Ben Fischer helped build the world’s greatest surveillance system, Golden Shield, which utilizes every camera, cell phone, and computer in San Francisco to battle crime. There is only one problem: Golden Shield can’t work without a human mind to operate it, resulting in a controversial melding of man and machine.

Written by Eric Garcia, with art by Javier Fernandez, City: The Mind in the Machine delivers an action-packed story that questions the roles of security and technology in our modern society. Almost ripped from the headlines, the comic does what comics do best, reflect modern society and makes us question the world around us. The series comes courtesy of Darby Pop Publishing and IDW Publishing and debuts in February.

Writer Eric Garcia took some time off from plotting his all too real surveillance state nightmare to chat with us about his new series and we’ve got an early look!

Graphic Policy: How did you come to work with Darby Pop and artist Javier Fernandez?

Eric Garcia: City: The Mind in the Machine is a story that I’ve had on my mind for quite a few years, percolating in my brain as I tried to determine what medium it would be best suited for. Sometimes I’ll think of something that feels as if it needs to be a novel, or a film, or TV, but I was having a conversation with Jeff Kline (founder of Darby Pop) and we were discussing some of the themes involved with City, and together we realized that comics were a way that could get out both the very internalized aspects of the story (a man interfacing with a network, “becoming” a city, is somewhat heady and certainly internal) and yet also provide the external, visual framework that the action elements required. Jeff and Darby Pop were the ones who suggested bringing in Javier, and that has been a dream come true, as he’s really brought a life to characters who previously only existed in my mind, or as words on page. It’s been thrilling to see Ben and Owen and the others come to life through his exceptional talent.

GP: The series clearly takes on the information and surveillance state that we currently live in. How long have you been working on the series? Did revelations like Snowden’s affect the series?

EG: It’s been quite a number of years since the original stories I wrote for City – I tend to write short stories, even if only for my own use, when I’ve got a concept that intrigues me, as it helps me to get into the world and characters. From there, I start to figure out how best to tell the story, and in this case it took a couple of years before we hit on the idea of doing it in comic form. It’s amazing how much has changed since then in the public eye, in terms of all the public revelations about government reach and surveillance, while I don’t think anything has really changed, substantively. Even Snowden’s whistleblowing, and all the ugly Streisand-Effect government responses to it, hasn’t changed a thing in terms of what’s actually going on day-to-day. They’ve pretty much just said, “Um, yeah, we do all that stuff. Were you not aware of that before?” That said, what it has done is wake up a percentage of the population that had not been aware of it before, and that’s at least a step in the right direction. In terms of the series itself, I don’t think anything in particular has been changed because of the revelations, mainly because I’d assumed they were happening all the time, anyway. So perhaps it’s more of a question of how it will be perceived – rather than a “this kind of thing couldn’t legally happen” approach, maybe it will be seen more of a true cautionary tale.

GP: What type of research did you do looking into how far governments are going as far as using surveillance and information?

EG: I am by no means a conspiracy theorist – yes, I believe we landed on the moon; no, I don’t think 9/11 was an inside job; yes, I’m pretty sure Mikey never went near Pop Rocks and Coke – but I’m also aware that every ten years or so documents are unclassified and stories are told in which previously “top-secret” events from decades prior are revealed, and unerringly these are events which were kept secret from the public in the name of safety. Now, that’s not to say that they shouldn’t have been kept secret – that’s not for me to judge in-the-now, and barely for me to judge in hindsight – but it only makes it obvious that the same things are happening now, and will be revealed at some point in the future. Snowden just jumped the gun by a couple decades, that’s all.

That’s all a long-winded way of saying that I generally read a fair amount about government surveillance (hand-in-hand with corporate info-gathering) and the information society in general – and the ways governments use it both publicly and in secret, as part of their wars against <Terror/Drugs/Insert Name Of War Here>. A while back, I’d become quite interested in how China would handle it, given their rapid infusion of capitalist values but a solid, probably frightened, party leadership – and they did not disappoint. The “Golden Shield” project in City is a direct reference to China’s “Golden Shield” project from the early 2000s, in which they laid out the framework to control the internet within China’s borders. Information is power, and China wasn’t about to let that get out of hand.

Around the same time, maybe 2005 or so, there was an article I read – Slate, perhaps? – about the proliferation of cameras in New York City, and that it wasn’t just the street/government cameras that had been multiplying, but the “private” ones as well – which included cameras that the government could, in theory, have access to — presumably with a warrant. Presumably.

Recently, I read a fantastic book on the subject – Heidi Boghosian’s Spying On Democracy – which sets up the situation not just as one that’s been foisted upon us, but one that we’ve been conditioned to accept and even, in some cases, crave.

GP: The technology presented seems like it’s far off and advanced but some of it exists and much is being worked on. How far off do you think we are from computer intelligence like you presented or human direction connections are we?

EG: All you need to do to see how close we are to so much of this is google “Oakland Domain Awareness Center.” First off, the name. Domain Awareness Center? I should have just held off on Golden Shield and used that instead – it’s the perfect dystopian moniker, ripe for a little Skynet action. When does it become self-aware? 2018 or so, I’m guessing.

But it’s a real-life thing, being completed just across the bay from where City takes place in San Francisco. Ostensibly, it’s being built to fight crime, but it’s funded by a grant from Homeland Security and utilizes surveillance cameras, mapping systems, gunshot detectors, twitter-feed scourers, license-plate readers, and lord knows what else. Will it fight terror? Maybe. Will it pry into absolutely every aspect of the citizens’ lives there? Pretty damn sure.

So that takes care of the computer-intelligence angle – because if what we know about it is that far advanced, imagine the things coming out of, say, DARPA, or government-funded private enterprises that we’re not privy to.

In terms of human/computer interaction, those technologies are growing by leaps and bounds every day as well. We can use brain-computer interfaces to wirelessly and, without moving a muscle, type or manipulate robotic arms or adjust characters on a screen – why is it that much of a stretch to assume we could also, with proper permissions, access cameras and the electrical grid and the water supply?

I think all the base technologies presented in City are not only possible or probable – but inevitable. And soon.

GP: It’s clear some of the characters have some apprehensions about the use of technology in the role of security, which is a debate the real world is having now. How much of this story is a look at the balance between liberty and security?

EG: It’s not a full driving force of the story, but it’s there with everything that Ben does. Thematically, we’re definitely looking at that balance, and when it’s worth it to swing the pendulum one way or the other. It’s the kind of thing that keeps popping up as Ben gets deeper into the project, and as he begins to lose himself in the CITY persona – so it’s something that we’re planning on bringing out in the series even more as we progress.

GP: It’s a very complicated debate, what are your personal thoughts on the subject?

Like with all topics, we bring our own personalities and experiences to our positions, and while I’m a relatively anxious person in my daily life, I tend to be a little less so on a macroscopic level – which means that I don’t worry about the things I feel I can’t control. Global and domestic terror are awful, and yes, they clearly happen, but I do feel that our responses to them are misplaced and mishandled and often cause a lot more grief and pain than the events they’re trying to forestall. We’re simply overloaded with information about all the terrible things in the world, so of course we’re more likely to believe it’s going to happen to us at any second, oh my god, they’re coming for us!!! and as a result we either turn a blind eye to overreaching governments or, in some cases, actively support their efforts because we want to be safe. I get it, though – because, like I said, I’m relatively anxious as a person and a dad and a husband and I want to protect my family – but I worry greatly about the overall cost on our liberties. We just keep nudging the debate a bit every time, and suddenly we look up and we’re miles from where we started, without ever having actually had a real conversation about it.

GP: One thing that’s struck me about the debate about the US government’s use of data and surveillance is that it’s not much different than what corporations do and they do it at the individual level without any checks and balances, unlike government. How much, if at all, do you explore that aspect?

Again, this is something that we bring up but don’t harp on – quite yet. There are private corporations in City that are funded by the government, and private sources of intelligence that are accessed by the government, and these are things that Ben finds he has access to as well – and yes, that’s troubling for him on some level, and exhilarating on another.

The corporations do it because we allow them to do it and, often, beg them to do it. Facebook was built on this notion, and they’ve done pretty well for themselves so far, from what I hear. We want the deals and the “freebies” and to be kept up on the latest trends, and all they want is to know what we’re watching, hearing, eating, writing, loving, hating, and thinking. And we’re thrilled to tell them. Can’t stop telling them, in many cases.

GP: Do you think the ability for governments, or corporations to track us or use data like they do is just a trade off for our comfort level we have due to technology?

EG: I don’t know that the two things couldn’t be mutually exclusive – but we’ve crossed the Rubicon on that one. So much of it is so ingrained in what we do that the only time anything makes waves any more is when it goes so far outside the lines as to provoke laughter or outright shock. I was looking to rent a vacation home in Florida with some friends over this past winter holiday – a Google search, mind you – and now, on my *wife’s* Facebook feed (I don’t have a Facebook account – for multiple reasons, though it’s primarily because I know it would take up too much of my time) she’s been inundated with ads for timeshare rentals in Florida. Now, I know how that works, and it’s not like I think there are Google or FB employees reading my searches and saying, “Aha! Eric wants to vacation in Florida – we’ll just send him this little tidbit!” It’s automated and not so much of an info-grab as it is an info-shuffle, but still – it’s the tip of the iceberg, and beneath it is a giant continent of potential malfeasance. Do we care? No. Should we? Yeah, probably – but like I said, I think it’s too late. I think we’ve just accepted a certain amount of it, and there’s every reason in the world to keep the status quo, and only long-term (read: never-going-to-happen) reasons to buck the system.

GP: What can we expect you to explore as the series continues?

EG: As discussed, I’m certainly interested in all the different aspects of the information society in general, in government/corporate partnerships and morality/responsibility. I’m also fascinated with the idea of a merged man and machine – not in a deep singularity way, but in a practical, around-the-corner way. Like I said, it’s either coming or already here – it’s just a matter of time and keeping our eyes open. And of course there’s the emotional component as well – as we become more and more part of our machines, our network, how does that impact our lives as people? And as people connected to other people, in real life? Ben’s slide into City, and the shifting nature of his relationship with Chloe (and Rajni, to an extent) are things I’d love to explore further as the series progresses.