AI is not a creator. It's a giver.
Creators continue to feel the pressures of artificial intelligence (AI). News reports -- okay, speculative blogs by uninformed individuals -- say AI will take over every aspect of creativity in a few years. It will write film/TV scripts, cast computer-generated actors, produce the next great novel, and become baristas/winemakers. The last item utterly freaks creatives out.
I disagree, as told in a previous post about an experience with image creation through generative AI. I can further prove my point with a recent visit to a local art show.
Art in the Park is an annual event sponsored by Loveland, Colorado, where artists, photographers, woodworkers, and other creatives display their works. It's an opportunity to go beyond store-bought items, examine the handiwork of passionate individuals, and ask questions about how they produce their material. Not only can you purchase unique items, but you also learn about an artisan's passion.
Arts festivals separate you from the digital while reconnecting you with real-world perspectives. In my case, it generated an epiphany about AI.
Make vs. Give
Creative people make things. They knit words together, paint extraordinary landscapes, and transform clay into pottery and sculptures. Creatives spin yarn and thread into clothing and convert notes into beautiful music.
The process starts as whispers in their souls. From there, it ignites a passion to create. The flame reaches their brains, signaling their eyes and hands to make things happen. In the end, this astounding process fulfills individuals.
On the other hand, AI gives. Souls don't speak, and passions don’t ignite. Instead, someone goes onto an AI platform and types:
"Write me a romantic novel between two narwhals.”
"Write me a horror novel about two zombie narwhals.”
"Write me a humor novel about two zombie narwhals on a road trip where they get involved with narwhal mobsters. Oh, and create an image of them while you're at it."
In turn, the AI engine pulls material from other digital sources, such as works by creatives, and gives those people what they want.
Creativity shouldn’t work this way. You can't remove the middle parts to get what you want. To be honest, it’s the best part of many things. For instance, you get a pair of tasteless cookies when you remove the cream filling from the middle of an Oreo.
Yes, the middle part is sometimes demanding. Writers get stuck moving their stories forward. Woodworkers struggle to find the right cuts.
However, once the struggles are behind you, what seemed initially difficult becomes nearly flawless. Your creative soul's voice is clear as a bell as your shape the final product. When done, you're grateful for what the middle gave to you.
None of this satisfaction occurs using AI. It's simply a manufacturing process. A person on one of my social media groups crowed about using AI to create 100 books and covers in a short period. Nothing was done by them, including editing or formatting.
Where’s the elation in this process? Where’s the satisfaction of typing The End? Where’s the feeling of intense accomplishment? It sounds pretty empty to me.
What Did We Learn Today, Rich?
Until robots gain sentience and independence through a bloody and apocalyptic war, people will continue to make great works of art. Oh, AI will try to make a breakthrough as it continues to learn. However, it won't have the ingenuity of the human powerhouse of mind and soul.
Visit your local arts festival if you still have doubts. There's a good chance you'll change your mind while examining the hard work, including the middle, these artisans went through to create their amazing items.
All the best.
Rich Scott Keller
Email: wpantscreations@gmail.com
ClearVoice Portfolio: https://clearvoice.com/cv/RichardKeller
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rskellerwpp/
コメント