The Jaipur Literature Festival 2024 returned to the British Library in London for another year, hosting a number of compelling sessions exploring the topics of our time including identity, ageing, and AI.

Taking place between June 7 to June 9, the cross-cultural voyage brings a mix of literary narratives and inspirational speakers from around the world. 

Among the themes covered this year included democracy, elections and geopolitics, the psychology of war and matters of the ‘Present Tense’. 

Unveiling history’s ‘Broken Threads’

One of the sessions featured BBC veteran journalist Mishal Husain and renowned author Anita Anand. Fresh off moderating a critical UK prime ministerial debate, Husain, alongside Anand, explored the rich threads of their shared histories influenced by the turbulent times of 1947, the year India and Pakistan emerged as sovereign nations.

“Mishal Husain’s journey, prompted by a fragment of her grandmother’s sari, has uncovered a wealth of personal history through letters and memoirs, tracing her ancestors’ lives through the upheavals of partition,” announced the festival organiser, setting the stage for a deep dive into historical narratives and personal reflections.

“While this session is called partition stories, my book is really about the before and after. It’s part social history because I wanted to trace the society in which my grandparents grew up, which was a pluralist society with many links across communities,” the award-winning broadcaster explained. 

The discussion ventured into Husain’s latest book, “Broken Threads,” which explores the lives of her grandparents amid the backdrop of the Partition. The book, a result of rigorous historical research and family stories, paints a vivid picture of survival and identity.

Read: Jaipur Literature Festival 2023: climate change, colonialism and constitution

Husain shared insights from her book, which began as a journey to understand her family’s past and expanded into a broader exploration of the social and political upheavals shaping South Asia in the 20th century.

“I think I have been in two very different zones for the day job and through writing this book,” Husain explained. She described her book as an attempt to trace the lives of her grandparents who lived through significant moments in history.

“The lives of my grandparents and the decisions they made were heavily influenced by historical events like the Mutiny of 1857 and the subsequent British dominance,” Husain explained. This historical insight shaped her grandparents’ approach to their professions and lives, embedding a deep understanding of the permanence of British influence in India.

The conversation also highlighted the emotional weight of personal histories. Husain recounted the discovery of an old sari fragment, a family heirloom from her grandparents’ wedding, which served as a poignant symbol of connection and loss through generations. “That fragment of a sari…it’s a fragment of a gift to mark your grandparents’ wedding,” she said.

They also touched upon the broader implications of partition, reflecting on the social fabric of the time, marked by intermingled lives and shared spaces, despite the backdrop of rising nationalism. “There were many beautiful stories about the links then, the links in the worst of times in 1947,” Husain noted, stressing the mixed legacy of partition — one of division but also of enduring connections across borders.

Read: Jaipur Literature Festival 2022 highlights: Literary greats on freedom of expression

She showcased the continuity of relationships amid the turbulent times of 1947, noting that despite the horrors of partition, some bonds persisted, though many were lost.

The Empire Podcast host chimed in with reflections on the resilience and defiance of norms by the previous generations, illustrating this through the love story of Husain’s grandparents, who maintained their religious identities despite societal pressures. “You have extraordinary grandparents because none of them did what that generation was supposed to do,” Anand stated.

The discussion also touched on Husain’s familial connections to historical figures and events, including an unexpected link to Mahatma Gandhi’s Salt March. “I realised when I was researching this book that my great grandfather was pretty much collecting the salt tax,” she revealed. 

The BBC Radio 4’s Today presenter pondered whether different political decisions could have changed the course of history, reiterating the role of British leadership in the tumultuous events of 1947. “I think by the summer of 1947 it was inevitable, but there was a period a year before that could have been different,” she noted, questioning the paths not taken.

“The remnants of empire, lost families, traditions, and shared histories not only connect us but also highlight the resilience of those who lived through such transformative times,” Husain reflected.

Exploring human mortality and the process of ageing

At the session titled “Why We Die”, named after the book in question, attendees heard about human mortality and the fear of death. Venki Ramakrishnan, a Nobel laureate and molecular biologist, engaged in a thought-provoking discussion moderated by JLF organiser Sanjay K. Roy, exploring the biological and philosophical aspects of why we die.

Ramakrishnan opened the session with a broad view of humanity’s historical obsession with death. “Stephen Cave says humans have been obsessed with mortality since we became aware of it, and we may be the only species that’s aware we all have a fixed lifespan,” he stated. Ramakrishnan spoke about how different cultures and religions have approached the idea of death and afterlife, reflecting a universal desire to deny or transcend death through various means.

The conversation looked into the biological underpinnings of death, with Ramakrishnan explaining the complexity of human biology in relation to mortality. “When we die, most of our cells are still alive. What we mean by death is the inability to function as a coherent whole,” he clarified, addressing the nuances of cellular death versus the death of the organism as a whole.

Read: South Asian Heritage Month: 18 books to celebrate diaspora

Roy questioned the implications of organ transplants and mechanical life support systems on our understanding of death, to which Ramakrishnan responded, “The traditional idea was that if you didn’t have a heartbeat, you were considered dead. But now, many countries define death by loss of brain activity.”

The discussion further explored how various life forms, from jellyfish to humans, handle cellular and genetic aging. Ramakrishnan highlighted the fascinating longevity of species like the Greenland shark which lives up to 400 years, and the bowhead whale, contrasting them with the relatively short lifespans of smaller animals like mice, due to evolutionary pressures.

On human efforts to extend life, Ramakrishnan was philosophical: “We’re outliers in terms of lifespan, living much longer than our size would predict. The oldest human lived to 122 years. It raises the question of whether we are somehow programmed for longevity or if it’s a complex interplay of genetics and environment.”

The session also touched on modern scientific approaches to aging, such as caloric restriction and potential genetic interventions. Ramakrishnan remained sceptical about the current hype around certain anti-aging interventions, noting, “The pathways that cause aging are deeply embedded in our biology and are a result of our evolution.”

Read: HistFest 2024 highlights: gender, empire, and espionage

The pair discussed the social implications of extending human life. “Death is a great democratiser, yet disparities in lifespan exist based on socio-economic status,” Ramakrishnan observed, questioning whether extending life would be beneficial or could exacerbate existing inequalities.

During the Q&A session, a member of the audience questioned the impact of emotional states like heartbreak on physiological health and the relevance of emotional intelligence (EQ) in the context of mortality. Ramakrishnan responded, “That’s the so-called mind-body, the sort of brain interaction with the rest of the body. And that’s very well established. And it is true that if you’re under stress, your physiology changes in a way, that’s detrimental. and if you’re happy, you probably have beneficial effects.”

He further explained, “I think stress is known to reduce life. It’s known to cause accelerated ageing in many ways. Even in even studies which show that stress can accelerate shortening of your chromosomes, through telomere loss, which is one of the causes of ageing. But stress probably has multiple ways in which it, affects ageing, through hormones interacting with many. So I think there’s almost certainly going to be some effect, but I’m not sure.” 

Listen to podcast: With The End in Mind author Dr Kathryn Mannix on death

The discussion then shifted towards the high-tech pursuits of immortality, specifically addressing the activities of tech entrepreneur Bryan Johnson, who infamously swapped blood with his 17-year-old son and 70-year-old father in a bid to stop ageing.

The scientist shared his insights, stating, “Bryan Johnson was in the news because there were studies on animals that showed if you connected an old with a young animal, the young animal would benefit from the blood of the young animal, and the young animal would actually suffer from blood of the old animal. This led to the idea that in younger blood, there are factors which actually may help you with ageing, and we lose those factors as we age.” 

Watch interview: Wendy Mitchell: challenging stigmas on death on World Alzheimer’s Month

He noted the scientific pursuit to understand these factors but criticised the rapid commercialisation that followed: “But as soon as these reports came out, it didn’t stop companies from sprouting up all over the place.” Discussing Johnson’s personal anti-aging regime, Ramakrishnan added, “And Bryan Johnson is a tech billionaire who seems to be obsessed with ageing. And his whole motto is don’t die, don’t age.” 

He added with a note of scepticism about the efficacy of such methods, yet acknowledged the underlying science, “And then, I think his markers didn’t seem to improve, so he basically decided it wasn’t quite working, although he said he still believes in the principle of it. And there I do agree with him, because the original data are still true, and we need to find out, what makes them work.”

The human cost of AI

Writer and tech philosopher Tom Chatfield, alongside FT’s AI editor Madhumita Murgia engaged in a critical discussion on the complex relationships humans share with technology. The event, moderated by Anjana Menon, explored the evolving relationship between human interaction with technological advances, particularly artificial intelligence.

Chatfield, who wrote the book “Wise Animals: How Technology Has Made Us What We Are,” opened the dialogue with a strong repudiation of the common notion that technology is neutral. “In the book, I particularly focus on what I call the delusion of neutrality,” Chatfield explained. He continued, “It’s very simple. I’m sure you will have heard the line, ‘technology is neutral, it’s just how you use it that matters.’ And I think this is wrong and silly and dangerous.” Chatfield elaborated on the inherent biases and values embedded within technological tools, reinforcing the critical need for users to engage with technology discerningly.

Read: Japan embraces AI as author wins literary prize using ChatGPT

As the writer of “Code Dependent: Living in the Shadow of AI,” Murgia complemented this perspective by discussing her findings on the societal impacts of AI, drawn from real-life stories. “The reason it’s called ‘Code Dependent’ is it’s actually an interesting angle on exactly what Tom was talking about, which is how we shape one another,” Murgia stated. She pointed out the often overlooked and dark sides of AI deployment, like the story of a mother in Amsterdam whose sons were preemptively labelled as future criminals by an AI-driven public service programme.

The session also explored the broader implications of AI in modern governance and social structures. Chatfield stressed the importance of accountability in technology deployment: “Any meaningful ethics of technology, I think, has to be rooted in a specific account of a system in the world.” He urged a move away from abstraction to more tangible, scrutinised applications of technology in society.

Watch interview: Who Wrote This? author Naomi Baron: AI’s threat to language

Whilst the Women’s Prize finalist shared her thoughts into the practical consequences of AI in critical sectors like criminal justice and healthcare painted a stark picture of current challenges and the potential harms of unregulated AI deployment. “I think for me, maybe the most shocking part of it is how little the builders of the technology and those who implement it know about how it works,” she remarked, stressing the opacity and lack of empathy in current technological applications.

How To Be Books also asked the pair a question on the recent AI Safety Summit and whether tech giants’ involvement in the discussions was merely lip service. Murgia responded, detailing her attendance at the summit and observing a noticeable drop in engagement and hype in subsequent meetings. She noted, “I was in Bletchley Park last November when that happened, and since then, there’s been another edition of the summit in Seoul, in South Korea…it’s unclear to me what is going to come out of that.” Murgia praised the establishment of the AI Safety Institute as a more effective, research-led initiative than the summit’s declarations. 

Chatfield echoed this sentiment, reiterating the need for a broader representation in these discussions, including voices from civil society and front-line professionals in health and education. “One of the interesting things was who wasn’t in the room?” Chatfield stated, stressing the importance of including diverse perspectives to genuinely transform how AI impacts society.

Together, Chatfield and Murgia provided a comprehensive overview of the profound influence of technology on individual lives and societal norms, urging a more cautious and informed engagement with technological advancements.