Keeping the (creative) human in the loop

It was a pleasure to be over at creative Manchester’s innovation showcase and evening lecture by Andrew Melchior , hosted by Creative Manchester at The University of Manchester .

Thanks for reading Philosophical Soundbites! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

The two events dovetailed nicely and highlighted the importance of developing critical, creative technology innovation challenges at a highly volatile period of time in the history of creativity.

In the first part of the day was introduced by Riza Batista-Navarro and we heard from Yishuang Sherry Xu how AI can be used to identify the prominence of bot-generated music streams, which are distorting our sense of value and the economic infrastructure of music. We also heard about the many ways in which we need to put academics and artists together with innovators and policy makers to redesign the infrastructure of intellectual property.

It reminded me of a message from Catherine Ross last week at the Business of Science Conference , who advocated the ‘quadruple helix’ approach to innovation whereby we bring academia, industry, government, and citizens together to forge a better future. Last month, two other creative industries events in Manchester also resonated with this, one led by Marianna Rolbina, PhD looking at the importance of co-creation, and the other by Leandro Valiati on the importance of international dialogue in policy directions about creativity.

The creative AI challenge isn’t a problem we can solve as individual nations.

Andrew’s talk was introduced by John McAuliffe and found a very receptive audience, mindful of the imposition of big tech in all aspects of our lives. He invoked the notion of ‘data colonization’ to articulate the ways in which culture is appropriated by technology, with complete ambivalence and often disdain over its value.

I was reminded of an artist who I followed for all of my adult life and whose work really influenced my thoughts on everything from creativity to the importance of humour, Prince.

Prince was also very articulate about the inadequacies of the pre-AI music industry and its incapacity to support artists in the appropriate ways, often exploiting new artists who were desperate for any kind of contract.

The period in which he wrote the word slave on his cheek expressed a sense of failure in the industry, not just to protect the economic interests of artists but, more importantly, a failure to recognise the value of music. In that period Prince would refer to his audience as friends rather than fans, creating a different way of imagining their relationship to one another.

With this simple transformation of the idea of fandom and the accompanying culture of consumption that operated around his music, Prince revealed the desire for a new model of thinking through the value of music.

Prince also experimented with many of the new technological opportunities that arose from digital transformations. In the early days of the world wide web, he released a song directly for download online called Cybersingle. The song was also was a meditation on the state of music distribution, at a point where, seemingly labels publishers and the now established giants of music profiteering were less exclusively empowered. Like many things back then in the early days of digital, a new way seemed possible.

In Andrew’s talk he was both resolute on the need for vigilance and action to avoid further diminishing the value that is attached economically and culturally to artistic works and made suggestions on how to do this using technological innovation. It seems unavoidable that the solution to protecting music from technology is likely to be a technological solution, even if I think a lot of people are warm to the idea that there may be an alternative, if we really think about it, but it might mean letting a lot collapse before we can rebuild it better.

While listening to the talk, I was thinking a lot about folk music and the different eras in which the value of music was marshalled and monetized in very different ways. There remains a semblance of this value in modern times but it’s hard to pin it down. We all both love the global community of music that we share, which is, itself, a product of the international industry, but we also really value local artists and seeing artists live in intimate settings. But if you go on TikTok or Spotify, you’ll struggle to filter music by your neighbourhood.

The most remarkable concert I ever attended was - big surprise - a Prince concert, but I went to a few and the most memorable one was, undoubtedly, in Las Vegas at a small club at a time when he was doing tours in very small venues. He had been through the height of his popularity and was, by this time, seemingly unmotivated by the imposition of needing to be the talk of the town. But of course, he was always the talk of the town and his legacy, even in the quieter years, was iconic and unquestioned.

At this time, he had created the New Power Generation club where ‘friends’ would subscribe to the music and then get sent the new albums when they came out. It was a pioneering idea and well before its time. But, what was really cool was that the NPG club members - yes, I was one - were also invited to the sound check before the gig. Around 150 people were there in the hall and I stood a metre from Prince, as he prepared and it was the most fun. He was absolutely in his element there among his friends and I remember him inviting people onto the stage to dance with him and it was just hilarious.

He was, as he always said, in his happy place, on stage, with people around him who loved his music. It was the sort of experience you wish everybody has when in the company of their favorite musician. It’s hard to do that when your bottom line is bums on seats and where that pursuit dominates so much of the industry.

I’m really grateful for the lecture last night, as it reminded me how many people are deeply invested in safeguarding creativity, at a time when it feels under threat and in jeopardy. I have a lot of friends who are pioneering creative AI in fascinating ways and I’m optimistic that these methods of creativity will usher in new forms of expression, which will be remarkable and transformative and part of the continuity of our artistic heritage.

But we need to make sure that we don’t lose sight of the art forms that matter.

When Prince received a Grammy for best album in 2015, he got up in his usual irreverent way, saying very little, and began by saying ‘Albums still matter. Like books and black lives, albums still matter.’ It was at the beginning of the streaming era, where the package of the album, as a musical book, was in jeopardy as play lists and platforms delivered music directly to audiences.

We don’t always do well at protecting all of the artists all of the time and the advent of AI may mean we protect none of the artists any of the time. Andrew’s talk was, therefore, a rallying cry to make sure that we don’t just let technology happen to us and lose sight of what we value in the process.

I confirm this was written by Andy Miah, without any input from AI.

Thanks for reading Philosophical Soundbites! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.