the mirror and the oracle

From week to week, we've been watching the series PLURIBUS. Admittedly, I was initially reticent to watch Vince Gilligan's other shows (Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul) since they didn't really seem, from the plot descriptions, they would at all be up my alley. When J moved in, one of the first things he wanted to do was introduce me to them, so I started warily, but ended up thoroughly enjoying both. We were excited when this debuted and it actually seemed more in line with weird sci-fi things I like, where an alien DNA code turns the subjective into the collective. Plus the main character is a writer, so I was sold. 

As we near the end of the season, its prompted me to consider the task of the writer. Or maybe more the role of the writer in a society where everyone shares the same experiences and disposition. The main character in the show, is one of the only singular voices stuck outside the group think.  In the most recent episode, she gets back to actually writing after running around aimlessly doing things like accidently setting off a grenade in her house, stealing Georgia O'Keefes from the museum. and playing chicken with lit fireworks. Before the events of the show, we get the impression that she's an unhappy writer doomed to write romance novels for eager audiences that don't reflect her own aesthetics (or even her own sexual orientation.) As she returns to writing after the change over, the plurality excitedly awaits the story that will come (though it looks pretty bad for potential book sales when everyone reads it at the same time.) 

In an age when AI seems to encroach from every angle, it occurred to me that computer generated writing is very similar to the plurality.  Generative AI tech and LLMs are built on collective language if not a collective brain (given how often its just plain is wrong, lying. or hallucinating ) As a poet, I've never much worried about AI taking over writing--or at least taking over poetry, since the genre may be the only one (vs. fiction, drama, essays) that relies so wholly on individual expression. Like why you would even write a poem in the first place if its not your voice and vision? Its also not exactly a lucrative field that people would be looking to break into and make mad amounts of cash. Where is the flex? If you have AI write a poem for you, I'm not sure what the point in the exercise is. It's probably going to look like a high schooler wrote it and not be very good.  Personally, as a creative in this conversation, I am less worried about theft and appropriation of my work when it comes to LLMs and more generally about misinformation potential and environmental impact.  While I played around with it a bit initially riding the wave of excitement for image generators and actually got some fun pieces that have been the basis of larger projects, I try to use it more sparingly if at all given the drain on resources (also the ridiculousness of tech bros (and their ties to conservatives) who want to cram it down our throats makes me stabby. I also understand the p-o-v of artists and writers who feel their work has been purloined. Though admittedly, I am, after all,  a collage artist and occasional cento writer who uses other images and other texts shamelessly (with credit of course as needed) So, it feels a little hypocritical to complain about that if I am at all self-aware. Thievery is sort of the name of the game in collage, especially mine that uses other media to make my own pieces.  

I do find it odd when people use AI it for things like a simple google search or a human-like conversation. I think people treat things like Chat GPT as an oracle, when really its more like mirror. If what it is reflecting is faulty or misinformed, it too will be faulty and misinformed. If you tell it to write poetry, it will write what it thinks poetry looks like. One of the hilarious things I kept encountering when using the image generators I tried out was that it took things far too literally. I was mostly making faux artifacts in vintage camera styles--cabinet card photos of Mothman and dollhouse dioramas of creepy Victorian houses. But the more specific I got, the more erratic the generator became. While most AI art could hardly be called art (and many artists violently balk at even that conversation)  I have seen people do some really cool things in the horror genre with it.  I still like its possibilities for creating collage elements in Canva I can't find among stock photos or things I can actually use.  I just wish it compensated artists it scrapes from and didn't use so much water. 

In PLURIBUS, the collective operates not unlike an LLM. If everyone shares the same brain, no new creativity can come from it---at least not any that doesn't already exits or Frankenstein existing things together. 

Previous