More than a century before the smartphone became an extension of the human hand, E.M. Forster imagined a world where people lived sealed in rooms, nourished and connected entirely by a vast mechanical system they had come to worship. Writing in 1909, he named the danger not as technology itself, but as the quiet surrender of human will to it — the moment when the tool becomes the temple. Today, as screens mediate intimacy, algorithms curate thought, and artificial intelligence consumes the books that once fed it, Forster's underground feels less like a dystopia and more like a direction.
Forster's 1909 Warning: How Technology Risks Becoming Humanity's Undoing
We created the Machine to do our will, but we cannot make it do our will now.
Mark
So Forster wrote this in 1909. How much of it is actually about technology, and how much is just about human nature—people being lazy, wanting comfort?
Mimi
Both, I think. The novella isn't saying comfort is bad. It's saying that when comfort becomes total, when it's the only option, you lose the ability to choose anything else. Kuno can't just decide to visit his mother in person—it's not even a real option anymore. The system has made it impossible.
Luke
But we should be careful here. Forster was writing about an imagined future. We're reading it now and seeing our phones and saying "yes, this is us." But are we actually living underground? Do we actually have no choice?
Mimi
Not literally, no. But the pull is real. How many of us choose to be outside, to be present with people, versus how many of us default to the screen because it's easier?
Mark
The part about AI companies destroying books after scanning them—is that actually happening, or is that speculation?
Luke
The source says there have been reports about it. That's not the same as confirmed fact. It's worth noting the difference.
Mimi
Fair. But the concern is real, whether or not every instance has been documented. We're extracting human knowledge to train machines, and we're not always clear about what happens to the original.
Mark
So the real question Forster is asking—is it about technology, or about power? Who controls the Machine?
Luke
That's the question the novella actually answers. Nobody controls it anymore. That's the horror. They created it to serve them, but now it serves itself, and they worship it.
Mimi
And that's what should worry us. Not that technology exists, but that we might build systems so large and complex that we can no longer steer them.
Il Polso
- A novella written before the airplane was common is now circulating as a near-perfect map of contemporary digital life, and the resemblance is difficult to dismiss.
- The story's central tension — a son begging his mother to meet face to face rather than through a screen — captures something many families and friendships are quietly living through right now.
- Reports of AI companies digitizing physical books and then destroying them have given Forster's warning about secondhand ideas replacing original thought an almost literal urgency.
- The deeper disruption is not addiction to devices but the erosion of the capacity to imagine life without them — the point at which alternatives become unthinkable.
- Digital communication specialist Jane Shussa frames the question as one of agency: can humanity pause long enough to ask whether the direction technology is taking us is one we have actually chosen?
More than a century before the smartphone became an extension of the human hand, E.M. Forster imagined a world where people lived sealed in rooms, nourished and connected entirely by a vast mechanical system they had come to worship. Writing in 1909, he named the danger not as technology itself, but as the quiet surrender of human will to it — the moment when the tool becomes the temple. Today, as screens mediate intimacy, algorithms curate thought, and artificial intelligence consumes the books that once fed it, Forster's underground feels less like a dystopia and more like a direction.
When E.M. Forster published 'The Machine Stops' in 1909, he described an underground civilization where people lived alone in small rooms, summoning food, clothing, and conversation through a vast mechanical system. They spoke to one another through screens. They rarely met in person. The Machine had become not just infrastructure, but the architecture of thought itself.
The story's emotional core is a mother named Vashti and her son Kuno. He asks her to visit him — to speak face to face, not through the system's mediated channels. It is a simple request that has become, in Forster's world, almost radical. Kuno eventually finds his way to the surface of the earth, where he sees sky and hills — the world before total mechanization. When he returns to tell his mother, she can barely comprehend it. The Machine has grown so complete that alternatives to it have become nearly unthinkable, and the society has begun to speak of it in religious terms: 'In it we have our being.'
Forster's critique cuts deeper than dependence. In the underground, original thought is discouraged. Secondhand ideas — summaries, interpretations, received wisdom — are privileged over independent inquiry. This detail has taken on new weight in an era when AI systems are reported to have digitized physical books and then destroyed them after extracting their content, leaving behind only what the machine has already processed and approved.
Jane Shussa, a digital communication specialist writing for The Citizen, draws the parallel carefully: the danger Forster identified was not technology itself, but the surrender of human agency to it. Kuno faces effective death for daring to act outside the system. Once the Machine becomes a religion, there is no mechanism left to question it.
Forster's closing line — that humanity, in its desire for comfort, had overreached itself — remains the novella's quiet verdict. The comfort technology offers is real. But the cost, the slow atrophy of physical presence, independent thought, and lived experience, may be a price we are only beginning to understand we are paying. We are not yet living underground. But the direction, if unexamined, may not be one we chose so much as one the Machine chose for us.
E.M. Forster published a novella in 1909 called "The Machine Stops," and reading it now, more than a century later, feels less like encountering a historical curiosity and more like receiving a warning that somehow arrived ahead of its time. The story describes an underground world where people live in small, windowless rooms, their entire existence mediated through a vast mechanical system. They summon food, clothing, shelter, and connection by pressing buttons. They speak to one another through screens. They rarely leave their chambers. The Machine, as Forster calls it, has become the infrastructure of survival itself—and, more troublingly, the infrastructure of thought.
The parallels to contemporary life are difficult to ignore. We carry devices that deliver food, entertainment, and social contact on demand. We have grown so accustomed to screens as the primary medium of human connection that the absence of one can feel like deprivation. Forster's underground dwellers would recognize our world immediately. But what makes the novella unsettling is not its accuracy as prediction—it is its clarity about what we lose in the exchange. In the story, a woman named Vashti has become so absorbed in her intellectual work, conducted entirely from her room through the Machine, that she has little time for her son Kuno. He begs her to visit him in person, to speak face to face rather than through the system's mediated channels. "Pay me a visit," he asks, "so that we can meet face to face, and talk about the hopes that are in my mind." It is a simple request that has become, in Forster's world, almost radical.
Kuno is the story's dissenter. He wonders whether life might exist beyond the Machine's confines, and he eventually finds his way to the surface of the earth. There he sees hills and sky—the world as it existed before the underground, before total mechanization. He returns to tell his mother what he has discovered, but she struggles to comprehend it. The Machine has become so complete a system that alternatives to it have become nearly unthinkable. Worse, the society has begun to treat the Machine as something sacred. "In it we have our being," the people say, echoing religious language. Kuno warns her: "We created the Machine to do our will, but we cannot make it do our will now."
Forster's critique extends beyond mere dependence. In the underground, original thought is discouraged. Vashti teaches from a single authorized text about the Machine itself. Other literature exists, but the culture privileges secondhand ideas—interpretations, summaries, received wisdom—over independent thinking. This detail resonates with contemporary concerns about artificial intelligence and algorithmic curation. There have been reports of AI companies scanning physical books and then destroying them after extracting their content for training data. The machinery of progress consumes the very sources of human knowledge and creativity, leaving behind only what the system has already processed and approved.
The author of this analysis, Jane Shussa, a digital communication specialist, notes that Forster's 1909 vision raises a question that feels increasingly urgent: how do we ensure that technological achievement does not become our undoing? The novella suggests that the danger is not technology itself, but the surrender of human agency to it. Kuno is threatened with homelessness—effectively, death—for daring to think and act outside the system. Once the Machine becomes a kind of religion, once people begin to worship it as the source of all meaning and being, there is no mechanism left to question it or to choose differently.
Forster ends his novella with a line that has haunted readers ever since: "But Humanity, in its desire for comfort, had overreached itself. It had exploited the riches of nature too far." The comfort the Machine offers is real. It solves genuine problems. It connects us across distances. But the cost—the atrophy of physical presence, the erosion of independent thought, the replacement of lived experience with mediated simulation—may be a price we are only beginning to understand we are paying. We are not yet living in Forster's underground. But we are living in a world where his warnings have begun to feel less like science fiction and more like a description of where we are headed, if we do not pause to ask whether the direction itself is one we have chosen, or simply one the Machine has chosen for us.
Citazioni salienti
Kuno begs his mother Vashti to visit him in person, asking: 'Pay me a visit, so that we can meet face to face, and talk about the hopes that are in my mind.'— E.M. Forster, 'The Machine Stops'
Humanity, in its desire for comfort, had overreached itself and exploited the riches of nature too far.— E.M. Forster, 'The Machine Stops'
Vuoi la storia completa?
Leggi l'originale su thecitizen.co.tz ↗
Culture & Arts