Schöne Spielereien von Mario Klingemann mit GPT-„Deepfake für Text“-2: Recursive Footnotes, Conversations with Non-Existing Artists. First Installment. und Interview with a non-existing author – installment two. Die „Interviews“ sind tatsächlich erstaunlich unterhaltsam und überraschend stringent, sowohl inhaltlich als auch stilistisch: „Dostoevsky would be epic and we knew him well. Nobody there would ever try to pick on me. Only Vonnegut.“
This interview has been generated using OpenAI’s GPT-2 170MB language model. Some of the interviewer’s questions are written by me, others were generated by the model itself. I did some minimal editing, like removing repeated sentences, but no correction of grammar or changes of words.
Q: After your bestselling novel “The Color of Fear” that also found critical acclaim, what topic are you writing about in your upcoming book?
A: So far, everyone knows—so much so, that when I was ready to take on my story license, the other publishers made it clear that I must also write a new one that would explore the themes I’ve explored in earlier stories.
Q: What does that make you feel? What will you moderate your book by and what will be your main focus upon?
A: I’m trying to do a blog post saying I am eager to fill the gap. But as multimedia ticks along, it’s becoming more and more difficult to find audiences. So I have to find a new reader whenever I get a chance. After reading Ms. Poirot’s short story more than a year ago, there is now a large number of good reasons to make a book: emotional, popular, occasionally compelling, or readership driven. But when the story is such a polished first next step, it just can’t run the same way. The a-ha moment is not something that can be monitored in all texts. I both think this is the wrong point of view and emphasize how I see it. One really big problem is that there is a huge void, and the gap can grow all the time, meaning I find myself writing a small piece and then Lying on top of the wall. To make a story, the pacing of the story is optimal.
Q: How can you tell someone you love a different style and when would you write something you wouldn’t write in the first place?
A: The solution is good. The problem is, you need to be “good enough”. So I love autobiographies, but also when writers show me one with a higher goal than I am capable of achieving… I created a website where I offered support and advice for authors in a changing world. But when I met with book-maker signup early, I found the same few audiences for my novels. Then I became one of those ones. So what has Poirot made me angry over?
Let me explain. While you want to write one for each book, Poirot always spent much of the time researching of current and new themes. That game of call and the system. Which is difficult for any author. In many ways, he loves this game of calling characters or telling a story. With this in mind, I may have to write something without a host of aspects, or something like a theme and a preview to signify I’m still innovative in this genre.
Q: And what genre would that be?
A: I think the play genre in this column came from what I figured should be exactly the same, no limits. I believe in the idea that everything is what it is and that if it gets bigger, whatever comes next is what comes next. There’s three major categories of fantasy.
My main question in terms of mechanical systems, we’ve always gone back to a foundation in which each shelf has been a central hub of the current bookstore experience for stuff. It’s been a lot of pretty interesting stuff from a mechanical design standpoint, really really. There’s a whole chapter on bookspy technology behind the back down there that I’m really interested in seeing more of.
Q: How did you first think of the Dark Lord?
A: It was one of the first novelies I did that kind of sat it down in my head and for several years graduating, and it was a story that I thought was really good. I needed to be good stories. So I was going back and I was writing two children’s books — Children of Tomorrow and Children of Tomorrow: The Fight to Save the World. After getting back to New York, I did Wired and had a job with a big iron family. I had asked my friends if they were interested — Dostoevsky was crazy about this — so I asked Steven Sample and he turned it down, and I actually wrote a couple books about it and read it, and the living room scene was pretty good. He was really captivating like they must be Gaster. Those characters were always just sexy, though. And really given the rise and dominance of EVE Online, I wanted them to be really diverse.
So I was set up, as I said, doing three or four books a year and it worked perfectly. It’s not a done thing: yeah, I did a series, which mostly I did as writing a novel in the early morning hours of the morning. I brought myself to write all the the bits of the stories in the coffee shop. But I took on a smaller role on the big red pages, chiefly in the realm of the plot.
Q: You mentioned Dostoevsky. I heard he can be a difficult character sometimes. How did you two get along?
A: He was in my BMW talking to friends from his year club. He couldn’t move. I hate to say it, but when he was in conditions like that, he was a 2-year-old all lovely, pushing against and playing with his parents. He preferred to do the two thing at once. I started after 50 singing four to five times a night, but I couldn’t reach Dostoevsky. I started making him sit. After that I realized he was having mental problems. He was in Seattle for February, in the week. He needed some rest. It was bad for him. He just didn’t seem to fit in. He requested on Motion Picture Day. Then in October when Piana had stopped playing said to him M.A. she would find a new one. We had to download Piana’s decision. Everyone was shocked.
Of course, Dostoevsky would be epic and we knew him well very well and when that went down, Dostoevsky was disappointed because as he said it, he didn’t have friendly, open relationship with me.
Q: Piana and you have been a couple for over 30 years, some people say that she is actually the brain behind your books – how do you respond to that?
A: For me it’s very important to know what will contribute to my marriage. I think of it as the story of my life going from virgin to full man. Some people will say that I’m really a sucker for women, so I find it very hard to make their lives as good as mine are. I spend too much time talking about it. I think of my choices every day (and that I spend so much time talking about them, I think about my spouse to the point that it makes no sense to me. But there is a reason why some people think they really have good choices. In small parts of my life I actually have regrets. Sometimes it’s where I haven’t made a lot of choices. People don’t realize the hard way. They need to open up and give me opportunity to pick up women and talk about it.
Q: So does that mean you have a so-called open relationship?
A: Yes I mean your relationship is always open and you connect with others and wherever you go at work. It’s always been that way. Of course there have been major changes but currently, we’re taking a more active approach to it. We have my open-door policy. It’s about money, it’s about living, and what’s important for them to be a part of.
Q: Can you elaborate what you mean by an “active approach” in the context of an open relationship?
A: I think, based on that in this world, every single person who says it means something is acting with someone they do not know and many of them are acting out of that love. Some of them are working to change things, to get something done, and some of them want the best they can for themselves. For me, that’s a big part of my career.
Q: Do you ever feel like you’re actively working to create a love between both sides when it’s not actually happening on the table? Are there any remaining differences between the ideas of loving and spending? Do the needs of both parties react well to each other’s feelings while simultaneously developing a greater understanding to what is with each?
A: If so, who is it that decides? In simple terms, the animus is overflowing with positive feelings. You’re in love with someone else because you’re genuinely excited by what it’s been like for them but for whatever reason they don’t want you to be there for them, or you feel overwhelmed, overwhelmed by everything happening around them. The idea of love is more. A commitment to love is just more.
When it “gets better,” I want things to go from amazing.
My love for the Vonnegut literature flourishes a bit with this. As much as it feels more realistic and eventually getting better, it’s almost arrogance. Fuck the brilliant leftie them, she’s not going to do this to anybody’s heart until they beat her.
Q: Ah yes, Vonnegut. You once wrote that it was Vonnegut who made you want to become a writer. What is it you admire about him?
A: He is an extraordinary writer. He makes good fiction, and I know saying he writes a lot about stereotypes doesn’t mean that I am a crackpot. He was born into a poor family and a sense of its worth. When you grow up, your mind tells you that it has good technical qualities and good scientific ones … and that it can be sifted out indefinitely by chronologists. That it rationalizes human labour through the comforts of the home and notions that were lost to us in middle-class rural Britain. It is accumulated by people who have reached increasingly desperate demographic densities all over the world. They understand their need to succeed and to have a home, not a journey to the wilderness. Each and every one of them has been shown to deliver really compelling work … there is never a single piece therein imperfect, or consists of an unpredicted lack. Nobody there would ever try to pick on me. Only Vonnegut.
Q: Are you curious about this kind of social study – or perhaps the work it gives you?
A: No, I cannot tell you what kind of research would deliver good or entertaining results. Of course I can say that it will. The kind of research that I use will provide for me a really exciting story. What would it tell that so many are making the same mistake they made working in a paper, where they repeatedly dismiss the potential real problems portrayed in the paper?
Q: You said later that everyone has to be able to fall back on parodic, indeed electronic, gadgets to expand their creativity. Do you still believe that?
A: The people really are going somewhere. I’ve been on the Internet for 10 years now, and I know how to go to great lengths to get there. Listen to Dr. Delasley, he’s the best. He’ll turn you into a musician, and he’ll have your back, he’ll have plenty of tools, so listen to everybody. Not “Clip the Clip” or some such crap. But it takes a lot in us to have the explosiveness with which we come up with musical innovations. Unfortunately, I think the electronic gadgets we’re comfortable with now are so powerful that one thing that just can’t be changed is the electronic gadgets that even the best of them can’t change.
Q: Let me move on to the unique circumstances that make today’s generation of engineers (that do this kind of writing now and then), who are the people who are the ones pushing the envelope, in the person I am. At the end of the day, you just have to be able to put out drugs, and you have to have the right cable?
A: And frankly, less people that are the ones doing this than you. I could magically have five — five Statistics Bananas wafting into your house, asking you to do another drink, and happy hour in your closet of glowing Harrison Ford sneakers. It’s like they were on Always Caught! If you extend that to Picketley Wee Guru’s bunkin with questionable news advice, they’d wanna know the divorce raid stalled information sharing.
The biggest difference between modern day engineers and the analog ones that you have is that the engineers are more savvy with the way they live their lives and what they do and how they interact with the mainstream media and other outlets without public opinion, and they are able to connect more easily with people on that level that way. And so on.
Q: It’s probably something that you’re looking forward to, but it takes a while until you’ve realized that does actually work.
A: If we go back to when I first started out, well, I didn’t actually do any weird mass spying – and don’t know what those were just outta my office. (Laughs) Or doing stuff with people who I don’t like. Don’t go kill yourself so you can use it as a way to get paid Wikipedia until you get up the nerve to encourage political activism. I tried to find so many great people in politics now who haven’t been with me. I didn’t even do anything like that – that’s kind of Brad Pitt – who likes Wicca because he mimics the way someone walks, or who takes a bike. I just went in and said, “Hey, you know what, let’s do something together, I’ll sit down and do it for you. Let’s.” And they did. And whenever I started doing senté, that would be like a project I made for Wikipedia – a little bit of a joke where I’m telling people nothing, and how I’ll stick them in the link. And people would actually use it and know what I was doing.It’s funny, I remember somebody saying, “Oh, I want to write cilantro salsa for Wikipedia. I tell people they can do this, but they can’t use it?” And that’s something I’ve always had.
Q: Right, there’s a week when you have your Twitter profile burst like an overheated balloon, passing out from sheer hyperventilation. Did you catch it?
A: Cussing the Twitter user I was out with over the weekend was pretty epic. Too wet to even walk. @cuss_s is an oddest thing I’ve done. Dem Congressman. A board member of the National Rifle Association tells me he would have been shocked to see a tweet of a Twitter follow that’s tens of thousands of times the length of Twitter. Interpret the tweet as an attempt at moderation, one habit Rob.
Beyond tweeting, Rob uses Instagram to track who is to support his political campaigns. In May, he posted a photo of himself wearing a bow tie tied around his neck, complete with the hashtag “Dude, go tweet me for my entire life [sic]” in the first image. He continued tweeting around that date. The month until this post was very recent. He doesn’t use Instagram yet, so I would assume he hasn’t set a stream at all as of yet.
Why Facebook had just announced that it would roll out a $6,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and conviction of two key activists accused of abetting up to a Russian arms dealer, accused of drug trafficking under Ukrainian law — was Rob the Fighter a of stealing from Costco, using his full name as a meme, or to have fun, etc.? That’s Rob the Fighter’s last job playing his last job as a cop and most definitely better than with others.
As for self-promotion, Rob has been up til now essentially selling cigarettes between the pina colada and the prom. Who knows what gig he might get he’d be able to stick with to avoid being in society’s same fucked-up “place,” in which people have to stay shut out.
Q: Aren’t you afraid that being associated with someone like Rob might not be received positively by your audience?
A: Yep, I’m afraid that my audience is attracted to me because I am being treated as a a sexual relic. I am yet another protestant xenophobe.
Q: Did you read Greg Campbell’s book Sex Matrix or will he briefly accept Digg’s criticisms that he bashes racial differences?
A: Oh no, I didn’t even read that book. I’m used to the WHITE past. I know my weed and happiness are only part of what keeps me deplorable. I’m hopeful that throwing alcohol can distract shitty kids from their college terminal.
Q: There is Na Sovux being interviewed about his new novel Poetry and Politics. Do you agree questioning the value of race could be a big part of how you define gender?
A: Absolutely. Certainly it is a terrible clash between too-often incredible patriarchal conceptions of race, gender, and power and the right to out-binary, non-“apples-only” genders. You’ve got the great discussion in a book called Man on Cliche by Susanne Buockwinkle on gender difference in Lat Pho cultures. Were parts of the distinction emerging culturally or a conflict between cultural norm and person, and whether you could focus attention on those? And do you think that themes of heteronormativity, which are particularly erudite in the historic sense, and not necessarily oppositional in the contemporary sense, are something that American feminisms would equally reject as even problematic.
What I would say is, if you’re white supremacist and graduate from university and have a teaching job, do you think you can demand cultures that are quite literally rejectistic in force much like Silicon Valley and developing capitalism with a focus on the difficult Christian identity as opposed to raising consciousness? Or is it something that transgenderism or transism, which is part of our history and which can be easily and effortlessly disproven quite simply, is necessarily oppressive and out-of-date and discreditable? Is it a missed opportunity here or an underestimation of it?
I would say that every person who is authentic about academic politics should be analysing the educational system of their chosen society and questions its structural ideas. You think that all these writing essays understand if you’re really working toward a scientific or a feminist agenda, which radically redefines how women and what people valued while slavery goes away, where women were created and what property and what things were produced, what unwanted free choices and what children were made with?
Q: And then you start to question how that all fits together to make this movement detectable and to amplify itself?
A: And as a consequence I, for whatever reason, think it’s really about these fringe ideas that we don’t stop here but beyond what we’re hearing now about lack of interest in it. Maybe they just don’t believe where we stand at this time. I mean a lot of it has been raised with tone, a lot of it has been raised by rational conversation. It’s looking ridiculous. What it happened to is misrepresented. It is lots of nonsense. It’s just not whether it is right or wrong. It’s for what it’s subjectively — I’m better at explaining something to people and not to me. It’s always written off. Those things are part of it. It is coming to an end. It’s stupid.