Culture Brief 2026-08-05
Ideas in Circulation
The Odyssey as cultural Rorschach
Nolan’s blockbuster adaptation is doing something unusual for a summer spectacle: it has become a proxy argument about translation, fidelity, gender, and what classical texts are actually for.
- How Emily Wilson’s Takedown of ‘The Odyssey’ Ignited a Debate
- ‘The Odyssey’ Should Have Done Better by This Character
- How Could I Forget Odysseus?
- Tell us: has Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey stoked your interest in classics and poetry?
Emily Wilson’s LRB essay panning Nolan’s screenplay has become the lodestone around which a wider argument is organizing itself: what gets lost when a text built on oral ambiguity gets resolved into Hollywood legibility? The Paris Review redux surfaces Daniel Mendelsohn’s earlier thinking about Odysseus’s facility with self-erasure — a quality that doesn’t survive spectacle. Meanwhile the Guardian reports UK poetry sales tracking toward a record year partly on the back of the film’s release, which makes the tension sharper: the adaptation is driving people to the source while simultaneously, critics argue, flattening what makes the source worth going to. The NYT’s Circe piece names what this debate is really about — which characters and capacities the Western tradition keeps editing out. This is not press-cycle churn; it’s a genuine argument about adaptation and canon that will be cited for a while.
AI as ethical and political object, globally framed
The argument about artificial intelligence is shifting away from capability and disruption toward ethics, values, and who gets to set the terms — and the non-Western framing is becoming more prominent.
- Towards an AI for Africa
- Disruption review – anti-AI thriller boasts knockout cast but tech commentary needs an update
- Writers Guild Withdraws Support From Film Festival Over A.I.
Fainos Mangena’s Aeon essay argues that Western-developed AI encodes individualist ethics that ride roughshod over Ubuntu values of communal personhood — not as a curiosity but as a structural claim about whose moral universe gets embedded in these systems. That argument gains texture from the cultural surroundings: a play in New York that reviewers found dated because AI discourse has already outrun it, and a union withdrawal from a film festival that added an AI section. Together they sketch a moment in which the institutional and creative response to AI is visibly lagging the philosophical critique.
Retro aesthetics and horror’s return to analogue
A cluster of critics and filmmakers are converging on the observation that horror’s current boom is bound up with a deliberate retreat from clean digital minimalism toward degraded, obsolete media surfaces.
- Analogue evil: why today’s horror film-makers are obsessed with obsolete tech
- Ice Cream Man review – Eli Roth’s junky slasher is one of year’s worst horrors
The Guardian’s analysis situates this summer’s horror hits — Obsession and Backrooms — within a broader turn: VHS grain, CRT static, and obsolete consumer technology used not for mere nostalgia but as a formal language for dread. The Eli Roth counter-example is useful precisely because it fails: the Guardian’s reviewer argues that slapping retro aesthetics onto thin material exposes the difference between style as argument and style as costume. What’s being traced here is a coherent aesthetic movement with genuine ideas behind it, one likely to intensify as digital native audiences develop an increasingly complicated relationship with pre-algorithmic media surfaces.
The taming of radical thought in the academy
Two separate pieces are circling the same structural problem: what happens to ideas that were generated as critique when they get absorbed into curricula and credentialing.
Takeshi Morisato’s Aeon essay argues that including Black philosophers in Western curricula has produced a smoothing effect — their radicalism gets filed down into reassurance, made to confirm rather than challenge the tradition. The Arday case, independently, opens onto the question of what institutional diversity actually does and doesn’t do: a scholar celebrated as a symbol of widening access now faces plagiarism accusations that are themselves being politically weaponized from multiple directions. Neither piece is simply about academia; both are about the gap between the idea of intellectual inclusion and its institutional reality.
—
Books, Film, Music, Art Worth Attention
Arca: XXXXX — Venezuelan producer Alejandra Ghersi’s follow-up to the Kick series, described by the Guardian as a beautiful and disorienting sound world that justifies its conceptual apparatus through sensation rather than press-release theory.
Center Stage (1991, restored) — Stanley Kwan’s film on silent-era Shanghai star Ruan Lingyu, reviewed by Hoberman on its restoration; at once biopic and self-reflexive documentary with Maggie Cheung playing a character playing a historical figure, a formal gambit that rewards the attention.
A Child of My Own — Chilean director Maite Alberdi’s docudrama about a faked pregnancy, built over nine months of candy-colored recreations that gradually yield to darker material; the Guardian finds it a precise and uncomfortable study of the pressures women absorb and internalize.
Triage by Claudia Rankine — Rankine’s new autobiographical work, following college friends divided by competing theories of how to effect change; reviewed as the kind of book that makes the political argument feel inhabited rather than argued.
The Ego Trip by Kimon de Greef — Reported account of the psychedelic toad subculture, deaths, and the guru at the center of it; the NYT reviewer finds it an enthralling navigation of the ugly underside of the psychedelic renaissance at the moment that cultural conversation most needs complicating.
Dread Beat an Blood (1979, restored) — Newly restored documentary on Linton Kwesi Johnson’s dub poetry as political document of Black British life in the late 1970s; a restoration that arrives at an apposite moment for thinking about diaspora, protest culture, and the archive.
—
Essays Worth the Read
Fainos Mangena’s argument is structural rather than rhetorical: Western AI systems encode individualist moral frameworks at the architectural level, and Ubuntu’s conception of personhood-as-relational cannot simply be patched in afterward. The essay rewards the time because it moves the AI ethics conversation out of its familiar regulatory and labor frames into a genuinely different philosophical register — one that will become harder to ignore as these systems are deployed across contexts for which they were not designed.
J.F. Martel’s essay inverts the standard account: rather than humans developing cognition and then making art as an output, he argues that image-making and representational practice were constitutive of the kind of self-awareness we call human. It’s a philosophically serious piece that draws on paleontology and phenomenology without being cumbersome, and its central inversion has implications for how we think about AI-generated imagery and what exactly is being displaced.
Takeshi Morisato’s argument — that canonical inclusion performs a kind of epistemic violence by domesticating radical philosophical traditions into confirmation of the very frameworks they were built to challenge — is a precise and testable claim, not a provocation. It gives a conceptual vocabulary to something that practitioners in several fields have been describing empirically for years.
—
One Thing Worth Reading Deeply
Artificial Intelligence: Ars Notoria and the Promise of Instant Knowledge
Anne Lawrence-Mathers’ Public Domain Review essay on the medieval Ars notoria — a manuscript that promised to fast-track advanced learning through magical means, bypassing years of study — is the most clarifying frame for the current AI moment that has appeared in weeks. The parallels are not superficial: the Ars notoria attracted genuine scholars, generated serious theological anxiety about demonic shortcuts to cognition, and produced a centuries-long debate about whether knowledge obtained without effort was actually knowledge at all. Lawrence-Mathers doesn’t make the contemporary application explicit, which is exactly why the essay works — the structural resemblance to current arguments about AI, expertise, and the labor of understanding arrives with the force of a reader’s own recognition rather than an author’s thesis. Worth the full read and worth returning to.