Latest news with #Bard
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Maverick
Julius Caesar — a fluid, but slightly flaccid, time-travelling Shakespeare full of intellectual bravado
An adventurous reimagining of the Bard's timelessly political play aims for gender and generational fluidity but gets bogged down by laboriously longwinded lines. I am definitely too dumb for Shakespeare. Just when I start believing that perhaps I've got a handle on the various layers of meaning that Stratford's Bard seemed to have been capable of juggling, some new and unexpected knot or twist or tangle reveals itself, completely destabilising my understanding of what he was on about. Then again, the latest conceptually formidable (and intellectually daunting) rendition of Julius Caesar that's been brought to the stage by director Fred Abrahamse (along with a small cast of mostly men and one fabulously engrossing Fiona Ramsay) really strives to deepen the perplexity of what is one of Shakespeare's most enduringly political plays. It is a heartfelt, highly ambitious conceptual reframing of the play about one of history's most famous political assassinations, and it is clever, even if that cleverness gets slightly bogged down in earnestness. Showing at Artscape 's Arena briefly before it tours abroad, not only does it overlay different periods in history, weaving past and present into a formidable postmodern tapestry that (much like the Tilda Swinton-starring film version of Virginia Woolf's Orlando, which it seems to model itself on) can feel quite a bit like you've dropped a cap of acid on a Friday night and consequently find yourself freewheeling and untethered down the highway of cultural complexity, the brakes cut and the vehicle speeding up, forcing you to grip the steering wheel ever tighter as you search for meaning. Three time periods Abrahamse's proposition is to muddle three time periods: the period when Shakespeare wrote Julius Caesar (1599), the time when its action presumably played out in a historically verifiable Rome (44BC), and finally, right here, right now. The earliest and the latter periods are self-evident, but it's something of a masterstroke to also find ways in which to insert Queen Elizabeth I into the action, in order to draw parallels between, on the one hand, the plotting and scheming and inevitable aftermath of Caesar's assassination at the hands of his political rivals and closest friends, and, on the other hand, the Essex Rebellion against the British crown in February 1601. The overlaps and parallels and the unavoidable commentary on the persistence of political conspiracies throughout history are all very compelling. It's a pity, though, that the action comes off as a little less riveting than the idea behind the intrigue. I say 'action', but in fact there's very little action to speak of in this thinking man's potboiler. Yes, there are moments — such as the slightly hammy moment when members of the cabal against Caesar pile in with their daggers and send Rome's ambitious leader into the afterlife — but, to a great extent, this comes off as a very static, very stagey play. The action is principally conveyed in the words, and to carry off the conceit, the words need to be spoken and performed with purpose; they should ideally be made to plant vivid mental images in the audience's imagination, to make the invisible, talked about and discussed 'action' truly come alive in our minds. That takes incredible skill. Fiona Ramsey, who is quite transcendent, of 10 times rapturous and also splendidly costumed and accessorised in this show, certainly gets it right. She slips between Elizabeth the queen and Caesar the would-be emperor with a mere slip of the tongue, and manages to hold the audience's attention and captivate its collective imagination with formidable ease. She is masterful and, just as her costumes and make-up and accessories add gravitas to the characters she becomes, her vocalisation and full-body performance generates what feels like entire universes on that otherwise quite sparse stage. The other actors have less of an easy time with Shakespeare, and in a number of scenes some of the characters seem hamstrung by the words, weighed down by the plodding, over-enunciated manner in which the pentameter is spoken. The actors need to get into their characters, disappear and take the burden of the dialogue with them. On the night I saw it (admittedly right at the start of the show's run), the ponderous recitation seemed to hypnotise rather than captivate. A few of the choices, such as transforming some female characters into camp, masked caricatures, seem unworthy of the concept, have the effect of parodying entire scenes rather than meaningfully contributing to the production's stated interest in exploring gender fluidity by having actors slip into roles intended for the opposite sex. When Ramsey switches between Caesar and Elizabeth, the transition is seamless and decisive, when Thinus Viljoen disguises himself as Portia, it comes off as charmlessly camp. A smart, compelling theatrical concept On the one hand, this production has quite a few lengthy speeches that end up getting lost because they're spoken too dryly and with a lack of colour, and on the other there are moments when the dialogue takes on a sing-song quality, as though it's poetry rather than words imbued with life-force that's being recited; the boys in the cast should look to Ramsey for a sense of how to navigate the middle ground, and thereby illuminate the meaning of the words, while conveying their emotional depth. For too much of the performance, I was engaged intellectually, being reminded just how dumb I am. In the face of such a smart, compelling theatrical concept, I felt somewhat relegated to some sort of emotional wasteland, grappling at the steering wheel in order to get a grip on the play's truth and meaning. Time will no doubt help mold this potentially great work into better shape; the men on stage need to relax into their roles. The key may be right there from the start, which is the pre-set state of the performance: the men in a Roman bathhouse, sitting on the edge of a pool of water, naked save for thin sheets covering their vital bits. What this play perhaps needs is for a more thorough investigation of the homoerotic tension that quivers and quakes during that opening tableaux. While the cast waits for the audience to take their seats, there's incredible drama in the simple fact of exposed flesh — as an expression of vulnerability, innocence and sexual desire, it's an image that's full of promise, and it should perhaps be better used to define and refine the ensuing energy of the play. Instead, beyond the unfulfilled promise of the opening scene's homoeroticism, there are only moments of minor innuendo, but nothing sufficient enough to transform this play into what might been a gender-bending triumph, perhaps even a queer take on Shakespeare that the world could do with right about now. At this moment in history when gender and gay rights are under threat in so-called democracies,that would be a worthy investigation. DM Julius Caesar is at the Artscape Arena through May 31, 2025.
Time Out
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Time Out
New York Classical Theatre kicks off its free Shakespeare plays in Central Park next week
Clear your evening plans: New York Classical Theatre is returning to Central Park for its 26th season, and they're bringing one of Shakespeare's most overlooked comedies with them. All's Well That Ends Well opens Tuesday, June 3, at the West 103rd Street entrance to the park, offering a rare chance to catch this twisty, witty tale of love, ambition and unexpected redemption, with no ticket required. Directed by NY Classical's founding artistic director Stephen Burdman, the production stays true to the company's signature approach: free, fast-moving and totally accessible. You can show up any night (except Mondays) through June 22 and catch professional Off-Broadway-caliber performances under the open sky. There are no seats, no stage and no boundaries between cast and audience—just a story unfolding around you in real time. This year's cast includes Anique Clements as the determined heroine Helena and Paul Deo Jr. as Bertram, her reluctant love interest, alongside Carine Montbertrand, Karel Heřmánek and others. It's a spirited lineup that blends returning favorites with fresh talent, all performing for and with the city that raised them. And while the Bard is the main event, this season also adds some delightful extras. On Dog Night (June 4), you're invited to bring your pup, pose for pics in matching ruffs and snag some free swag. Family Nights on June 12 and 21 include pre-show crafts, crowns and circus performers to entertain younger theatergoers. And on June 20, Pride Night starts with a happy hour at VERS in Hell's Kitchen before a festive crowd caravans uptown for the show. Performances begin at 7 pm sharp, with special activities kicking off at 6:30 pm on themed nights. While reservations are free and encouraged (you'll get weather alerts and a digital program), walk-ups are more than welcome.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Sharing excerpts from Gemini responses could soon get a lot simpler
Google is simplifying how users share excerpts of text from Gemini responses in the Google app, moving towards a more intuitive drag-and-select method. Currently, sharing a portion of a Gemini reply involves a four-step process, which the update aims to streamline significantly. The new implementation has a limitation: it doesn't currently allow seamless selection of text across bulleted or numbered lists, though this may be addressed before the public release. Google's Gemini is getting smarter with every passing month. What started out as Bard in 2023 has rapidly evolved into a capable AI model, powered by dedicated models for all-around help, deep research, and even reasoning, math, and code. Even though the assistant can do a lot more than answer simple queries — it can generate videos, connect with frequently-used apps, see what's on your screen, and more, text-based answers to queries remain a core aspect of the AI tool's functionality. Recognizing the importance, Google now seems to be taking steps to make text-based answers easier to share. Sharing Gemini replies is a seamless process, but only when you want to share the response in its entirety. You simply long tap the text and tap Copy text in the subsequent overflow menu. You're then free to paste the reply wherever needed. Alternatively, you also have the option to Export to Docs, or share the conversation via a public link. However, if you only want to copy and share an excerpt from the reply, you have to go through a four-step process. Long tap the text (or tap the three-dot icon). Tap Select text. Select the text in a new page. Share and/or Copy. The image above highlights what the current excerpt-sharing procedure looks like. However, Google seems to be planning a change to make excerpt-sharing a lot more intuitive and seamless. As highlighted by folks over at Andorid Authority after looking into a new Google app beta build (version beta), copying Gemini's reply to your query could soon be as simple as copying text from a webpage. If and when the simplification goes live, users will be able to long press text and begin dragging their finger to highlight text, with the familiar Copy and Share chips appearing as soon as you stop dragging your finger. For what it's worth, the new implementation, although much more intuitive, still has one flaw. The drag-and-select gesture can not continue highlighting text if it encounters a list and bullet points. The limitation could very well be fixed by the time Google is ready to roll out the intuitive sharing feature. When that happens, though, is currently unclear. Google Gemini Google LLC PRODUCTIVITY Price: Free 4.4 Download
Hindustan Times
18-05-2025
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Google's Sundar Pichai takes a veiled dig at fellow Indian-American CEO Satya Nadella for his ‘dance' comment
Google CEO Sundar Pichai just took a veiled dig at his counterpart in Microsoft, Satya Nadella. During a podcast appearance with David Friedberg, Pichai opened up about the AI race, his major competitors, and then took a lighthearted dig at his fellow Indian-American executive Satya Nadella for his 2023 remarks on making Google 'dance'. Gemini, formerly known as Bard, is a generative artificial intelligence chatbot developed by Google. It is one of several AI chatbots in a market where several companies are vying for the top spot. Friedberg, an American entrepreneur, asked Google's Sundar Pichai on his views about competition on the All-In Podcast. 'Your competitors out there have active founders. OpenAI has Sam [Altman], xAI has Musk, Meta has Zuckerberg, and Microsoft has Satya [Nadella]. Are you willing to share your perspectives on those four competitors - both the companies and the leaders?' the CEO of Google was asked. Pichai kept his answer diplomatic, praising his rivals. However, before wrapping up, he couldn't resist a dig at Satya Nadella. 'Obviously, by definition, it's a very impressive group. I think you're talking about some of the best companies, some of the best entrepreneurs. It shows how much progress we are going to see, because you're basically talking about many people who are working hard to drive that progress,' replied Sundar Pichai. 'Look, each of them, they're different people. I am fortunate to know all of them,' he added, before saying: 'I think maybe only one of them has invited me to a dance, not the others.' His remark earned a puzzled look from podcast host Friedberg even as Pichai continued to talk about the time he spent discussing future technologies with Elon Musk. Nadella, who, like Pichai, is an India-born techie who rose through the ranks to lead one of the world's largest tech companies, never actually asked his counterpart at Google to a dance. Pichai was likely referring to Nadella's 2023 remarks about making Google dance amid the AI race. In 2023, Satya Nadella welcomed the announcement of AI-aided search engine Bing. 'Today's announcement is all about rethinking the largest software category there is: search,' Nadella said in an interview with The Verge. 'At the end of the day, [Google is] the 800-pound gorilla in this,' Nadella said. 'I hope that, with our innovation, they will definitely want to come out and show that they can dance. And I want people to know that we made them dance.'
Forbes
12-05-2025
- Forbes
Google's Gemini AI Kids Edition Is Here: What It Means For Parents
A child using a system AI chatbot on a mobile application to do his homework. AI systems impact children's lives even when those children are not directly engaging with the tools. In theory, AI has the potential to diagnose and treat illness, process vast datasets to advance research, and accelerate vaccine development. Unfortunately, AI also carries a well-documented set of risks. These include digital harms such as abuse, exploitation, discrimination, misinformation, and challenges to mental health and well-being. These competing realities have recently spilled into the inboxes of parents using Google's Family Link controls. Many have begun receiving emails informing them that Gemini, Google's AI chatbot, will soon be available on their child's device. As first reported by The New York Times, Google is allowing children under 13 to access Gemini through supervised accounts managed via Family Link. That's a notable change, especially considering Bard, Gemini's precursor, was only opened up to teens in 2023. This update, rolling out gradually, enables children to explore Gemini's capabilities across a range of activities. These include support with homework, creative writing, and general inquiries. Parents can choose whether Gemini appears on Android, iOS, or the web, and configure it as their child's default assistant. Gemini is being positioned as a tool to support learning, creativity, and exploration. Google's earlier messaging around Bard leaned into this idea, emphasizing AI as a study companion, not a homework doer. Bard was offered to teenagers for a wide range of use cases, including finding inspiration, exploring new hobbies, and solving everyday challenges such as researching universities for college applications. It was also pitched as a learning tool, offering help with math problems or brainstorming for science projects. The original messaging was clear: Bard wouldn't do all the work, but it would help with generating ideas and locating information. However, recent surveys on ChatGPT use in universities suggest that ideal isn't always upheld in practice. It turns out that when given the chance, humans, teenagers in particular, often take the shortcut. And while the educational potential of generative AI is being more widely acknowledged, research indicates that digital tools are most effective when integrated into the school system. As UNICEF notes, for students to thrive, digital tools must support rather than replace teachers. Abandoning mainstream education in favor of AI isn't a viable path. UNICEF's report ''How Can Generative AI Better Serve Children's Rights?'' reminds us that real risks run parallel to AI's potential. Using the Convention on the Rights of the Child as a lens, the report outlines four principles: non-discrimination, respect for the child's views, the child's best interests, and the right to life, survival, and development. These should be the criteria for assessing whether children's rights are genuinely being protected, respected, and fulfilled in relation to AI. The first major issue highlighted by the report is unequal access, referred to as "digital poverty." Not all kids have equal access to high-speed internet, smart devices, or educational AI. So while some children gain a learning edge, others are left behind, again. Bias in training data is another major challenge. AI systems mirror the biases present in society, which means that children may encounter the same kinds of discrimination online as they do offline. The issue of data consent is particularly thorny. What does meaningful consent look like for a 9-year-old when it comes to personal data collection and usage? Their evolving capacity makes this a legal and ethical minefield. It's even more complicated when that data feeds commercial models. Misinformation is also a growing concern. Kids are less likely to spot a fake, and some studies suggest they're more prone to trust digital entities. The line between chatbot and human isn't always clear, especially for children who are imaginative, socially isolated, or simply online too much. Some users have already struggled to tell the difference, and at least a few bots have encouraged the illusion. There is also an environmental dimension. AI's infrastructure depends on data hubs that consume massive amounts of energy and water. If left unchecked, AI's carbon footprint will disproportionately affect children, particularly in the Global South. So what is Google doing to offer reassurances to parents? Parents using Family Link have been given more information by Google about available guardrails and suggested best practices. The most important one: Google says it won't use children's data to train its AI models. There are also content filters in place, though Google admits they're not foolproof. Parents can also set screen time limits, restrict certain apps, and block questionable material. But here's the twist: kids can still activate Gemini AI themselves. What rubbed many parents the wrong way, however, was the fact that Gemini is opt-out, not opt-in. As one parent put it, 'I received one of these emails last week. Note that I'm not being asked whether I'd like to opt my child in to using Gemini. I'm being warned that if I don't want it, I have to opt out. Not cool.' Google also suggests a few best practices. These include reminding children that Gemini is not a person, teaching them how to verify information, and encouraging them to avoid sharing personal details. If Gemini follows Bard's model, we may see further responsible AI efforts soon. These could include tailored onboarding experiences, AI literacy guides, and educational videos that promote safe and thoughtful use. The uncomfortable reality is that much of the responsibility for managing generative AI has shifted to parents. Even assuming, generously, that AI is a net positive for child development, many unanswered questions remain. A responsible rollout of generative AI should involve shared responsibility across sectors. That is not yet evident in practice. Tech companies need to do more to make these tools genuinely safe and constructive. Skill-building around safe navigation should be a priority for users of all ages. Governments also have an educational role to play: raising awareness among children and helping them distinguish between AI-generated and human-generated interaction and content. But for now, most of that support structure is either missing or undercooked. The dilemma, it seems, is unchanged: if AI holds promise for parents, the energy required to navigate its traps might cancel out the benefits entirely. So, when should kids start using AI tools? How much is too much? And who decides when it's time to step in? These may well be the new questions keeping modern parents up at night, and they don't come with chatbot-friendly answers.
