Kinda Controversial : AI in the Arts

There is surely a feeling of unease whenever we speak of artificial intelligence in the same breath as art. It actually is very primal, though very acceptable; the instinctive fear that may let artists and the “engage-rs” (an audience, a writer or a fan) make the term “art” define once again. The re-definition comes from the instinctive fear that what makes us humans might be replaced, rewritten or erased.

I was, although writing this blog in a very new company that promotes a great deal of AI-powered storytelling, not a big fan of usage of AI in Creative Industries. By this blog, I want to learn and tell about my experience by conducting an actual literature review, alongside with what I believe in. 

I believe art should make you feel something, negative or positive; that is for sure. However, for the engagement to be more intense and the “art” and the connection between the artists and the audience should be more euphoric. I love experiencing it while not understanding a single thing about why I feel that way. I love trying to explain why and how I’m feeling; and now that I’ve done my research, I know that I am not the only one whose favorite part is that about arts. 

The second nature that I would like to highlight, before moving on to the main topic of artificial intelligence, is it; being a product of a very creative mind. Not so long ago, I was amazed by the term “psychology of creativity”; until I learned there is no such thing, scientifically.  When I talk about it with a person who surely knows very much more than me, she told me “there is no such thing as psychology of creativity because there is no operational definition* of creativity. Even if there was, then again there is no need for psychology of creativity; because they would teach creativity to AI.” That was devastating, joking.

So, let’s come to my/our fears once again: “Will the human soul lose its place? Will the soul of creation be swallowed by code?” (questions from ChatGPT). The short answer is- no. AI will not replace artists and it will not overtake the human-made.

It turns out that, which is very hard to admit for me, AI is not a thief creeping into the studio at night to steal the brush of a painter, the pen of a writer, the camera of a director or the actual legs of the choreographer. It is not a rival playwright plotting to rewrite Shakespeare or Dante.  I guess, it is more like a mirror that is being held from a strange angle that could help us see reflections we hadn’t considered, inviting us to look closer or from backwards, to think differently.

No, AI will not overtake the human-made. How could it anyways? Art has always been more than a movement that is being performed, a note that has been sung, a pigment on canvas or words on a page. It is about timing, hesitation, longing, memory - it is an unspoken (therefore not prompted) gesture between two people who understand each other without saying a word, whether it is contemporary or not. These are things a machine cannot feel.

However, here’s the part that is even harder to admit: AI is in the room where it happens* and adds something to do room. It gives the artist new rituals. They prompt, prod, rewrite… To become an explorer in territories that were unknown makes the product, not only about shaping or composing but shaping the machine’s imagination and seeing what comes back, kind of distorted yet exciting.

For the boring and efficient part, it is also great for archiving and having “what artists went through” during the production stage which I believe we, as art enthusiasts, need in our lives.  We all read the journals of artists, “in the making” movies and the biograğhy or autobiography of artists that we love. I personally would love to have Kafka’s “ChatGPT enterprise” or what would Van Gogh prompt Midjourney.

AI’s unsettling answers (and questions) may be really productive for a developing work of an artist. Through this technology era of ours, using it correctly might open various kinds of doors for creative and cultural industries.

Perhaps this is the quiet gift of AI in the arts: you never know what can happen or whether it is scary or making everything easier. It forces us to defend what is deeply human, while daring us to expand what “human” might mean.

And maybe, just maybe; that tension, the mix of fear, wonder, and relentless curiosity, becomes the most creative place.

*An operational definition is designed to model or represent a concept or theoretical definition, also known as a construct. Scientists should describe the operations (procedures, actions, or processes) that define the concept with enough specificity such that other investigators can replicate their research.

** Song by Lin Manuel Miranda for the production of Hamilton the Musical on Broadway. Listen here: https://open.spotify.com/track/2TK2KSrzXD6W01qjXVjNGh?si=ddb401652609439d