Hello there! It's Jocelyn Mathewes from my studio in Appalachia. And I’m going to share some scattered reflections on AI, along with some of my own AI art.
I use AI tools regularly for work. I’ve read some histories of the technology. I’ve talked about them before here in my newsletter. I watch the development of AI as an interested, deeply concerned observer.
AI’s native conceptual space is computing, and at its root are questions about the nature of cognition, or knowing. “How do we know what we know, and could we build a machine that knows things the way we know things,” is the challenge of General AI.
All technologies are, in some way, philosophical. AI especially so. This makes it tricky to discuss, because talking about aspects of what AI is capable of is not the same as talking about what it means.
One of the especially tricky things about AI is that it’s so good at imitation. Mimicry that good erodes trust and the value of the originating material. We don’t know if we can trust what we see, because it can so easily mimic the appearance of long-fought talent or consistent customer service.
AI technology also changes so fast that services built up around it seem to come and go and morph at breakneck speed. What will remain constant?
AI fundamentally unsettles us.
AI/Art
An older artist acquaintance of mine recently said she believed that artists who do not use AI will become more valuable.
Yes, and no.
I believe yes because I think in our deepest being we have a sense of what is true. We can’t survive without ensuring we are connected to that. I believe we long for that.
And I believe no, because this particular technology is changing the way the playing field works. It will soon become difficult to verify who is really “not using” AI. It may become a disadvantage to not participate, or completely unavoidable.
There are some artists of interest that I follow who incorporate AI into their practice in interesting ways:
Michol Hebron — whose ongoing work explores the biases embedded within AI.
Luke Haynes — who has used AI to help him envision new textile works.
Holly Herndon — whose album PROTO captured my imagination.
These artists are thinking intentionally about what the tool can do for them as it relates to how they work in their particular medium. It is refreshing and encouraging to see AI used thoughtfully.
And here is a great statement from an art professor of mine, David Kasparek, who teaches at my alma mater. It’s from Messiah University’s The Bridge alumni magazine, vol. 3, 2023:
Considerations / Reminders for AI and Art:
AI can generate but not create.
AI does not compose. It recomposes.
AI can replace/mimic mediocre work, but not truly excellent work.
AI cannot provide true creative leadership.
AI is VERY artificial, but only narrowly intelligent.
AI is not clever.
AI is not strategic.
AI is amoral.
AI does not have empathy.
AI does not have free will
AI does not have fine dexterity (especially hand-eye coordination).
AI is more effective in the domain of Data and Information, but not so much in the realm of Knowledge and Wisdom.
AI should be used as a tool and not as an end.
AI can change or make untrue all of the above statements as it evolves, unfolds, or develops.
my own AI art
Lastly, I will share with you some pieces I made using Playform.io — an AI tool you can train on sets your own work to generate new images and maintain your ownership over them.
I call this series, Earth Become Ocean.
As static images, they felt like incomprehensible fragments of something. Unsatisfying.
As prints, they don't hold the same visceral magnetism of my cyanotypes. I think I spent too much time trying to make them mimic the originals (or maybe they just were bad mimics), and I need to let them fly off into something else.
So I’m going to let them stay here, in the digital world, and pulsate.
xo,
jocelyn
support my work - become a paid subscriber or purchase artwork
find me elsewhere - website | instagram | facebook | tiktok
for exhibition inquiries - send me an e-mail