Temporary Clones (of myself)
You know the old phrase, "I need a clone of myself."
Ovro writes (dotart.blog):
"Every now and then I get a feeling like I really need a few copies of me to get things done, with all the brain buzzing going on." […] What would really happen, though, is that all of the mes would be busily doing one thing, with all the other stuff still waiting to be done."
This has often been a thought exercise of mine.
Would I be able to share the work load with a clone of myself so that we could divide up the chores and fun between us?
(For the pedantic: I’m using "clone" here as a magical copy that springs into existence fully grown and with all of my memories at that exact moment.)
I could be really wrong, but I feel like I could actually make having a copy work out.
I’ve seen Multiplicity (1996) with Michael Keaton, so I know there’s problems beyond sharing work and hobbies! A permanent clone would be a huge gamble. If it didn’t work out, what would it tell me about me?!
But a temporary clone. I think I’d be really tempted to try that. There are plenty of tasks and even some hobby stuff that I want to have done, but I don’t actually want to do the work of doing.
Note: I was reminded on Mastodon that David Brin’s Kiln People would be worth a re-visit! I last read that in 2008, and I’m afraid my memories are hazy.
Sharing that load with a day-long clone and getting the "executive summary" at the end of the day when the temporary goes back to wherever he came from sounds…okay?
Update April 2026: Dave from the dystopian future here (good lord how much has changed in just under a year), I’ve changed my mind. Screw this whole concept. We are meant to do the work ourselves. If you can’t accomplish it yourself, you’re not going to get anything out of it. Do less. It it more intentionally. Learn to love it.
Of course, the other thought exercise is: What’s it like to be the temporary clone? If I find that I am one, would I be okay with that? That’s a whole different problem.