Google’s most revolutionary product has been effectively discontinued. Our newest columnist from the Three Beard’s tech initiative delves into why…
Words: Benjamin Southworth
Google Glass is dead. Well, nearly. But by the time you read this it will only be available via eBay. Google has decided to stop selling the “revolutionary” product it introduced in April 2012.
It was launched with no small fanfare, either. We had the Sergey Brin front row at Fashion Week proudly sporting a pair, with a few bemused models wearing them on the catwalk. It seemed we were entering a brave new world of human-computer interaction. Sadly, it never really caught the consumers’ attention, certainly not in the way that the smartphone has, nor I predict the way that Apple’s new smartwatch will.
But why? In many ways, having the power of the internet permanently on hand, in vision and in ear would be great; saving us cricking our necks to constantly look at our phones. We could continue to make eye contact and be connected to our virtual world. It all sounded great. But aside from the geekiest of my friends, no one cared. In fact, after a while, the Google Glass wearers garnered the name “glassholes” and were mocked openly. Personally, I would ask people to take them off as they spoke to me. The whole thing seemed odd, unnatural, and creepy.
I’ve been wondering about why this could be, and I think I have a theory of sorts. Eye contact is a crucial part of human interaction, it forms a huge part of the unspoken communication that we all need to help us navigate the gulf between what is being ‘said’ and what is being ‘meant’. Google Glass very clearly and visibly adds a screen in between my companion and myself. I am unsure if they are reading a tweet, googling my name, navigating home, or any of the hundred of other possibilities that activate huge amounts of anxiety that comes with not being sure of what is being ‘said’ and ‘meant’.
You, see the gaze has long been recognised as being of critical importance, the Greeks had a word – socophilia – to define the act of a “sexual gaze, or to take pleasure in the looking at erotic objects”. We see this playing out in texts, in art, and in films. Films are the most notable and easily-accessed, with the sexualisation of women throughout film having far more do with the straight male eye, observing the female behind the camera, than anything to do with the story per se. We can all think of times that there are unnecessary shots of legs, or shower scenes, that add nothing but titillation to the story to know this is sad reality.
What if we are to apply the same theories to Google Glass, the more recent fetishization of the internet, and even technology? Whereby my Google Glass companion is reading my Twitter feed whilst talking to me, looking at my Flickr stream, my Facebook?
Can we not say that there is an eroticism being displayed by those who believe they can only function if they can access all this knowledge immediately, and surreptitiously? What if a man was stalking a women’s FB page whilst talking to her, or, secretly filming the interaction for some unknown reason?
You see, Google Glass represents a huge shift in agency, in power, and knowledge, and many of us are uncomfortable with the reality of what humans, and especially men, can be capable of.
As I sit looking in to their Google Glass enshrouded eyes, I see the reflection of something else in the retina, could it be about me? Could it be something more interesting than me?
Either way, if you don’t respect my right to not be gazed upon with augmented information, I don’t respect you for not understanding my value as a real object in a real world.
Take off the Google Glass, and meet my eyes, for the magic of conversation is more meaningful than your Twitter stream overlaid upon the world. It’s a creepy moment of inconsideration to the other, and only serves to highlight the egotism of technology that makes us believe we’re more important than we really are.
