Love all this, the tricky relationship with horse racing while having an appreciation for horses, your reflection on the annual hometown invasion, and how AI has now made slippery what used to be a consistently positive adjective, referring to something living as a “machine.”
For me, horse racing is a lot like combat sports, hard for me to square. I had family that lived in Paris, KY, have been to the track many times, even attended the Preakness a couple years (bonafide shit show)… the mixed feelings of love/hate/appreciation for it (save for maybe the asterisk that the horses don’t have a choice in any of it) make it one of those things I can’t totally quit, and willingly take in from time to time, a drug of sorts, with or without trifectas.
One of my favorite movies growing up, Phar Lap, was about the legendary Aussie race horse. The film is melodramatic in spots but has some great scenes for anyone who loves horses. Phar Lap had some similarities to both SeaBiscuit (underdog horse, inspiring during the depression) and Secretariat (enlarged heart, albeit not as big), but suffered a tragic end worth a read and one of those wikipedia rabbit hole sessions you mentioned.
Great post, well done. Plenty to mine here for fiction as well, fun to see that in a post like this.
thanks matt! i really want to watch some of those saccharine horse movies now. never seen one. the comparison to combat sports is maybe a good one…never given those a try either. “machine” could be an adjective given to a human fighter for sure
Having been to the Kentucky Derby I think you have good instincts about horse races and shouldn’t ignore them. I’ve never seen the idea of racehorses as a kind of technology explored but it feels pretty accurate (and morally wrong to me). I think the fear we’ll do this to ourselves is justified. I also think we’ve tried to perfect or improve the human condition in very shortsighted ways before.
I can definitely see how people wanted powerful tech incorporated into their bodies but as a counter point things like War Games and the original Tron to a lesser extent both presented AI as an external threat (because the protagonist can enter the digital world). There’s also the Terminator but that feels less relevant bc it’s about a physical robot. Either way these things still imitate people and like you describe that’s very uncomfortable. Because chatbots (I’m sure there’s some esoteric difference between LLMs and chat bots but this is how they’re used) are the most common ai we interact with I think the imitation factor is the most salient. Downstream of that imitation is the idea we’ll give AI jobs only humans should have.
I’m sure you’ve seen me go on paranoid rants before (sorry) but I’m most concerned about the military applications of AI. AI targeting systems have been used multiple global conflicts at this point and the US uses AI to conduct mass surveillance all over the world but the case I’m most familiar with is in India. Sometimes these programs are operating without much oversight and that’s scary.
Anyway Palantir is bad and more nonfiction on Substack should look like this.
i’m definitely afraid we will try to machine-ify ourselves. as you point out, we basically are already. but instead of limb attachments its chat bots. and while at least the limb attachments made us punch harder, the bots make us dumber.
I enjoyed this. I too have a proud Kentucky lineage and watch the televised races every year. I grew up on a beef cattle farm riding quarter horses for working cattle, but we had some mixed thoroughbreds as well. There is definitely a special horse/human connection. I hope horse racing is never outlawed. They were born to perform with independence, yet, to please the rider, as if to say "I had this all along." They know the task we want them to take on and they do it. Simple as that. Maybe it's a special interspecies bond of trust, probably only matched by some dogs and their owners. Thanks for sharing.
That's a beautiful essay. Your inexplicable reaction (based on the things you "know" about yourself) to the inexplicable event (the miracle that was Secretariat that day).
This year's Kentucky Derby was pretty peak as well. Golden Tempo was dead last and managed to get to the first in the last furlongs. I wasn't that invested at first, but the end was very thrilling. His trainer became the first woman trainer to win this race too.
Also, while I understand you didn't mean it like that, Sham was a good horse as well. His heart was also larger than an average horse's, but Secretariat also had a near perfect stride on top of the heart. Sham's had multiple victories and still holds a 2nd place record. Speaking of which, the reason we're not breaking Secretariat's record, on top of his near perfect genetics, is that modern tracks are slower.
i didn’t know that about this year’s derby. also, weird that tracks are slower now when in other sports the conditions improve and make things easier for competitors. thanks for reading.
There’s is something about sports events and seeing the impossible happen that makes us all remember the indomitable human spirit (Gurren Lagan type shit). Makes me think of postseason baseball every time.
But being is the exact thing AI lacks. It has imitation, poor and general imitation, because it’s dependent on input and maps and probabilities of might and could be but could also not be, so it cannot risk or push beyond unless told to do so. I’m sure someone could make an AI that is more “creative”, but you’d probably end up with the same sort of corporate amalgam programming we already get with a forced hodgepodge of themes and ideas from different minds smashed together in some vague coherency until given it the green light because the dollar drove the decision.
May we never hear of the tremendous machine coming close to us humans. They couldn’t do it on their own anyways.
I enjoyed how you began with an event, then discussed the participants, then focused on one participant, then one race won by that participant, then the phrase "like a machine", which led to AI, and finally acknowledgement of human accomplishment. Quite a trip, Clancy. I believe your emotional response to Secretariate's record-setting, run-away win came from your soul, that part of your being that connects you to all creation. Spirit plays a part in extraordinary events. Your soul responded to Secretariate's spirit. AI doesn't have a soul.
The turn from Secretariat to AI is where this really clicked for me. That line about a bodiless machine having a "baseline competence" but never being able to pull ahead by 31 lengths feels exactly right. It's not that AI fails, it's that it can't want anything, and wanting is what made that race unforgettable. Did writing this change how you think about the town's yearly invasion, or just sharpen the resentment?
The parenthetical does a lot of work here — it holds both possibilities in tension without forcing a resolution. I think that ambiguity is exactly right. The modern male experience isn't uniformly machine-like or uniformly human; it alternates, sometimes mid-sentence. Looking forward to reading the full essay.
I've worked like a machine before but I don't know. It's kind of boring, honestly. As annoying as we humans can be, we truly are more interesting. Machines taking over has crushed art into bits. Only humans can produce art that moves other humans. And with the tear-jerker tremendous moment, you never know, man. I've had moments like that get to me and I wondered what was wrong with me. But maybe we're just happy for Secretariat. After all, he's probably a good ol' fellow. His achievement is awe-inspiring. We shed a tear or gasp while the machines process. Yes, we actually are more interesting. Awesome read as always, Clancy.
Love all this, the tricky relationship with horse racing while having an appreciation for horses, your reflection on the annual hometown invasion, and how AI has now made slippery what used to be a consistently positive adjective, referring to something living as a “machine.”
For me, horse racing is a lot like combat sports, hard for me to square. I had family that lived in Paris, KY, have been to the track many times, even attended the Preakness a couple years (bonafide shit show)… the mixed feelings of love/hate/appreciation for it (save for maybe the asterisk that the horses don’t have a choice in any of it) make it one of those things I can’t totally quit, and willingly take in from time to time, a drug of sorts, with or without trifectas.
One of my favorite movies growing up, Phar Lap, was about the legendary Aussie race horse. The film is melodramatic in spots but has some great scenes for anyone who loves horses. Phar Lap had some similarities to both SeaBiscuit (underdog horse, inspiring during the depression) and Secretariat (enlarged heart, albeit not as big), but suffered a tragic end worth a read and one of those wikipedia rabbit hole sessions you mentioned.
Great post, well done. Plenty to mine here for fiction as well, fun to see that in a post like this.
thanks matt! i really want to watch some of those saccharine horse movies now. never seen one. the comparison to combat sports is maybe a good one…never given those a try either. “machine” could be an adjective given to a human fighter for sure
Having been to the Kentucky Derby I think you have good instincts about horse races and shouldn’t ignore them. I’ve never seen the idea of racehorses as a kind of technology explored but it feels pretty accurate (and morally wrong to me). I think the fear we’ll do this to ourselves is justified. I also think we’ve tried to perfect or improve the human condition in very shortsighted ways before.
I can definitely see how people wanted powerful tech incorporated into their bodies but as a counter point things like War Games and the original Tron to a lesser extent both presented AI as an external threat (because the protagonist can enter the digital world). There’s also the Terminator but that feels less relevant bc it’s about a physical robot. Either way these things still imitate people and like you describe that’s very uncomfortable. Because chatbots (I’m sure there’s some esoteric difference between LLMs and chat bots but this is how they’re used) are the most common ai we interact with I think the imitation factor is the most salient. Downstream of that imitation is the idea we’ll give AI jobs only humans should have.
I’m sure you’ve seen me go on paranoid rants before (sorry) but I’m most concerned about the military applications of AI. AI targeting systems have been used multiple global conflicts at this point and the US uses AI to conduct mass surveillance all over the world but the case I’m most familiar with is in India. Sometimes these programs are operating without much oversight and that’s scary.
Anyway Palantir is bad and more nonfiction on Substack should look like this.
i’m definitely afraid we will try to machine-ify ourselves. as you point out, we basically are already. but instead of limb attachments its chat bots. and while at least the limb attachments made us punch harder, the bots make us dumber.
I always wondered what it would be like to live there during track season. I enjoyed this piece a lot
when you’re someone who doesn’t go to the track, it’s a massive inconvenience! you know exactly where i’m talking about hahah
I enjoyed this. I too have a proud Kentucky lineage and watch the televised races every year. I grew up on a beef cattle farm riding quarter horses for working cattle, but we had some mixed thoroughbreds as well. There is definitely a special horse/human connection. I hope horse racing is never outlawed. They were born to perform with independence, yet, to please the rider, as if to say "I had this all along." They know the task we want them to take on and they do it. Simple as that. Maybe it's a special interspecies bond of trust, probably only matched by some dogs and their owners. Thanks for sharing.
thanks for reading cave! i can’t say i’m privy to the special connection. if i was, I’d probably understand horse racing a lot more
Clancy Steadwell, thank you so much!
I’ve just finished reading your piece. I found your writing style incredibly engaging—I couldn't help but read it through to the very end.
English isn't my strong suit, but since I enjoy your writing so much, it’s actually a great way for me to study.
Thank you ありがとうございます！（日本より） 🐞
That's a beautiful essay. Your inexplicable reaction (based on the things you "know" about yourself) to the inexplicable event (the miracle that was Secretariat that day).
thank you writer!
This year's Kentucky Derby was pretty peak as well. Golden Tempo was dead last and managed to get to the first in the last furlongs. I wasn't that invested at first, but the end was very thrilling. His trainer became the first woman trainer to win this race too.
Also, while I understand you didn't mean it like that, Sham was a good horse as well. His heart was also larger than an average horse's, but Secretariat also had a near perfect stride on top of the heart. Sham's had multiple victories and still holds a 2nd place record. Speaking of which, the reason we're not breaking Secretariat's record, on top of his near perfect genetics, is that modern tracks are slower.
i didn’t know that about this year’s derby. also, weird that tracks are slower now when in other sports the conditions improve and make things easier for competitors. thanks for reading.
There’s is something about sports events and seeing the impossible happen that makes us all remember the indomitable human spirit (Gurren Lagan type shit). Makes me think of postseason baseball every time.
But being is the exact thing AI lacks. It has imitation, poor and general imitation, because it’s dependent on input and maps and probabilities of might and could be but could also not be, so it cannot risk or push beyond unless told to do so. I’m sure someone could make an AI that is more “creative”, but you’d probably end up with the same sort of corporate amalgam programming we already get with a forced hodgepodge of themes and ideas from different minds smashed together in some vague coherency until given it the green light because the dollar drove the decision.
May we never hear of the tremendous machine coming close to us humans. They couldn’t do it on their own anyways.
well said Zachary.
I enjoyed how you began with an event, then discussed the participants, then focused on one participant, then one race won by that participant, then the phrase "like a machine", which led to AI, and finally acknowledgement of human accomplishment. Quite a trip, Clancy. I believe your emotional response to Secretariate's record-setting, run-away win came from your soul, that part of your being that connects you to all creation. Spirit plays a part in extraordinary events. Your soul responded to Secretariate's spirit. AI doesn't have a soul.
thanks for noticing that KC! you’re right about the soul thing for sure.
The turn from Secretariat to AI is where this really clicked for me. That line about a bodiless machine having a "baseline competence" but never being able to pull ahead by 31 lengths feels exactly right. It's not that AI fails, it's that it can't want anything, and wanting is what made that race unforgettable. Did writing this change how you think about the town's yearly invasion, or just sharpen the resentment?
The parenthetical does a lot of work here — it holds both possibilities in tension without forcing a resolution. I think that ambiguity is exactly right. The modern male experience isn't uniformly machine-like or uniformly human; it alternates, sometimes mid-sentence. Looking forward to reading the full essay.
I've worked like a machine before but I don't know. It's kind of boring, honestly. As annoying as we humans can be, we truly are more interesting. Machines taking over has crushed art into bits. Only humans can produce art that moves other humans. And with the tear-jerker tremendous moment, you never know, man. I've had moments like that get to me and I wondered what was wrong with me. But maybe we're just happy for Secretariat. After all, he's probably a good ol' fellow. His achievement is awe-inspiring. We shed a tear or gasp while the machines process. Yes, we actually are more interesting. Awesome read as always, Clancy.
What a wonderful foray into the realm of essays! I will always enjoy your fiction, but I'd be happy to read more nonfiction from you any time.