will martha wells dare to imagine the end of capitalism? and other thoughts on system collapse (and the rest of the murderbot diaries)
I'm writing this post because the wait for System Collapse is killing me and I need something to do. These are not so much predictions of specific, concrete events—I am terrible at predictions and bad with plot—so much as exploring existing thematic arcs in the series and tracing them to what I think are their natural ends. (Also, this post uses "bot" and "construct" interchangeably because I'm lazy. Sorry, MB.)
Some points I think the rest of the series (SC and onwards) may hit on:
Further development, and let's say "stress testing," of ART and Murderbot's relationship, and bot/construct relationships in general
Every day I go insane about this conversation MB has with ART early in Artificial Condition, which is not very subtle foreshadowing:
[ART said], My crew always considers me trustworthy.
I shouldn’t have let it watch all those episodes of Worldhoppers. “I’m not your crew. I’m not a human. I’m a construct. Constructs and bots can’t trust each other.”
It was quiet for ten precious seconds, though I could tell from the spike in its feed activity it was doing something. I realized it must be searching its databases, looking for a way to refute my statement. Then it said, Why not?
I had spent so much time pretending to be patient with humans asking stupid questions. I should have more self-control than this. “Because we both have to follow human orders. A human could tell you to purge my memory. A human could tell me to destroy your systems.”
I thought it would argue that I couldn’t possibly hurt it, which would derail the whole conversation.
But it said, There are no humans here now.
But in the future there will be humans who could tell ART to do something undesirable to MB (technically, NE already did this to some extent, but it didn't fully address the issue). Artificial Condition in fact explicitly notes ART doesn't have a refutation to that particular argument, and that's why they can't trust each other. We get some initial glimpses in Network Effect of this—ART makes its own decision to save Murderbot, and thankfully its crew agrees with the plan, but we can't expect ART and its crew to be in agreement forever.
Frankly, a lot of ART's plans seem to rely on either (1) its humans / the people in charge of it agreeing with it or (2) them not being around to disagree, which is going to be a problem sooner or later, especially as Murderbot's view of humans is not as ... positive as ART's. Network Effect dances around this problem because both the Preservation people and ART's crew are good people who largely support ART and MB in their decisions, but I don't think that will always be the case.
(Side note: I am once again thinking of Murderbot's surprise that Don Abene allowed Miki to override her orders in Rogue Protocol, and the bot spectrum of "cannot disobey orders literally ever" (like SecUnits) to "can disobey orders in the right circumstances" (like Miki) to "can mostly just do whatever but ultimately bots still have their programming" and how MB views ART's place on that spectrum. Also I am once again begging Murderbot to please reflect more on Miki's death, but given its current level of emotional repression, I am not optimistic about this.)
Leading me to my next point—
The question of ownership, independence, and property in the Murderbot universe
As Murderbot has mentioned various times, the people of Preservation call themselves "guardians" of bots rather than owners, but it's still very much ownership (and MB is right to point this out and express discomfort about it). MB knows it's fortunate that its owner—sorry, guardian, Mensah, allows it a ton of freedom, but legally, MB is still Mensah's property. Mensah's approach is a single, individual band-aid in that it may (for now) allow MB to live a life more or less of its choosing, but it doesn't address the larger systematic issue that actually, owning these bots is fucked up and many people exploit the bots they own, including people who think that they're already being incredibly generous and goodhearted simply by not abusing bots. (I'd need to go back and review, but I got the latter vibe from many of the Preservation bot owners in Fugitive Telemetry.)
Martha Wells seems like she will address this larger issue later. I don't know how, but I'm sure "Murderbot gets dragged into it and has to *gasp* talk about its feelings" will happen somehow, since that recurs frequently.
What healing from trauma looks like for a bot/construct
Dr. Bharadwaj has already suggested that Murderbot could use therapy ("trauma treatment" but like ... sounds like it's therapy combined with some other self care / community care strategies), and Murderbot is not subtle about its whole "I have been through many horrific things but I will pretend it's totally fine and not a big deal" coping strategy. I'd be interested to see what role ART plays in this—it's quite scarred from the events of Network Effect, will need to heal, and is unlikely to do the "yeah whatever that's just what my life is like" strategy MB adopted, because that's not what its life is like.
(Side note: in NE, MB says being taken over by targetControlSystem "would be like having a governor module again. No, not again. Never again." To MB, the loss of control ART experienced is similar to what MB's life was like every day until it hacked its module. I'M SO. 😭)
But therapy for a bot would look very different from therapy for a human, and I'm doubtful there's any therapists out there equipped to handle it. The "nicest" humans, if you will, seem to be the PreservationAux citizens, and they still have a long way to go on their understanding of bots. Also, much like in real life, therapy is not a cure-all for everything and there's a lot of terrible therapists, issues with psychiatry, etc. I will not get into—so I'm not actually saying that Bhadwaraj's idea of "trauma treatment" is the specific route MB will take to heal, I'm just curious what it's gonna take to get it to open up and be willingly emotionally vulnerable.
Who is Murderbot outside its day job? (aka its hypercompetence with regard to security)
One of Murderbot's defining traits is that it's an incredibly competent person, even when (often especially when) surrounded by much less competent people. The Goodreads blurb for System Collapse implies this won't always be the case:
But there’s something wrong with Murderbot; it isn’t running within normal operational parameters. ART’s crew and the humans from Preservation are doing everything they can to protect the colonists, but with Barish-Estranza’s SecUnit-heavy persuasion teams, they’re going to have to hope Murderbot figures out what’s wrong with itself, and fast!
My first reaction is: "hey, why is Murderbot the only one who has to figure that out?!" (Not that I think ART or the humans are jerks who don't care about its problems or don't want to help; I think Murderbot has trouble asking for help or even imagining people want to help it, e.g. its assumption in NE everyone just left it behind to die when it was captured.) The inherent question with characters who define themselves through their hypercompetence at something is: who do they become when they can no longer rely on that? (For example, who is a star athlete when they get a permanent injury? Who is a brilliant painter when they go blind? etc.)
ART already had to grapple with that to some extent when it lost control of itself in NE and couldn't rely on itself or its crew, so it resorted to kidnapping MB to fix the problem. But that doesn't deal with the larger identity crisis / struggle for self-definition at play, which is essentially: Who is Murderbot when it's not useful, when it's not able to do what it was created to do?
Speaking of which, this is very relevant to my title question—
Will we see Martha Wells envision the end of capitalism???
The Murderbot Diaries is the story of a single bot and its friends / enemies / etc., and I'm perfectly happy if it stays that way and focuses on MB's internal journey. But Martha Wells seems like an ambitious enough author to imagine wider solutions to the problems that plague the Murderbot universe, which is namely that corporations are evil. If corporations were not so evil, we wouldn't have our corporation-hating traumatized-by-corporations created-by-a-corporation-and-struggling-with-it protagonist. There's indentured servants in Rogue Protocol. There is literally a space version of the Underground Railroad in Fugitive Telemetry. It is impossible to understand this series without understanding that it is a very, very vicious critique of capitalism, and without this critique laying out its foundations, we would not have most of its characters, including Murderbot itself. Preservation is already a first step in that it seems to be some sort of utopian commune devoid of corporations or privatization—which is a huge step in itself, that Wells envisions a world devoid of capitalism—but it's one small (and still imperfect, re: earlier discussion of treatment of bots) planet in a large, dysfunctional universe.
So far the series has been Murderbot dealing with individual evil corporations (GrayCris, Barish-Estranza, etc), but mainly in the context of one crisis at a time, with regard to saving only its friends / clients. (It's fine with leaving Eletra to Barish-Estranza in NE, for example.) I do not think Murderbot will singlehandedly destroy capitalism or that its goal is to do so—it's not a fix-everything save-everyone hero, no one is, one of the points of the series is that you should not attempt everything alone—but this series has done plenty of exploration of the evils of capitalism; I would like to see Martha Wells explore how we could end it.
