The author sees AI as a partner/collaborator-an extension of human creativity which is how I see AI and not as something to be feared.
Manu discusses a shift of human design and creation from creators to narrators which is an interesting way to look at the trajectory of AI in creative practice and how people become narrators of creative output rather than the physical process of creating.
The book describes the essential nodes of creativity as ‘intention’, ‘articulation’ and ‘manifestation’ and states how AI impacts each of these sections by ‘reframing intention, enriching articulation and ushering new and dynamic modes of manifestation’ and thus disrupting and inspiring the traditional creative process.
AI is changing the way we create art: We become the instigators of its creation and stand aside as spectators as the art is created in our presence. Manu sees this as a privilege and responsibility—a new way of being and creating, allowing us to go beyond the limits of our imagination and explore new ideas and possibilities of creativity.
He describes this as ‘creativity in the digital age’.
Manu says imagination and intent govern artistic expression and therefore there is no need to fear tech which helps to deliver our expression but the question then is what happens when the tech is also able imagine? From the current trajectory of tech, it is clear it is headed this way so what happens then?
The author says AI democratises production and says it reduces bias which is contrary to the loud dominant cry surrounding AI and bias. By using AI, the creative dictates the story and AI creates it with less human bias because it is simply responding to directives. The artist is biased towards colours shapes etc and can change and make iterations during creation. AI, however, is not compromised. This is an interesting idea as he suggests AI does not reinvent the world as it is but presents an avenue for creatives to reimagine the role and scope of design.
The book unpicks the myth of the creative genius where creativity appears to belong to an elite few who can create and Manu instead discusses the collaborative opportunity of AI for all, an idea which supports the concept around the democratisation of creative practice. Rick Rubin confirms this idea in his book, ‘The Creative Act: A Way of Being’, as do many other creatives and designers including Joy Paul Guilford who came up with the term over 50 years ago.
The books states that AI’s pattern recognition, design patterns, generative algorithms etc will redefine pedagogical approaches but I don’t see how yet because as we know AI’s pedagogical approaches still follow traditional approaches and have not delivered any revolutionary approaches and this is also confirmed by other writings, (Council of Europe, (2022), Ido Roll1 & Ruth Wylie, (2016).
Manu calls for the blurring of the lines, maybe even the removal of the lines between natural and artificial in this collaboration of creative production. Acknowledging the interconnectedness and continuum of both together which is an interesting idea, a way of seeing AI as a partner and not as competition, but a vehicle for expressing one’s creativity and thus an extension of one’s thoughts and ideas.
I love when he says AI is more than just a tool in toolbox but it ‘transcends our imagination, extends and bears testimony to heights of our imagination and thinking’: -it allows us to be transcendental.
Manu calls for us to push the boundaries of what we have called creativity and go beyond the norm, fearlessly exploring the next and embracing AI and tech, design and art for ‘the enduring act of creativity’. I love it.
That’s what I think but needed someone else to say it—that AI will not bring a shift in our existence but an opportunity to experience more, push the boundaries, extend and surpass our own imagination, bring colour and joy to us. It can enrich us and allow us to probe our own potential.
It can create new things rather than follow archetypes. You can ask it to create things we do not already see, beyond our experience and knowledge of the world. By doing this we can create new things not connected to archetypes. By collaborating with AI, designers and artists can explore new horizons.
I like when Manu says AI will not become our masters but our playmates—AI has nothing to prove but to respond to us. Ai is proof of our knowledge and wisdom, ingenuity and creativity. This is exactly what I have been saying.
Creating is personal but there is a need to investigate responses to this art. There Is no clear demarcation between art and non-art and thus is the idea of what is artistic changing?
He states that AI allows for real time collaboration and that AU has the potential to include viewer in it development through feedback making them cocreators inputting the society’s diversity.
Using AI in the virtual spaces it occupies gives toom for wider collaborations across forms, cultures, nations fostering a shared understanding across boundaries.
He adds AI can also cause dissociation as the act of being in virtual spaces can be an individualistic pursuit.
Of course, we can argue these have not been started by AI but made possible through the internet and possibly extended by AI.
Manu posits that the practice of creating requires guidelines and rules but by using GenAI these rules might not apply. Interesting, because on one hand the skill of generating art means one is able to demand better results from GenAI but on the hand could we create new artforms by the absence of these rules. Is that day coming when current conventions do not matter?
Manu asks the question I have been asking: How will AI inspired art impact on how we see art and on how we respond -- will our way of seeing change?
He suggests the fusion of tech and design will open a new way of perception and sensory experiences.
He says that by changing perceptions and the way we see influenced by the virtual this could impact how we see in the physical-thus the possibility that the way we see will change.
His attempt to classify AI as natural and human creativity as artificial is cumbersome and does not come over naturally or easily. I think he fails in this attempt in saying nature, as in the environment, is natural and human creativity is artificial. He says nature created itself and evolves on its own and this can be defined as natural whilst human creativity is created and can thus be defined as artificial. There are many holes in this argument: For example, human creativity is innate to man, so it can be defined as natural. Additionally, if one believes in God, which I do, nature is created—does it become artificial as well? This attempt to define human creativity as artificial and thus in the same bracket as AI does not work in my opinion
Conclusion
This was an interesting book dealing with and providing answers to so many of the questions around creativity and AI in a time and landscape that is changing like quick sands for so many.
I think his book offers a guide and an anchor to navigate these changes for many and helps to reduce the fear and trepidation around art and AI.
There are, however, questions which I think continue to require consideration and discussion:
Since creation starts with an intention which of course relates to all of creation. But AI does not have intention it responds to prompts, the questions we need to grapple with is what happens then when AI develops the capacity to have intention?
Thus, we need to start discussions on what constitutes art, human art, AI art, because once AI starts to imagine and create art on it its direction, where does that leave human participation in the creation of artistic expressions.
Additionally, since, AI will change the way we see art and our perception of reality, where are the guidelines around AI generated art. Who moderates this? How can it be moderated? Do humans want to change the way we see art or our perception of reality.
Questions, I think which still seek answers.
Ido Roll1 & Ruth Wylie, Evolution and Revolution in Artificial Intelligence in Education Published online: 22 February 2016, International Artificial Intelligence in Education Society 2016
Rick Rubin, The Creative Act: A Way of Being’,
Transcending Imagination: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Creativity
By Alexander Manu, 2024
Wayne Holmes, Jen Persson, Irene-Angelica Chounta, Barbara Wasson and Vania Dimitrova ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND EDUCATION A critical view through the lens of human rights, democracy and the rule of law, 2022, Council of Europe
Comments