that - except under extreme circumstances - she can never show to anyone else. But one that matters to her, and that she holds onto, nonetheless.

And there’s so much more I could say. I could talk more about Hera’s connection to water, her apparent draw to the natural and tangible. I could talk about how she reads, the way she processes things through emotion and into memory. I could talk about how she phrases things in terms like “now I’m going to have a headache” and only rephrases if someone challenges her on her wording. I could talk about how, while, yes, she is technically always everywhere, it’s also established that she can be more present in one place if she wants to be (and how this connects to her learning mindfulness in canon.) I could talk about how Hera sleeps, how she dreams, how Pryce has intentionally given her nightmares and threatens her with more.

But all of those are just details. If there’s anything I’d want people to take away from this, it would be that, one, over the course of the show, I believe it becomes more and more apparent that Hera is fundamentally just an average, more-or-less human person navigating extremely abnormal and inhumane circumstances, and, two, she experiences physical loneliness. She starts off the show embittered by, and in part in denial of, these facts, and by the ways she’s been mistreated, isolated, and othered. Accepting that she’s not fundamentally different from the people around her, and therefore not intrinsically doomed, is what ultimately allows her to leave the Hephaestus with the others, and allows her to believe that building a life on Earth is possible for her.

#wolf 359 #w359 #hera wolf 359 #hera w359 #okay. it's done. it's done.#it's impossible for this to ever be as thorough and clear as i want it to be. but it's done.#thank you so much to beth for helping my organize my thoughts #it's just like. i don't know.#so many people seem to read the way hera sometimes distances herself from humanity #as a desire to be seen (and respected) as something different #but it's always in moments of loneliness and hurt. to me it reads like an expression of pain #like distancing herself before anyone else can other her #but that's just one part of it too. i can't separate my feelings about hera and humanity from my feelings about hera being trans.#anyway. honestly i'm really nervous about posting this because it's a topic that's so close to my heart #but i hope other people understand what i'm saying and find it resonates with them

250 notes · View notes