A thing that's often overlooked is that it's not just artists who find meaning through their work, those who may only listen to the works of others also derive a sense of meaning from that experience - they share in the creative process in a vital way because any performance only really exists when both performer and audience are in some sense 'present'. This sharing need not be an actual physical shared space or time- it's more about the understanding that the artist is not merely modelling sound but is trying to impart meaning. The Song, the Book, the Painting- these are the physical manifestations of art - but that which is being expressed can only really be made manifest when the intent of the artist meets the comprehension of their audience. Meaning can only arise from this collaboration, this 'meeting of minds'. AI has no mind, nor does it have anything to say. AI is not trying to communicate, it's just an algorithm solving a problem; 'Make me a Song that fits the following criteria'. AI gives us the outward appearance of meaningful activity but there's a vacuum at the centre- AI Art and Music is like a Zombie- it seems to be a living thing but there's no one in there- there's nobody home. Someone asked me once would I ever read a book entirely written by an AI- my reply was instant and without reflection- I said " No, because I would be alone." On the face of it this was an odd response because surely the reader of a book is almost always alone- reading is a mostly solitary activity. But I think my response reflected a deeper truth, which is that even if the words I am reading were written by a man long dead, those words remain an expression of the living mind that wrote them- and in reading them now I am not alone because-through his words- I share in that 'meeting of minds' that transforms the mere modelling of sound or paint or words into meaning. The perverse irony of AI is that it could eventually become superhuman in it's mastery of every form of creative expression yet still have nothing to say, nothing to communicate. It's this 'absence' that I think many of us are trying to articulate. Looking at AI Art, or listening to AI Music or reading AI written books will not in the end be a real substitute for the work of human creators- not because the Art will be ugly or the Music discordant or the words poorly crafted but because we do not want to be alone- we want the Art we look at, the Music we listen to and the books we read to mean something- we want that sense that behind the art, the music and the words is the living mind of their creator.
It's unclear if AI is intended to undermine humanity, but its impact depends on how it's used. The artistic struggle has always been deeply connected to the music industry. However, much of the music created in the post-internet era seems to focus more on the artist's struggle with self-promotion on platforms like Instagram and the challenges of maintaining and protecting their brand.
Exquisitely put Nick…it feels like humans are eroding their own humanity with the use of AI , social media and our impulsive need for instant gratification.
I don't think humans will settle for the banal. As suno is now, it is pretty mediocre and is only good for memes or a remedy to blank canvas syndrome. Even in the future when AI generated art and music nears perfection, humans will always be able to discern what is a better product, or at least one that is more suited to their taste. I happen to like 711 coffee, but a coffee sommelier will have a very different opinion to me.
A thing that's often overlooked is that it's not just artists who find meaning through their work, those who may only listen to the works of others also derive a sense of meaning from that experience - they share in the creative process in a vital way because any performance only really exists when both performer and audience are in some sense 'present'.
This sharing need not be an actual physical shared space or time- it's more about the understanding that the artist is not merely modelling sound but is trying to impart meaning. The Song, the Book, the Painting- these are the physical manifestations of art - but that which is being expressed can only really be made manifest when the intent of the artist meets the comprehension of their audience. Meaning can only arise from this collaboration, this 'meeting of minds'.
AI has no mind, nor does it have anything to say. AI is not trying to communicate, it's just an algorithm solving a problem; 'Make me a Song that fits the following criteria'. AI gives us the outward appearance of meaningful activity but there's a vacuum at the centre- AI Art and Music is like a Zombie- it seems to be a living thing but there's no one in there- there's nobody home.
Someone asked me once would I ever read a book entirely written by an AI- my reply was instant and without reflection- I said " No, because I would be alone." On the face of it this was an odd response because surely the reader of a book is almost always alone- reading is a mostly solitary activity. But I think my response reflected a deeper truth, which is that even if the words I am reading were written by a man long dead, those words remain an expression of the living mind that wrote them- and in reading them now I am not alone because-through his words- I share in that 'meeting of minds' that transforms the mere modelling of sound or paint or words into meaning.
The perverse irony of AI is that it could eventually become superhuman in it's mastery of every form of creative expression yet still have nothing to say, nothing to communicate. It's this 'absence' that I think many of us are trying to articulate. Looking at AI Art, or listening to AI Music or reading AI written books will not in the end be a real substitute for the work of human creators- not because the Art will be ugly or the Music discordant or the words poorly crafted but because we do not want to be alone- we want the Art we look at, the Music we listen to and the books we read to mean something- we want that sense that behind the art, the music and the words is the living mind of their creator.
I bet you're the president of your own fan club.
@@_cloudface_ Not really- the whole thing was written by chat GPT. 😁
That's no Nick Cave that's Boabby the Barman.
It's unclear if AI is intended to undermine humanity, but its impact depends on how it's used. The artistic struggle has always been deeply connected to the music industry. However, much of the music created in the post-internet era seems to focus more on the artist's struggle with self-promotion on platforms like Instagram and the challenges of maintaining and protecting their brand.
the assumption that everyone is a lazy ass just letting the AI write songs shows panic came before thought.
Exquisitely put Nick…it feels like humans are eroding their own humanity with the use of AI , social media and our impulsive need for instant gratification.
I don't think humans will settle for the banal. As suno is now, it is pretty mediocre and is only good for memes or a remedy to blank canvas syndrome.
Even in the future when AI generated art and music nears perfection, humans will always be able to discern what is a better product, or at least one that is more suited to their taste. I happen to like 711 coffee, but a coffee sommelier will have a very different opinion to me.
Human made might even get more expensive.
Isn't evil, narcissistic and satanic music also a problem? Not that I'm any fan of AI. I certainly agree with NC about AI creations in this regard.
It's another method for a few people to make a lot of money.