Science fiction as a genre provides a playground to explore the future of technology in our lives. The 2008 Pixar movie WALL-E takes an environmental approach to this question, illustrating the necessity of looking after our environment for our own well-being. Geared towards young audiences, this movie takes place in a dystopian world several hundred years in the future. Earth has been exploited and destroyed; all that remains are enormous piles of trash and debris. Humankind has been forced to desert the planet in the face of this destruction, and all remaining people now live on a colossal, highly technological spaceship. They hold onto the distant hope of returning to Earth if plant life can once again be supported by the atmosphere. While the primary concern of this movie is climate change and the impacts of mass-scale pollution, central to the story is the question of technology’s potential as a destructive force, as entertainment, and as a savior. With two loveable robots for protagonists, the movie explores how technology is embedded into human lives as a means of survival and the implications of this integration. The film explores the relationship between technology, environmentalism, and neoliberal capitalism; while it highlights the dangers of technology as a destructive force, it also shows how technology can be a source of life, depending on who has access to it. The contrast between the robots and the humans in WALL-E highlights the potential of technology to either amplify or diminish our humanity. Who is responsible for ensuring that technology is used to benefit humanity as a whole? In the film, we see that leaving this to a single corporation can be dangerous. In fact, Noble argues specifically against this monopoly, stating that access to information through technology should be decentralized. For McLuhan and Plato, it is instead the artist and the visionary who help us navigate the impact of technology on our lives. The Bhagavad Gita offers yet another perspective, emphasizing the importance of detachment from material rewards and using technology for the public good.

In the Western imaginary, space travel is framed as the next frontier. The ideal of science here embodies American freedom and American expansion. Beginning with the Cold War, the idea of traveling to space has captivated the public, as well as many scientific resources. We now experience extremes of this with major tech giants, namely Elon Musk, who aim to send their vehicles to space and gain social capital by flaunting their technological manpower. The idea of using space as an alternative for an Earth that has sustained too much environmental damage has its roots in the 1970s, as prominent scientific research envisioned space capsules to support human life without needing the atmosphere. A central ethical question guides this research: who gets to escape the Earth for space? While it is never addressed in the film, contextual clues provide a vivid answer to this question: the captain of the ship is a white American man, most passengers on board the vessel are white, and they lead a laid-back lifestyle, suggesting financial stability. This is an instance of technological redlining, which Safiya Umoja Noble, author of Algorithms of Oppression, describes as when “algorithms in the age of neoliberalism […] reinforce oppressive social relations and enact new modes of racial profiling.”¹ Towards the end of the film, there are also explanations provided as to why certain individuals decided upon this departure into space. In a short video, a world leader stands before a podium with a gas mask covering his face and the flags of the world behind him. While the flags indicate this is a world council, all members are once again white and speak American English. We thus see how survival at the end of the world is racially segregated and favors wealthy individuals, ultimately illustrating algorithmic bias in who is permitted on the ship; a bias that enforces oppressive social relations. 

The lack of diversity on the ship equally highlights the tension between luxurious space travel and the service industry. In fact, the only being left behind on Earth (that we know of) is the titular robot Wall-E, who is designed to pick up trash. On the spaceship, all forms of service that are usually mediated by human interaction, such as ordering food, are replaced entirely by robots. As much work in the service industry is performed by immigrants and people of color, and none of these groups seem to be present on the spaceship, the question remains of what happened to all of these individuals who were not permitted on the ship. Furthermore, their displacement by machines points to the cultural positioning of members of the service industry as replaceable and disposable, or below human.

Within its narrative, the film highlights the risks associated with exclusively trusting one form of media. Aboard the ship, humans depend solely on television for entertainment and news. They spend their days lounging in hover chairs, consuming an endless stream of media that numbs their senses and disconnects them from the world around them. The film depicts a dystopian future in which consumerism reigns supreme, and people are so accustomed to the constant barrage of media that they have lost touch with reality. This representation of the effect of digital media on communication is, of course, dramatized to drive the point of the dangers of becoming a “screenager” home; when I first watched this movie at age ten, I remember thinking that the people on the ship were rather stupid, while the robots were my heroes for taking an active stance. In fact, the portrayal of people aboard the spaceship is reminiscent of critiques of Americans as fat and lazy people. While this is a harsh and largely incorrect critique that is based on fatphobia and economic elitism, this representation serves to critique media oversaturation in our daily lives.

The film equally problematizes the effect of constantly interacting with a single medium that has a singular source. All technology on the ship is governed by a unique corporation. However, when the medium of television is internalized, this is harder to notice, as information gets distributed in fragmented ways. As Noble argues about the centralization of information in the context of search engines, “monopoly in the information sector is a threat to democracy.”² We thus see how the spaceship exemplifies a consumer dystopia, in which individuals are so sucked into a singular hot medium that they fail to distinguish the impacts of the medium on the information they’re receiving. Furthermore, as information is so dominated by a single source, there are few ways in which people can verify what they are told, thus allowing for misinformation to spread rapidly. As Marshall McLuhan argues, “such amplification [of the senses] is bearable by the nervous system only through numbness or blocking of perception.”³ The humans are trapped within an attention economy in which their consciousness is constantly being exploited and manipulated for the benefit of the corporation that controls their media consumption. Yet, they are also so entrenched within that technology that they lose the ability to analyze the effects of this monopoly. In this society, people are not only disconnected from reality, but also from each other. The human characters in WALL-E are portrayed as lonely and isolated, despite being surrounded by one another. They are unable to form meaningful relationships or engage in genuine communication, as their interactions are mediated by technology.

McLuhan suggests that when we use technology, it becomes an extension of ourselves, and we can no longer recognize who we are. He terms this phenomenon “self-amputation,” describing how overstimulation by a medium numbs our senses, especially the sense that is being heightened by the medium. In the case of the humans aboard the spaceship in WALL-E, their constant interaction with a single medium—television—has led to the disconnection from genuine relationships with others and critical relationships with information. McLuhan argues that this selection of a singular sense for intense stimulus “or of a single, isolated, or ‘amputated’ sense in technology, is in part the reason for the numbing effect that technology as such has on its makers and users.”⁴ This reliance on technology and single forms of media leads to a loss of self-recognition and historical context. In the film, the captain of the ship has to go as far as to ask his robot for the definition of “Earth” and “sea,” since those concepts had become so distant. McLuhan argues that this self-amputation forbids self-recognition and that, like Narcissus, people who are so extended by technology fail to distinguish their reflection within technology from their true selves. 

Moreover, the film highlights McLuhan’s concern that the age of technology is also the age of anxiety and apathy. McLuhan argues that “the machine world reciprocates man’s love by expediting his wishes and desires, namely, in providing him wealth,” which makes technology ever more powerful in extending man.⁵ The humans on the spaceship are trapped in an attention economy that has led to apathy and a lack of rebellion against the oppressive consumer dystopia in which they live. However, McLuhan also argues that other senses have to come into play to restore equilibrium. In the film, the robot Wall-E, who is not extended by technology in the same way as the humans, is able to connect with his environment and find happiness through his love for another robot. This suggests that rebellion against the numbing effects of technology is possible, but it requires a recognition of the self and a connection with the world outside of the numbing medium. On top of this, Wall-E’s ability to create meaningful relationships points to how technology itself can experience this recognition and awakening.

The mediated nature of communication takes on further dimension in light of the spaceship’s orchestrated efficiency. The shift from written to vocal interaction within its confines not only spurs contemplation about our current information preservation methods but also raises critical questions about our digital era. In our present day, the responsibility for archiving information lies largely with private entities, introducing a complex interplay of social and moral obligations. Moreover, the curation of content by algorithms and corporations dictates what information receives prominence, a parallel to the spaceship’s selective transmission of security alerts through ubiquitous flatscreen televisions. These disruptions, characterized by their intrusion, spotlight the consolidation of information sources, leaving the passengers with minimal avenues for communal exchange. Unlike the communal ethos envisaged by Marshall McLuhan’s “global village,” the spaceship’s environment lacks such connectivity, emphasizing the concentration of knowledge.

While the connection between the film’s narrative and Plato’s philosophical insights may not be immediately evident, it contributes significantly to our comprehensive understanding of the film’s themes. Plato’s Phaedrus engages in an inquiry into communication’s essence and the role of rhetoric in the pursuit of truth. This dialogue between Socrates and Phaedrus casts light on the enduring tension between spoken and written discourse, with significant implications for contemporary society. Within Plato’s framework, images emerge as a comparatively feeble conduit for acquiring knowledge, often resulting in mere impressions rather than genuine understanding. Plato’s cautionary stance against the manipulation of information for public consumption also resonates with the predicament faced by the spaceship’s inhabitants. These individuals, ensnared in a corporate dominion over their lives, relinquish agency and choice. Plato’s assertion that an overreliance on imagery hampers logical and critical thought takes on a disconcertingly apt parallel. The spaceship’s denizens, confined to visual media for their informational needs, find themselves trapped within perceptual boundaries, their imagination stifled and their prospects limited by the confines of their screens. They can no longer imagine returning to Earth and living there “normally” as a possibility.

While humans have been so extended by technology to the point of resembling robots in WALL-E, a profound transformation arises as the very robots that mirror human characteristics become the saviors of the world, embodying humanity’s noble attributes. This paradoxical dynamic is further illuminated through the lens of Marshall McLuhan’s insights on media interactions. McLuhan posited that the collision of disparate media can trigger moments of cultural revelation, jolting societies from the stupor induced by an overindulgence in a particular medium. In this context, the presence of lifelike robots amidst the mechanized passengers serves as a subversive awakening, akin to the awakening McLuhan theorized. A divergent perspective that resonates with the resolution of the film emerges from the ancient wisdom of the Bhagavad Gita. This revered text offers profound guidance on the pursuit of a virtuous life, propounding the significance of righteous action (dharma), intellectual growth, and devotion to a higher ideal. Here, a compelling parallel surfaces between the struggle depicted in the film and the Gita’s counsel: the internal conflict between material desires and the aspiration for spiritual elevation. The Gita advocates relinquishing attachment to the outcomes of our endeavors, a principle applicable to our interaction with technology. Far from an endorsement of renunciation, the Gita advocates a more challenging path—to engage with technology virtuously, contributing to the collective welfare while fostering compassion and human values.

Currently, technology is mostly privately owned and driven by profit motives, as is reflected in the film. However, the film suggests that technology can also be part of the solution to these very questions. This recalls Ong’s argument that technology can only be critiqued through a higher form of technology. Here, we can understand the emotional robot Wall-E, capable of love, sadness, and fear, as a futuristic technology. As a lonely soul left on the earth, Wall-E’s duty of cleaning trash has been hard-coded into his body, and he performs it diligently. However, Wall-E also gains the compassion of the audience as he collects small trinkets of human activity, such as an old boot, some screws and springs, and broken electronics, all of which he keeps neatly organized in his home. These artifacts are reminders of the importance of cherishing small, mundane moments in our lives and connecting to the environment around us. Without this quirk, Wall-E would not have seen the value in the small plant he discovered, which ultimately leads to humans being able to return to Earth. This humanity that we experience with Wall-E is completely lacking in most people aboard the ship, who are so consumed by television that they have let go of any individuality or personal items. 

Wall-E himself exemplifies this concept, embodying the principle of virtuous engagement with technology. He dutifully fulfills his tasks while also treasuring fleeting moments and forging meaningful connections with the elements of his surroundings. Through his emotional depth and compassion, Wall-E becomes a symbol of the potential for technology to amplify our humanity and help us solve some of the biggest challenges facing our world today; our beloved robot becomes the visionary who guides humanity towards the truth. Overall, WALL-E serves as a powerful reminder that our relationship with technology is complex and multifaceted. It is up to us to use it in a way that benefits humanity as a whole. Yet the film itself is also a product of the attention economy, using animation to simplify complex issues for a family audience. With lovable and relatable characters, the viewers are drawn into their television for hours, becoming themselves the lazy spacemen in hover chairs. While the movie centers the necessity of taking care of the environment, it fails to provide viable and enactable solutions. It instead focuses on the tensions between characters and dramatic action in order to keep the viewer engaged. In the end, the audience leaves the movie emotional from the romantic turmoil, slightly more aware of the dangers of littering, and with two hours less of their time.

1. Safiya Umoja Noble, Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism (New
   York University Press, 2018), 1.
2. Noble, Algorithms, 3.
3. Marshall McLuhan and W. Terrence Gordon, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man (Gingko Press, 2013). 43.
4. McLuhan, Understanding Media, 44.
5. McLuhan, Understanding Media, 46.