The 19th Century Silent Film That First Captured a Robot Attack (npr.org) 46
The Library of Congress has restored Gugusse et l'Automate, an 1897 short by Georges Melies that likely features the first robot ever shown on film. Long thought lost, the reel was discovered in a box of decaying nitrate films donated from a Michigan family collection. NPR reports: The film, which can be viewed on the Library of Congress' website, depicts a child-sized robot clown who grows to the size of an adult and then attacks a human clown with a stick. The human then decimates the machine with a hammer.
In an Instagram post, Library of Congress moving image curator Jason Evans Groth said the film represents, "probably the first instance of a robot ever captured in a moving image." (The word "robot" didn't appear until 1921, when Czech dramatist Karel Capek coined it in his science fiction play R.U.R..)
"Today, many of us are worried about AI and robots," said archivist and filmmaker Rick Prelinger, in an email to NPR. "Well, people were thinking about robots in 1897. Very little is new."
In an Instagram post, Library of Congress moving image curator Jason Evans Groth said the film represents, "probably the first instance of a robot ever captured in a moving image." (The word "robot" didn't appear until 1921, when Czech dramatist Karel Capek coined it in his science fiction play R.U.R..)
"Today, many of us are worried about AI and robots," said archivist and filmmaker Rick Prelinger, in an email to NPR. "Well, people were thinking about robots in 1897. Very little is new."
1897? Way before that. (Score:3, Informative)
In Jewish folklore theres a non living creature called a Golem (yes , I imagine thats where Tolkein got the name from) which is made from the soil. Not strictly a robot but certainly shows people could imagine solid creatures (as opposed to spirits) that weren't natural that could be created out of mundane substances.
Re:1897? Way before that. (Score:4, Informative)
The creation of life from clay is a recurring theme in many traditions, some predating the myth of the Golem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Fair enough. Most myths and folklore build on what came before.
Please pay attention (Score:4, Insightful)
a) Constructs are not Robots. Golem is a construct and one that exists in lots of folklore not just Jewish.
b) This story is about what was put on film, not what some guy dreamed up in their head. Do you know of any films of Golem from before 1897?
Re: (Score:1)
"Constructs are not Robots"
Whats the T-1000 in the terminator films then if you want to stick to film?
"Do you know of any films of Golem from before 1897?"
Plenty of drawings. Also actual robots existed before film was invented:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Please pay attention (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
The Mechanical Turk was more like a mechanically remote-controlled animatronic puppet. I would point to Pierre Jaquet-Droz' robots as an example of pre-film robots, here's one that was programmable:
https://www.messynessychic.com... [messynessychic.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Whats the T-1000 in the terminator films then if you want to stick to film?
Robot. A made machine, not puddle of mud brought to life. Seriously I'm not sure if you don't know what a Robot is or don't know what Golem is when you compare the two.
Plenty of drawings
Do they move? Do you know what a film is?
Also actual robots existed before film was invented:
Were they filmed? Do you know how to parse basic English sentences?
Look simply saying "no" would have sufficed. You keep coming up with a wide range of things which have zero to do with TFA or TFS. The topic at hand is robots on film in 1897. You've said that has existed prior and yet come up with prec
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
In Jewish folklore theres a non living creature called a Golem (yes , I imagine thats where Tolkein got the name from) which is made from the soil. Not strictly a robot but certainly shows people could imagine solid creatures (as opposed to spirits) that weren't natural that could be created out of mundane substances.
In Islam, jinn are sentient beings created by God from smokeless fire, existing in a world parallel to humankind.
Re:1897? Way before that. (Score:4, Informative)
Terry Pratchet has some fun Golem stories in his Discworld books.
He's one of those guys who takes a basic idea (create a clay man, write out instructions and place in mouth) and it follows them) and then pulls lots of threads to see where they could go.
Full of..folklore. (Score:1)
In Jewish folklore theres a non living creature called a Golem (yes , I imagine thats where Tolkein got the name from) which is made from the soil. Not strictly a robot but certainly shows people could imagine solid creatures (as opposed to spirits) that weren't natural that could be created out of mundane substances.
Here you are romanticizing about Tolkein defining solid creatures that weren't natural that could be created out of mundane substances.
And here I am, reducing that entire idea down to the vernacular retort commonly known as "You're full of shit."
Re: (Score:2)
It's Tolkien, both of you. It's not that hard.
Re: (Score:2)
It's Tolkien, both of you. It's not that hard.
Somewhere in between dirt and Skynet, lives bullshit.
You're right. It's not that hard.
Spoiler (Score:2)
Everyone shown in that movie died.
Re: (Score:3)
Everybody dies. Some people should be more aware of this.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, just about everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
"Some people are greatly improved by death"
Re: (Score:2)
Just like The Conquerer (1956)
"Is this a dagger I see before me, my mother"
[/john wayne drawl]
Re: (Score:2)
It's a small leap to the word robot.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Robot? Really? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Robot? Really? (Score:4, Informative)
The movie was made circa thirty years before the word "robot" was even coined.
Yes, TFS mentions that.
It also looks more like an automata
The singular form is "automaton"; "automata" is plural, and is the name of the book on the subject by Heron of Alexandria (circa 1st century).
Robots are automata.
The International Standards Organisation defines robots as programmable machines with at least three degrees of freedom. That falls within the scope of Heron's automata.
Around the 16th century, when Heron's book was translated into Italian, androids (automata that looked like people, what today we might call animatronics, or puppets) became popular with show people. Those who built and operated them were known as necromancers. (Although at least one Christ-shaped temple machine was in operation since the late middle ages.)
The word "robot" is younger, of course, as the fine summary mentions, and in Capek's play it didn't refer to automata, but rather to mass-produced variants of Frankenstein's creature. (From the book, not the Hammer Films adaptation, which is very different, and also quite a bit later.) In his books, Isaac Asimov distinguished between androids (made from organic tissue like Frankenstein's creature and Capek's robots) and robots (ambulatory positronic computers, sometimes humaniform).
The Golem of Prague also perfectly fits the description of a robot, although it is centuries older than the word.
(The word "golem" meant someone who does menial tasks. That particular golem happened to have been a programmable machine, made from clay in an imitation of the story of Genesis, so a sophisticated form of necromancy. Although there is no evidence that the story isn't science fiction.)
There's an even older story from China, about a puppet that is so human-like that the king doesn't believe that it isn't a human, until the creator dismantles his work to prove it, destroying it in the process.
Going further back, Hesiod describes the Greek god Hephaistos (Vulkan in the Roman adaptation) as creating different kinds of automata, including tables that move around by themselves, and even a sex bot made from gold. (The story of Pygmalion probably doesn't count, it's just about a life-like statue that miraculously comes to life.)
Re: (Score:1)
And who the hell would want a solid gold sex-mo-tron? It'll be cold and very, very heavy. Silicone rubber would have been better. Vulkan/Hephaistos was a damn fool.
Re: (Score:2)
Good questions. This is getting very philosophical.
Pygmalion's statue/daughter/wife was not built as an android, but really just a statue that looked alive, and then by divine intervention came to life. That's why I said she probably doesn't count. But of course that is a matter of interpretation, I didn't say that she definitely doesn't count. (Humans are programmable, aren't they? Free will just means not under coercion, it's one of those things that can only be proven by absence.)
In contrast, the Go
Re: (Score:1)
But what I'm really interested in is dissecting this screwbot. I know that gold is a very soft metal, but how are the access ports going to correctly expand and contract in order to accommodate the relevant bits of the
Re: (Score:2)
Well, free will is [...] the capacity to decide and act without any external impetus.
No, that's automation.
I'm really interested in is dissecting this screwbot.
Sure. Everybody needs a hobby.
Since it was clearly a factual and well-recorded historical event, I think we deserve answers.
Haha :D I'd love that. Unfortunately, Hesiod didn't include any schematics, and Heron's text books are perserved only fragmentary.
So many years ago... (Score:2)
And yet the robot is more nimble and human-like than anything today's technology can offer.
Thats no hammer (Score:5, Informative)
The actual movie a minute long so feel free to watch. The robot is taken down by a giant cartoon style mallet.
Re: (Score:3)
Many things are.
"That poor coyote."
[/themians accent]
Acme Resistance, Inc. (Score:2)
The actual movie a minute long so feel free to watch. The robot is taken down by a giant cartoon style mallet.
And here we thought us meatsacks were going to have to rely on phased plasma rifles in the 40-watt range.
Sara Connor? Please. Wile E. Coyote is obviously the leader of Acme Resistance, Inc. Distributor of Skynet-destroying mallets.
Re: (Score:1)
I still use those against Windows.
Summary and Story inaccurate (Score:2)
The Story: "In an Instagram post, Library of Congress moving image curator Jason Evans Groth said the film represents, "probably the first instance of a robot ever captured in a moving image."
The Summary: "[...] likely features the first robot ever shown on film."
What is shown on film is NOT an "instance of a robot".
If I make a video of an industrial robot in a factory, that is "an instance of a robot captured in a moving ima
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There exists a film which is "the first instance of a robot ever captured in a moving image".
This is not it.
Not sure about the person on the left being a clown or not. He has a fake bald head, which is quite clown-like, but I do not know much about 19th Century clown outfits.
It's the First gallagher (Score:1)
nope (Score:2)
It's not the only copy of the film in existence. It's just another copy. Gotta read to nth graf of original article to find that out.
Re: (Score:2)
Citation please? I don't see any reference to other copies of this film existing, in any of the linked articles.
Nitrocellulose (Score:1)