Inception

I always enjoy deep conversation. Lately, the topic of AI seems to hum everywhere. Most are baffled at how fast things are happening. How quickly the AI is getting better. 

As musicians and artists, we often talk about how many of our former opportunities are disappearing due to the ease of use of AI. We easily foresee human-written jingles, movie or television programming cues (those are the little bits of music that appear underneath the storyline), making the humans, who formerly based a great deal of their income on having these unique skills, obsolete.

Even demo recordings for the purpose of pitching to more established artists are being produced entirely by means of AI. This takes away much of the income of studios and session musicians alike. 

We can all have our thoughts and opinions about that, but I have always been of the mind that it is a foolish pursuit to fight the advance of technology. Imagine if we all stuck with the horse and buggy, simply because we felt sorry for the stable hands and equestrians who had to find other means of income. It’s ridiculous to think we can fight something that undeniably will make our lives easier. 

It occurs to me that the visual artists might have had similar conversations with the invention of the photograph. “What is the point of painting a portrait now, if not for capturing the likeness of a person, which a photograph does with much more precision?” 

The most interesting conversation about AI goes deeper than that. What we discuss is the idea of inception. I would argue that self-awareness and truly unique thoughts and ideas are still the province of humans alone. We argued that unless AI becomes inceptive, it can only create based on what already exists. Creating something truly new is still the exclusive capacity of humans.

Even if AI ever became self-aware, it would never understand human emotion. And what is art and music if not expressions of emotion and a vehicle for evoking an emotional response? I believe art is a connection between humans; a conduit between the creator and the recipient. If the creator is not capable of emotion, where does that leave us with the “art” it creates? (Or as my friend exclaimed: “Then what’s the point? If there is no emotion involved, what’s the point of music?”)

Considering there are actual “hit artists” that are fully AI (the artist, the music, the video - everything is AI-created) inhabiting the top of the Billboard charts, it appears the general public seems to fancy, if not the songs they create, then at the very least the newness of these AI artists. I have yet to meet a fellow human artist who is impressed with the quality of the so-called art. 

But when have the masses ever gone for quality? We all know many of the highly praised artists who are considered masters today were not understood or appreciated in their own lifetimes. Yet some of the (in my opinion) hideous creations have gained almost famed notoriety, simply due to good promotion or something going viral. I’m sure most adults get a sour look on their faces when they hear the beginning of “Baby Shark,” but talk about a monster success in the form of a song! Does that mean it is a good song? I would argue “no”. Just because something takes off, goes viral, or is a huge success does not mean it’s quality. Popularity does not equal brilliance. The broader public does not always recognize true artistry or even genius when it’s right in front of their noses.

I don’t ever see the advancement of AI taking away the true uniqueness of human-created art - whether it is music, poetry, painting, sculpture, or design. The patrons of the arts will always appreciate the human-made brushstrokes of a painting, the fingerprints in the clay, or the skillful playing of an instrument. Appreciating the emotion-evoking experience of a live music event, or standing face to face with a Degas ballerina, is not something that can be reproduced by AI. We may find ourselves robbed of former revenue streams and in need of finding new ways to actualize our art, but this is true with any technological advancement. And as far as advancements go, this one is looking to be a doozy. I would argue it will go down in the history books as a technological revolution.

We, humans, are nothing if not resourceful. When we find ourselves in new and unknown circumstances, we evolve, adapt, and continue creating. Because that’s what it means to be human.