Every craft is concern with coming to be; and the exercise of the craft is the study of how something that admits of being adn not being comes to be, something whose origin is in the producer and not in the product. For a craft is not conderned with things that are or come to be by necessity; or with things that are by nature, since these have their origin in themselves.
And since production and action are different, craft must be concerned with production, not with action
- Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics Chapter 5 6.32
So, dear readers, an interesting topic came up in my notes.
People raging, as they sometimes do, about an issue of the day. But this one was one interesting to me - AI art.
You see, the ragers thought that AI art was dehumanizing. Defeatest to use. And that it would make the world a no good, very bad place for artists.
Because corporations would use AI to avoid hiring people to make songs, images, and other such things for their marketing. Which, I can understand those concerns. Greed is going to greed.
Personally, though, I think they’re overblown. Garbage in is garbage out, and companies will learn that quickly enough.
Instead, I think AI is a great tool for artists.
I know, that if it existed back in my theatre days as a set designer, and when I had time to draw, I would have loved it. The most difficult skill, as an artist, is to get the image in your head onto paper. The ability to get even a small bit of it, visually, that you can then work with, is a huge step in the creative process.
You can mash up different images quickly, or use one image for part of a drawing, another for a second part.
The possibilities are endless.
And I haven’t even had time to actually use the tool for making art, I’m just slobbering like a dummy, day dreaming about how I would love to have the time, money, and art studio to do it.
I think that, the artists that can do things in person, will be in high demand after AI takes off, because the rich people will status signal with real art. You can’t fake a live violin performance. You can’t fake the depth of a real oil painting, the evocative way that the light hits it, the way that it draws you in, the brush strokes upon the canvas…
Then there’s the small, little things like we have on this substack, where I can visually and artistically tie every post together with ease. Make them relevant, symbolic, and I hope, beautiful to you, dear reader. Where my critics want me to magically “find and edit pictures” to do so somehow. The giving power to little people like us, away from gate keepers, so that we can make beautiful, good, and true art.
Finally, as the post says, we get to the philosophical critique.
All of the above, every bit of it, is nothing different on a philosophical basis than using photoshop or adobe illustrator to edit random pictures that you pulled, without the original creator’s permission, from the internet.
Heck, it’s no different than taking old school physical photos, cutting them with scissors, and gluing up a montage. Again, given you don’t have the photographer’s permission.
So, if you’re ok with randomly posting meme’s all over the internet…
Randomly using whatever images you find on the internet for thumbnails and whatever the heck you want….
Then you’re a freaking hypocrite, philosophically, if you say AI is artificial.
Because all art is.
It’s in the name, and it actually means what it says because it’s the Latin derivative.
Literally, folks, you can’t make this stuff up.
All art is artificial.
All the way down.
But, at it’s core, all communities need art. The folk need folk music. They need paintings, and drawings, laughter and love. They need things that represent THEM. Not the city, or the state, the country, or even the town next door.
They need THEM!
And THAT!
That RIGHT THERE!
Is why this matters.
Because AI gives people tools in areas simply to start expressing themselves. Without having to go to liberal Uni’s. Or take classes. Or leave the Rural areas where they can stay sane, safe, and have families, friends, and communities.
They can make beautiful art, right where they’re at, and really dig into it, play with it, and learn.
To bring to local artist back to his locale.
In a way craft and fortune are concerned with the same things, as Agathon says: ‘Craft was fond of fortune, and fortune of craft.’
A craft, then, as we have said, is a state involving true reason concerned with production. Lack of craft is the contrary state involving false reason and concerned with production.
- Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics Chapter 5 6.32
JD Cowan has a post that tangents into this topic.
https://jdcowan.substack.com/p/whats-really-going-on
My view on AI art is neutral. It's a tool. Generally, without a learned skill in prompt design, you'll find the tool frustrating and give up. Without an understanding and appreciation for art outside the tool, you won't know where to go with the tool until you discover that appreciation. Without a knowledge of the artists who make the art that that AI tool uses, you will be hampered by your inadequacies in refining the artwork it produces.
As an artist, it is no more a threat to me than Photoshop or Illustrator, than Clip Studio Paint or Procreate, or than a Hunt 102 dip pen. AI tools for me are a rapid development aid and a quick way to test out ideas. A fail faster drill, if you will.
The people who fear AI tend to be the ones who are less proficient in their crafts, and therefore, are at a greater threat of displacement by those who choose to learn and develop their skills. They miss the point that human creativity drives all the works that are produced as "art", not the tools used.
That means the Hollywood producer who thinks he can have a press-button writer or artist is a fool who hasn't failed yet. "Yet" is the key. The untalented will never succeed by just "using AI."
The tool cannot create; it waits for the mind and hand of Man to drive it, exercising the creativity given to them by the Creator.
I think the people who fear AI art and writing are the mediocre artists and writers.
As you say, AI will never replace a skilled human violinist - but it can replace "robotic" musicians the same way that it can replace a robotic sort of writer who is incapable of producing anything beyond glorified book reports.
Are you human? If so, great! Competing with a robot is easy, because there's really nothing of the divine spark within them that exists in human beings. The challenge, as it were, is for the robotic sort of artists, writers, musicians, etc. to really be human again.
Those who channel that divine spark into their work will stand out just as they always have.