Studio Ghibli, AI and me
On the need to belong, to be seen and more
If I could be anything or anyone, I would choose to be a historian. I enjoy analysing dead people, events long forgotten and trends long abandoned. It’s only a week or so ago that ChatGPT incorporated Studio Ghibli templates into its design and social media was abuzz with Ghibli theme artwork. The move was criticised and perhaps applauded in some circles but it did get me thinking.
I am fortunate to inhabit a sphere occupied by immensely creative minds and their social media feeds were full of censure and criticism of ChatGPT taking something that was made by human hands and reduced to a mere caricature. Suffice to say that this argument isn’t novel in its scope. Andy Warhol faced some flak for his Marilyn Diptych for its perceived superficiality. There’s an entire Reddit thread dedicated to who Warhol was and that might lead us into another rabbit hole but let’s stick to this for now.
As an act of copyright infringement, I stand solidly with my artistically inclined friends about a machine algorithm that can replicate Isao Takahata and Hayao Miyazaki, broadly arguing that software cannot reduce human creativity to mere binaries and program. It strikes deeply at the heart of what it means to be human and free. To see everything beautiful commodified, packaged and presented neatly as a purchasable or experiential event is beyond disgusting.
But where do the less artistically gifted go in a world of show and tell? I cannot write poetry, I failed in a drawing exam in school much to everyone’s mirth sans mine, I cannot lay claim to being a good photographer. Indeed a scatter plot might be a good way of showing off my “skills” with none of them reaching or surpassing a critical cut-off level. In a distracted world, I’m just one more distracted mind.
I’d like to think ChatGPT offered a way out for us albeit controversial. With the arrival and meteoric rise of social media apps, life no longer followed a tangent we were familiar with especially if you came of age in India before the Internet. Facebook, Instagram and all other apps offered templated ways of expressing our uniqueness. It was fun to check-in at tourist destinations, upload cover photos and display pictures and join the hashtag bandwagon, hoping to be seen and heard. We were here, we lived, we loved, we laughed, we want you to see us and acknowledge us. Achilles too wanted the same, a stab at everlasting fame even at the cost of Here’s what he had to say in the nether world:
Why should I labour under this question alone? Here’s what a few others had to say:
Respondent 1: “Its an important question. Not necessarily rhetorical. It takes me back the paper and book by Walter Benjamin titled The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. You will find some answers there. With AI we are in the same kind of confusion that we were in when photography and printing/photocopying took over and people thought that art would get lost or contaminated forever. But art emerged in new forms because art does not recognise a plebian from an expert. Everyone has the right to express and respond to an existing piece of art or art form. Isn't Ghibli imitating nature, the greatest artist?”
Respondent 2: “We don’t want a world where the mediocre copy artists. We want a world where the mediocre discard perfection in art and discover their own genius.. perhaps they could become Paul Klee. We take away from us the chance to discover our genius when we put into our hands an easy claim to fame.”
Me: “But do the mediocre know this? The problem begins because they don’t even know what they don’t know. Right?”
Respondent 2: “In that world, the mediocre choose to remain ignorant. In this world they are deceived into remaining ignorant and they go on to build towers of success by access to quick fame and money.”
Please note I had used the word mediocre in the question and hence it features in her response. The word itself isn’t a pejorative or a shortcoming. Indeed it is my shortcoming that I had to rely on a judgmental word to convey a feeling.
Respondent 3: “We live in a time where art has been democratised through various platforms like YouTube (for filmmaking) Instagram (for art) and Soundcloud/Spotify (for music)
These spaces are still open to even the not-so-talented people and they can keep making content and hopefully find an audience. The problem is that they're doing it to make money without putting in the effort and resources, and in many cases it is a resources game. I can't tell you how much shite content I've seen that has tonnes of views because it has high-end production value.
As far as the AI thing goes, I think people who use it to prop themselves up, will inevitably get found out. I remember where a guy wrote and illustrated a kid's book using AI and sold it on Amazon. He got found out pretty fast and the backlash and vitrol was akin to a hate-tsunami. AI tools to make art work best in the hands of artists, and people who don't know how to make art will not be able to use AI to do anything aside from copy and transcribe (the Ghibli thing is a prime example)
If people don't know how to make art and AI offers them a way to do it, they are ultimately falling to the dark side which is more easy and seductive. But ultimately, it won't bring them what they want because in a sea of mediocrity, the unique and special can still rise to the surface. I don't think this Ghibli art thing from ChatGPT will ever replace Ghibli as we know it.”
Respondent 4: “I think in general if there is no AI art or a template to put up, we (the people) will put up whatever we can. Which is what a lot of us did. When IG started, not many people could take good pictures. So if you scroll back far enough in any of our accounts, you will see substandard pictures. Bad photography is fine if the objective is for us to share our world with others on SM.
What AI, I think, is doing is making everyone use "finished" or "good" or "artistic" or "beautiful" content. It flattens art - visual and textual - to a generic standard. So we all have same-ish looking pictures.
The beauty of everyone posting is in the flaws we get to see in their posts. The uniqueness comes from there.”
Respondent 5 spoke to me and this is a summary of their thoughts. Art isn’t about creating picture perfect images or graphics or ChatGPT created Ghibli artwork. Artists question society and its rules, art is a tool for resistance and challenges authority. To merely capture a photograph and put it up on social media isn’t a work of art. To express thoughts, to ask questions and challenge the norm or at the least, evoke some expressions and questions is what’s expected from art. In a value-driven society where everyone is expected to deliver some form of “value”, we should exclude the expectation of value from artists and allow them their creative freedom.
Currently, an unknown number of artists (but sufficiently large) suffer for want of fame and celebrity that translate to economic viability. With ChatGPT now entering the fray, are we expected to kick them even more?
Gathering everyone’s opinions, I believe we all dream the same dreams that Achilles did. To be seen, to be heard, to be remembered. In a milieu where collective memory is that of a goldfish, we will be remembered by a machine. Our creative footprint will be left on a hard disk.
Fin.