On AI

When I look across our current creative landscape, I see a trend that is by no means new. A new technology, a divisive adoption curve, a sense that a shiny new technology might threaten the very foundation of a craft. I see some calling for a rewrite of what it means to be an artist and others claiming a moral high ground through condemnation and abstinence.

While I am deeply troubled by both the implications and already visible impacts of this technology across fields, I am not here to pose precise definitions of AI, AI use, or even of art. Rather, I am a creative who has begun to turn outward what has always been a personal and intimate process. I’m so excited for this journey, but I also want to undertake it without compromising the sincerity I have always approached my creative expression with. Art, for me, is a vessel of radical honesty; a means of articulating truths I have struggled to tell even myself.

And so, as I join the discourse of modern creatives, I want to also share some of the values, reflections, and accountabilities that shape my personal identity and work.

I believe that art, at the end of the day, is a conversation. Sometimes this conversation inspires revolutions, often it’s no more than a quiet exchange of “look” and, “I see.”

The intent and delivery of this first act of expression, or, creation, is intrinsic to the weight and value of this conversation. When the creation is empty, intentless, or shallow, an audience’s interaction with it is purely an act of aesthetic consumption. And in this cycle, the creation depreciates in value. This in turn devalues, decentralizes, and de-personalizes the creator.

Indeed, AI can create something beautiful. It can rhyme. It can evoke emotions. But it also places an impermeable veil between the artist and the audience.

Art is powerful because it transcends conventional language to make a statement unique to the artist. And every artist’s creative practice is deeply shaped by the experiences, knowledge, and identity of that individual. To sever this near-intrinsic connection is to lose something irreplicable.

My own creative process is given life by the human nature of it. My limitations have drawn me to the unconventional. The way I am moved by others’ art deeply impacts what I create.

I can define both the process and products of my creativity as an exploration. To outsource this journey feels for me akin to a hiker taking a helicopter to a summit and wondering why there is no rush of fulfillment.

When I show my work, I am not asking if it’s beautiful. I’m asking if the human inside of the art speaks to the human inside of the audience. I don’t expect my work to be taken precisely how I intended it; in fact, I welcome a negotiation of (i.e. conversation with) intended meanings. But I’d like my work to be taken as human.

Given this, beyond the joy I find in the process, I choose not to use AI in my work as a way to respect an audience that might find slivers of their own experiences in what I create. I invite conversation. And in doing so, I commit to leading with expression that is honest, curious, and thoughtful.