"The Circle" Prompt #5: Mae Against the Machine

3) The New York Times review of The Circle contends that, in the end, “Mae, then, is not a victim but a dull villain.”  Expand on this notion, while also interpreting the meaning of Egger’s surprising departure from novelistic conventions in the text’s last pages. 

To quote a popular movie: "You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain." That's Harvey Dent, from The Dark Knight. Perhaps that's a bit overdramatic considering how Mae's story ends, but it works, too. Confession time: I've never liked Mae, even in the early parts of the book when she's portrayed as the everywoman protagonist. I found her to be whiny, spoiled, selfish, and annoying; aka, not an easy character to relate to in such a complicated novel. However, I never saw her as the villain of the story per se until I went back and thought long and hard about the text. The members of the Circle aren't blatantly villainous; they genuinely believe in the morality and righteousness of their actions, yet the various "innovations" they shepherd go against many of the moral and ethical truisms of our time. So I suppose it would be correct to say that Mae, that figurehead, in many ways, of the organization, is the true villain of the story. 

Throughout the book, Mae builds more and more of a wall between herself and her humanity, namely her relationships, beliefs, and private experiences. She betrays those closest to her; Annie, her parents, Mercer, and even Kalden. She compromises her inherent regard of privacy and human connection in favor of advancing further up the corporate ladder. And by donning a body camera herself, Mae bares herself to the entire world, literally, allowing total strangers access into her deeply private moments. Mae serves as the embodiment of everything that is wrong with the Circle and its supporters, yet refuses to listen to Mercer or even Kalden/Ty, who has the most insight into all the trouble the Circle can cause if its power remains unchecked. Her progression is clear; Mae willingly gives herself over to the Circle rather than doing the right thing, as several more "enlightened" characters try and fail to stop her. Mae has become so robotic by the end of the book that she feels no emotion for Mercer's death, and presumably Ty's as well, and reflects upon Annie's coma from the view of entering her thoughts rather than showing any real concern for her friend.  

Mae's final thoughts on Annie serve as a highly atypical ending for the protagonist of any story. Usually, the protagonist follows a version of the "hero's journey" storyline, in which they reach rock bottom before finding redemption by vanquishing some ultimate evil. Mae, on the other hand, is no hero. Her story is a slow, downward spiral into psuedo-villainy that ends the story on a much more ominous note than it started on. (And the book was never exactly cheerful to begin with.) However, Mae's transformation is less malevolent than it is petty and reeking of neediness, which is clearly Eggers' idea of how social media affects people, especially teenagers and young adults. I'm not sure if I'm alone, but reading about Mae's various screw-ups just made me want to bang my head against a wall; the ending, however, was just plain creepy. It gets the author's point across, no doubt, but is handled with all the delicacy of a bull in a china shop. Again, perhaps that's the point, as it certainly leaves an impression that sticks, and not in a good way. 

"The Circle" Prompt #4: You've Got Moxie, Kid

Like many of the concepts presented throughout the novel, demoxie is heralded as one of the next great inventions from the brilliant minds of the Circle. Like most of the company's technological breakthroughs. it immediately becomes ingrained into the daily lives of its users in a shockingly fast way, all while ignoring the potentially dire ramifications of the existence and acceptance of such technology. Stop me if you've heard that one before.

By looking at demoxie with our own political system in mind, we can easily see how its existence would invite the possibility of monumental abuses of power by the American people, the very same people who demoxie's twisted version of "democracy" is intended to protect.

Credit: John Greim/Getty Images 

Demoxie starts perhaps innocuously enough with the idea to make everyone with a TruYou account a registered voter. Eamonn Bailey sees this as the most perfect form of electoral democracy, finally "closing the circle" between electors and the electorate. Just like every other sounds-good-on-paper-but-is-actually-terrible-idea to come from those crackpot Circlers, demoxie is met with raucous applause. To make matters worse, Mae has the idea to take the whole thing a step further by forcing everyone to vote. How democratic. 

Naturally, the Circle is so excited by this idea of 100% participation that a trial version is up and running in a week, with its first question asking about veggie options at lunch. Now, voting on the lunch menu may seem harmless enough, but imagine what could happen if such a direct democracy was left in the hands of ordinary people. We all know someone that makes us think, "Thank God they're not running the country." But by putting a vote in everyone's hands, demoxie opens up the possibility for disaster. Instead of qualified and experienced leaders, ordinary and uninformed citizens could end up making decisions that impact the entire country. Do I want the robot or the orange man as president? Should we nuke North Korea for insulting us so many times? How large should the military be? Should free speech be legal at all? You can see where I'm going with this; there's a reason why we elect people to run this country instead of doing it ourselves, and demoxie completely ignores it for the sake of transparency and a hollow definition of what "democracy" really means. 

The message behind demoxie is how it points out the necessity of our representative democracy. We have a process and a system for doing things, even though it's slow, confusing, and often frustrating for those who expect the instantaneous results produced by the Circle. Just as we citizens are checks on the power of our elected officials, our representatives keep us in line too. If we decided matters as easily as we did the vegetable menu, we'd run ourselves into the ground, which is exactly what Mae and Bailey are helping to do. They don't realize it; hell, they even think they're doing the right thing by "closing the circle". But time and time again, they sacrifice the value of human contact and experience for the sake of results and the illusion of connectivity. You can't "close" the distance between politicians and people by simply eliminating it; the distance needs to be there to protect the interests of everyone. 

That's the essence of democracy, not forcing people to vote because you think it's the right thing to do. It's more democratic to choose not to vote, because at least you still have a choice to do what you think is best, too. Eliminating that choice helps no one, no matter how glamorous Mae tries to make it out to be.