Of Cats, Brands and the Elephant (not quite) In The Room

5.04 …a cat’s breakfast

In the wee small hours of Thursday morning I listen to the latest edition of Mathew Syed’s excellent Sideways radio programme entitled, Crazy Cat Lady* as my cat squats, perfectly still, serene and totally focussed on clawing the living daylights out of whatever organism she has located (and trapped, terminally) behind the kitchen cabinet.  Later, of course, she will climb up and demand a cuddle, the most affectionate creature you could possibly imagine. 

The focus of Sayed’s programme this week is a (very broad) look at how cats have represented a challenge to orthodoxies over the centuries; from Pope Gregory IX’s (1223) papal bull Vox in Rama linking cats with the devil, to JD Vance’s (2021) Fox News interview where he claimed that the U.S. was run by: “…a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable over the choices they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too.” 

A claim (we learn) which might have been featured in a letter to The Times (circa 1908) bemoaning the rise of the suffragette movement demanding equal rights for women.

(short pause while the cat climbs up to check what I’ve written)

The battle between the ‘Patriarchy versus the Catriarchy’ notwithstanding, one of Syed’s academic contributors, historian and author Kathryn Hughes** then identifies the origins of the subversive power of the pussycat as follows:

“Right from the start, ancient times, cats were a sort of liminal creature, by which I mean they had one paw in and one paw out of human civilisation. When we went from being hunters gatherers to farmers, cats started to come out of the forest and the woods and hang around the farmyards. They performed useful tasks, which is that they kept pests away… We could see that we needed dogs to guard the farmyard, to help us hunt, the dog is completely integrated, he’s man’s best friend, whereas the cat stays warily on the perimeter of civilisation. A kind of freelancer on the periphery of farming culture.”

12.04 …the elephant (not quite) in the room

I find myself on the periphery (entrance) of the British Museum’s exhibition:  Ancient India, Living Traditions*** (my caps) having belatedly (and perhaps stupidly) realised that this will be primarily a collection of religious artefacts. Really not my thing. Indeed, my closest encounter with Indian religion had been when I’d rolled up (hungover) to join my friends at a punk concert at Imperial College (1976-7-8?) only to find that I’d got the date wrong and in place of ‘Solid Vomit’ there was a Hindu wedding feast in full swing. I stuttered my apologies to the host, very red-faced, only to be told:

“That’s perfectly okay, come and join us.”

“What??”

“Come in, come in. Eat, drink and celebrate with us.”

For the next two hours I was treated like part of the family. Unlike ‘Solid Vomit,’ the musicians could actually play their instruments, and while there was no pogoing, the bride, groom and guests could easily match any punk bands’ fans in kohl eye make-up and piercings.

In the spirit of (…1976-7-8) I venture forth into the exhibition and am greeted by several representations of Ganesha, who is generally represented as a kind of jiving elephant, and who I had always thought of (not wholly incorrectly) as the Good Luck God. I had even worn brass bangles bearing his likeness (1972-4) with my pre-punk clogs and Afghan.  What I hadn’t realise (before the exhibition) was that Ganesha, like the cat, is also a liminal figure who is traditionally placed in doorways and on the threshold. Always half in, half out, even his portrayal is supposed to reflect his In-Betweenness:

Part Human/Part Elephant ‘hybrid of two realms’

Big tummy and tiny mouse friend ‘vastness and minuteness’

Broken tusk ‘wholeness and incompleteness’

15.04 …from Bloomsbury to Broadband, from gods to marketing

In the third of Brandwatch’s highly-recommended webinars on Cultural Relevance, the series moves on (from the hands-on reflections of movers and shakers in the previous episodes) to the more elevated overview of academic Dr. Marcus Collins of Michigan’s Ross School of Business. And while I can see the point of leading with the leading lights of Klarna, United Airlines, Motorway and L’Oréal, I personally would have started with Dr. Collins’ session and set the series in context from the start.  Collins himself starts with a quote from Anaïs Nin: 

‘We see things not as they are, but as we are.’

And then he introduces the Welsh socialist, academic and writer, Ray Williams (1921-1988) who, among others, expressed the view that:

‘Culture is ordinary. It’s not abstract, but experienced in daily life… It is a signifying system which works through symbols, rituals, language, style and shared practices that signify identity, values and belonging.’

Or a ‘realised meaning-making system’ as Collins describes it in his bestselling book: ‘For the Culture; The Power Behind What We Buy, What We Do, and Who We Want to Be.’

Of course many would see it as perfectly acceptable for Klarna, United Airlines, Motorway and L’Oréal to want to (responsibly) populate the dreams and identities of as broad a spectrum of remunerative groups and viewpoints as possible. But what if even bigger companies sign up to populating these same groups and viewpoints with the views, opinions and attitudes that comprise the 'culture' of a single U.S. Administration?

17.04 …teetering on another threshold ?

Over tuna salad on rye, I read an article by Mariatje Schaake* entitled Beware America’s AI Colonialism (FT 20 August) posing a question which would give even my cat (who eats anything) dyspepsia:

‘President Donald Trump’s trade wars are teaching the world a harsh lesson: dependencies get weaponised.  In the White House’s view, international trade is zero sum. With his AI Action Plan promising “unchallenged” technological dominance a further ambition is clear. Will the rest of the world recognise that embracing US artificial intelligence offers Trump an even more potent tool for coercion?’

As background, back on the 23^rd of July (only 19 days after celebrating the Declaration of Independence) Trump signed three executive orders relating to AI:

1)      ‘Promoting the Export of the American AI Technology Stack’

2)     ‘Accelerating Federal Permitting of Data Center Infrastructure’

3)     ‘Preventing ‘Woke AI’ in the Federal Government’ to eliminate DEI (Diversity,  Equity and Inclusion), misinformation, and climate change considerations from AI guidance.’

And as the FT article points out:

‘What makes AI dependency particularly dangerous is its opacity. Unlike trade in physical goods, AI decision-making processes are often black boxes, making subtle manipulation nearly impossible to detect. These systems become deeply embedded in critical processes, with high replacement costs. Many countries already have significant dependencies on US tech companies. Add AI and powerful lock-in effects would intensify.’

 Adding:

‘…Ensuring transparency and security requirements and building in contractual protections against service termination might help in the short term, but coalitions with like-minded democracies to foster alternative AI ecosystems free from unilateral US policy change will be more sustainable.’

Which will be great for better ensuring a multiplicity of cultural perspectives, but I can’t help thinking that it will be a bit like herding, well, cats.

DT 29 August, 2025

* https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m002hksl

** ‘Catland: Feline Enchantment and the Making of the Modern World,’ Amazon. 2024

***Exhibition runs to 19 October 2025

****Fellow of Stamford University’s Institute for Human-Centred Artificial Intelligence and the Cyber Policy Center, author of The Tech Coup.