I think the revulsion to slop is not sufficiently interrogated. There’s been a great rushing in by many people who have never been anything other than perfectly alienated from the spiritual nature of craft. They do not comprehend the sin of anti-touchness that is AI because they have not encountered much touch—to stay with your meaning—at all for themselves.
The pain at experiencing the distance between creative expectation and crafted reality is an immensely pleasurable one if embodied for long enough. This is what made us human for so long, this is what gave us meaning. Those of us who know, are appalled. Those of who don’t will never.
I think that a lot of the tech bro relish and drive to duplicate human art by tech is essentially a version of artistic envy in the same vein as moral envy with jobs as explained by David Graeber in his book Bullshit Jobs.
Essentially, tech bros push so hard for AI duplication of the human creative spirit in an attempt to deny the value of the human creative spirit, which they cannot access to the same extent as people who have dedicated themselves to creative crafts outside tech.
I'd add a caveat too, there's probably some of these tech guys who were pushed by parents or other mentors to refuse to indulge art and follow tech as a way to provide for their families and themselves, so there also is probably at least a bit of a class perspective on it too, akin to how Graeber explains that support for the military has some class explanation because anyone can join the military and help people recover from a hurricane or bring vaccines to developing countries etc while joining the doing the same by joining the Peace Corps requires a college degree.
This is a deep into muscle memory for artists. The connection between an artist and their brush or pencil is not discussed enough. Thank you for sharing.
Talent is training but gifts are from birth and I have witnessed children gifted at athletics compared to others where no one taught them to have that “touch” at for example throwing a frisbee where other people really have to work at it. If such a child does then further develop their gift using training for talent they become amazing.
I love this. It is great lens to view my obsession with calligraphy which sprouted after the rise out generative AI.
It’s also a great way to describe my deep concern with chatbot writing, because it erodes the thinking and touch that comes only through the process of doing it yourself.
I make collages. I've been doing it for a long time, and (on some days) I feel like I've gotten pretty good at it. I make my work from cutting up magazines, books and posters and then reassembling them again. But, and this bit is important to me, I don't view my materials as books or magazines or bits of paper. I view them as *culture*. I recontextualise culture.
Recently, I have started using AI generated material in my work. Things I have generated myself and things that other people have generated and I have pinched off the internet. I am printing them and then using them in my normal collage practice as I would any other piece of found material. The AI imagery is not the finished product, but another crouton in the soup of culture for me to do my toast into.
It is clear that whatever your feelings about AI 'art', it is now irrevocably part of our culture, and I don't think we should pretend any differently. The trick from here is finding uses for it that serve our culture rather than degrade it.
I think this is excellent essay. I agree with you and also with Sam Broadway's comment. I like the "touch" analogy too. The way I've always described this missing piece in certain artwork is when I notice that a painting or photograph or collage doesn't have "fingerprints." I want to know that a person was there creating it, that they've made a mark that's singularly theirs, and that the artwork stands for that individual's mark in life. I understand some things can be manufactured and spit out and we buy stuff like that and that's fine. I'm not going to go on Etsy for handcrafted coffee mug - I might just get one from Target or Walmart. And I understand that's kinda of an issue too but I don't have the funds (or patience) to buy 100% "fingerprint" items when I need something. Are those items basically the slop of the tangible world? I agree with you that if we are all touch-less and/or we've burned off our fingertips we're kinda not here anymore. Where's the will to live in that?
I think the revulsion to slop is not sufficiently interrogated. There’s been a great rushing in by many people who have never been anything other than perfectly alienated from the spiritual nature of craft. They do not comprehend the sin of anti-touchness that is AI because they have not encountered much touch—to stay with your meaning—at all for themselves.
The pain at experiencing the distance between creative expectation and crafted reality is an immensely pleasurable one if embodied for long enough. This is what made us human for so long, this is what gave us meaning. Those of us who know, are appalled. Those of who don’t will never.
Thank you for your illuminating analogies.
I think that a lot of the tech bro relish and drive to duplicate human art by tech is essentially a version of artistic envy in the same vein as moral envy with jobs as explained by David Graeber in his book Bullshit Jobs.
Essentially, tech bros push so hard for AI duplication of the human creative spirit in an attempt to deny the value of the human creative spirit, which they cannot access to the same extent as people who have dedicated themselves to creative crafts outside tech.
I'd add a caveat too, there's probably some of these tech guys who were pushed by parents or other mentors to refuse to indulge art and follow tech as a way to provide for their families and themselves, so there also is probably at least a bit of a class perspective on it too, akin to how Graeber explains that support for the military has some class explanation because anyone can join the military and help people recover from a hurricane or bring vaccines to developing countries etc while joining the doing the same by joining the Peace Corps requires a college degree.
I just posted a similar comment after reading this other post by Connor Wroe Southard that I think you'd enjoy. https://connorwroesouthard.substack.com/p/elon-musk-and-the-war-on-writers/comments
This is a deep into muscle memory for artists. The connection between an artist and their brush or pencil is not discussed enough. Thank you for sharing.
Talent is training but gifts are from birth and I have witnessed children gifted at athletics compared to others where no one taught them to have that “touch” at for example throwing a frisbee where other people really have to work at it. If such a child does then further develop their gift using training for talent they become amazing.
I love this. It is great lens to view my obsession with calligraphy which sprouted after the rise out generative AI.
It’s also a great way to describe my deep concern with chatbot writing, because it erodes the thinking and touch that comes only through the process of doing it yourself.
I make collages. I've been doing it for a long time, and (on some days) I feel like I've gotten pretty good at it. I make my work from cutting up magazines, books and posters and then reassembling them again. But, and this bit is important to me, I don't view my materials as books or magazines or bits of paper. I view them as *culture*. I recontextualise culture.
Recently, I have started using AI generated material in my work. Things I have generated myself and things that other people have generated and I have pinched off the internet. I am printing them and then using them in my normal collage practice as I would any other piece of found material. The AI imagery is not the finished product, but another crouton in the soup of culture for me to do my toast into.
It is clear that whatever your feelings about AI 'art', it is now irrevocably part of our culture, and I don't think we should pretend any differently. The trick from here is finding uses for it that serve our culture rather than degrade it.
I’ll have to think about the “AI is part of culture” idea. I really appreciate the comment, thanks Joel.
I think this is excellent essay. I agree with you and also with Sam Broadway's comment. I like the "touch" analogy too. The way I've always described this missing piece in certain artwork is when I notice that a painting or photograph or collage doesn't have "fingerprints." I want to know that a person was there creating it, that they've made a mark that's singularly theirs, and that the artwork stands for that individual's mark in life. I understand some things can be manufactured and spit out and we buy stuff like that and that's fine. I'm not going to go on Etsy for handcrafted coffee mug - I might just get one from Target or Walmart. And I understand that's kinda of an issue too but I don't have the funds (or patience) to buy 100% "fingerprint" items when I need something. Are those items basically the slop of the tangible world? I agree with you that if we are all touch-less and/or we've burned off our fingertips we're kinda not here anymore. Where's the will to live in that?