The Problem of Subjectivity in Algorithmic Creativity Organisation

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31866/2410-1915.25.2024.312598

Keywords:

algorithmic creativity, digital technology, cultural practice, subjectivity

Abstract

The aim of the article is to study the issue of determining subjectivity, authorship and uniqueness of the results of producing the creative process, organised by the use of algorithmic calculations. Results. The article clarifies the possibility of organising the artistic and creative process using mathematical calculations, and automating the reproduction of certain manipulations, additionally, it reveals signs of the uniqueness of the corresponding generation results, and grounds the degree of automating the cultural process. The scientific novelty of the article is revealed in the process of highlighting technical assets of modern art, which, although slowly, nevertheless quite demonstratively show the potential of algorithmic computing as a stimulator of creative innovations. Among the methods used in the process of analysing the issues which are raised in the article, first of all, the analytical method has to be singled out, that is based on both historical and philosophical processes, as well as modern cultural activity. Conclusions. It is revealed that algorithmic creativity is actually a kind of mechanised production process, organised in accordance with the features of machine training, and the identified signs of stylistic imitation of traditional practices. Two types of practices for organising the corresponding creative process are established according to the degree of interaction of artists with robotic systems: practices where robotic mechanisms become “subjects of creativity”, that is they are able to produce content for organizing artistic processes; practices involving the equal interaction of robotic mechanisms and artists (for instance, in theatrical performances). The cultural process automation leads to the decrease in the artist’s participation, and weakening of his authorship, but he still has an absolute advantage in the thinking orientation. Interpretation of meaningful content is a critical problem in relevant practices. The usage of algorithms in creating art products challenges traditional methods of artistic cultural creation, as the artist’s meaning and intentions are not always clear. Evaluating further prospects for the artistic culture development requires taking into account these aspects, and recognising potential consequences of forming algorithmic creativity for the further cultural development of humanity.

Author Biography

Tetiana Sovhyra, Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts

DSc in Cultural Studies, Associate Professor

References

Ames, C., & Domino, M. (1992). Cybernetic Composer: An overview. In M. Balaban, K. Ebcioglu, & O. Laske (Eds.), Understanding music with AI: Perspectives on music cognition (pp. 186–205). MIT Press [in English].

Andujar, M., Crawford, C. S., Nijholt, A., Jackson, F., & Gilbert, J. E. (2015). Artistic brain-computer interfaces: The expression and stimulation of the user’s affective state. Brain- Computer Interfaces, 2 (2–3), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/2326263X.2015.1104613 [in English].

Bostrom, N. (2014). Superintelligence: Paths, dangers, strategies. Oxford University Press [in English].

Bruce, A., Knight, J., Listopad, S., Magerko, B., & Nourbakhsh, I. R. (2000, April 24–28). Robot improv: Using drama to create believable agents. In IEEE International conference on robotics and automation [Conference proceedings] (Vol. 4, pp. 4002–4008). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBOT.2000.845355 [in English].

Burleigh, T. J., Schoenherr, J. R., & Lacroix, G. L. (2013). Does the uncanny valley exist? An empirical test of the relationship between eeriness and the human likeness of digitally created faces. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 759–771. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.021 [in English].

Chen, W., Shidujaman, M., Jin, J., & Ahmed, S. U. (2020, July 19–24). Methodological Approach to Create Interactive Art in Artificial Intelligence. In 22nd HCI International conference 2020 – Late Breaking Papers: Cognition, learning and games [Conference proceedings] (pp. 13–31). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-60128-7_2 [in English].

Dautenhahn, K. (2007). Socially intelligent robots: Dimensions of human-robot interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. Biological Sciences, 362(1480), 679–704. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2006.2004 [in English].

Edmonds, E. (2018). Algorithmic art machines. Arts, 7(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts7010003 [in English].

Ferrari, F., Paladino, M. P., & Jetten, J. (2016). Blurring human-machine distinctions: anthropomorphic appearance in social robots as a threat to human distinctiveness. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(2), 287–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0338-y [in English].

gtec medical engineering. (2018, January 24). A3 K3 by Dragan Ilic at Ars Electronica Festival 2017 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHzcCotmHbY [in English].

Lubart, T., Esposito, D., Gubenko, A., & Houssemand, C. (2021). Creativity in human, robots, humbbots. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/c3xzh [in English].

Lucchiari, C., Folgieri, R., Dei Cas, L., & Soave, F. (2016). Creative thinking: A brain computer interface of art. In T. Magnusson, C. Kiefer, & S. Duffy (Eds.), Live interfaces [Conference proceedings] (pp. 74–79). University of Sussex [in English].

O’Hanrahan, E. (2001). Pratique du dessin interculturel: la réponse de l’école d’art [Cross-cultural drawing practice: The art school’s response] [Interview]. In J. Chuhan, R. Creed, & A. Mitha (Eds.), Responses: Intercultural drawing practice (pp. 40–47). Liverpool School of Art and Design [in French].

Ogawa, K., Taura, K., & Ishiguro, H. (2012, September 9–13). Possibilities of androids as poetry-reciting agent. In 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International symposium on robot and human interactive communication [Conference proceedings] (pp. 565–570). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2012.6343811 [in English].

Paré, Z. (2015). Robot actors: Theatre for robot engineering. In Ehwa Institute for Humanities Science & LABEX Arts-H2H Laboratory (Eds.), Theatres du posthumain (pp. 143–162). Arcarnet [in English].

Pearce, M. T., Meredith, D., & Wiggins, G. A. (2002). Motivations and methodologies for automation of the compositional process. Musicae Scientiae, 6(2), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/102986490200600203 [in English].

Penny, S. (2013). Art and robotics: Sixty years of situated machines. AI & Society, 28, 148–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-012-0404-4 [in English].

Reblitz, A. A. (2001). The Golden Age of automatic musical instruments. Mechanical Music Press [in English].

Roehl, H. N. (1973). Player piano treasury: The scrapbook history of the mechanical piano in america, as told in story, pictures, trade journal articles and advertising. Vestal Press [in English].

Sovhyra, T. (2021). Robotic theatre: Comparative analysis of human and mechanized activities in the creative process. Creativity Studies, 14(2), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.3846/cs.2021.13545 [in English].

Thompson, D. W. (1992). On growth and form. John Tyler Bonner. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107325852 [in English].

Tramonte, S., Sorbello, R., Guger, C., & Chella, A. (2019). Acceptability study of A3-K3 robotic architecture for a neurorobotics painting. Front. Neurorobot, 12(81). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2018.00081 [in English].

V Ukraini vystupyv rok-hurt robotiv Compressorhead [Robot rock band Compressorhead performed in Ukraine]. (2019, October 19). Ukrinform. https://www.ukrinform.ua/rubric-technology/2802253-v-ukraini-vistupiv-rokgurt-robotiv-compressorhead.html [in Ukrainian].

Verostko, R. (1998). Algorithmic art. Composing the score for visual art. Verostko.com. http://www.verostko.com/algorithm.html [in English].

Wadeson, A., Nijholt, A., & Nam, C. S. (2015). Artistic brain-computer interfaces: State-of-the-art control mechanisms. Brain-Computer Interfaces, 2(2–3), 70–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/2326263X.2015.1103155 [in English].

Downloads

Published

2024-10-04

How to Cite

Sovhyra, T. (2024). The Problem of Subjectivity in Algorithmic Creativity Organisation. Culture and Arts in the Modern World, (25), 49–58. https://doi.org/10.31866/2410-1915.25.2024.312598

Issue

Section

THEORY AND HISTORY OF CULTURE