6 ms·

The moment quality in art becomes commodified, what is popular will select on something other than quality. Look what happened to visual art in the earliest 20t

The moment quality in art becomes commodified, what is popular will select on something other than quality. Look what happened to visual art in the earliest 20th century. Any art academy graduate could give you a beautiful painting, but nobody remembers any artists from the 20th century who simply made "beautiful paintings"

threeseed 3y ago
Already been seeing this play out in photography. Huge trend back to 90s CCD digital cameras, film, polaroid etc.
sirwitti 3y ago
Quality never was the only or even the most important aspect of popularity in music and probably art in general. So I'm not sure your projection is valid.
- vouaobrasil 3y ago
  His projection is valid because it's not a qualitative problem, it's a quantitative one. Music may already have been turned into a commodity selected by traits other than quality, but tools like this bring the effect up to a whole new level, a whole new order of magnitude.
  - kkzz99 3y ago
    Every tool that makes it easier to create art is good in my book. In years past you had to actually have the instruments and had to know how to work them. Now you can much easier learn to use simpler tools to get even better results, which just increases the amount of people that can actually realize their creativity.
    - vouaobrasil 3y ago
      But part of the whole point of listening to music is enjoying the expression of the people playing the instrument. Music is much more than just the final output of a machine, it's an expression of the soul. You may be able to create music more easily with this tool, but I guarantee it will be soulless, just like Google. The results certainly will not be better. They will be a hideous amalgam from a computer. Just listen to real music created by real people (preferably live) and you will know how hideous these results really are. Everything, even EFFICIENCY, has its limits to how much we should have.
      - soco 3y ago
        The sheer amount of pop music and its pop-ularity contradicts you a bit here. Because one can play live AI generated music just as well, hop around on the beat and prompt the viewers to put their hands in the air - a live performance is (arguably much) more than the music. But I may be wrong, maybe the pop assembly line is not the sign of commoditization I seem to see, and won't gain that much from AI support.
        vouaobrasil 3y ago
        You are right. The pop assembly line is EXACTLY what you describe. However, that does not mean we should create new technology to make that assembly line even MORE efficient! Instead, we should work on changing and dismantling society so that it is LESS efficient.
      - tchaffee 3y ago
        The same arguments were made to dismiss rock music when compared to classical music. And a world without the Velvet Underground would be more soulless to me. I've heard soulless music performed by highly trained musicians playing on great instruments. And soulful music played on crappy instruments by untrained musicians. On average, the great music comes from the more trained musicians on the better tools. AI is just another tool. The vast majority of music is terrible. It will continue to be terrible. And a few geniuses will use AI the way Hendrix used the electric guitar. I'm excited to hear what that will sound like.
- bambax 3y ago
  You're right that pure formal perfection is not the only component in art; art has to mean something. But quality has always been a very important aspect of popularity in art as well as in music (see: Renaissance sculptors & painters, Baroque and Classical composers, etc.) Great art is when a unique, profound emotion or insight is expressed with great execution. AI helps with the last part; real artists should still provide the emotional seed.
  - andsoitis 3y ago
    > Great art is when a unique, profound emotion or insight is expressed with great execution. Emphasis on unique
    - tchaffee 3y ago
      Can you give an example of a unique insight or emotion? A lot of the classic books I read, the greatest films of all time, and the most celebrated visual artists are unique mostly in style or execution, but all express the same basic universal human truths.
  - criddell 3y ago
    > But quality has always been a very important aspect But what is quality? I used to think it was just degree of goodness, then I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and now I have no idea what it is (or what it isn’t).
    - coldtea 3y ago
      It doesn't have to be something that you can objectively measure to exist and people to be able to recognize it (even if not perfectly) - which is the whole point of Z.A.M.M. by the way.
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    But effort itself is also a quality. The fact that a human took out a substantial fraction of their time on planet earth to create something is already a sign that at least one individual cared about the work: the creator. If art is like vomit then that initial round of validation is absent.
- seydor 3y ago
  Hm. It was before the 20th century maybe. People knew of artists by name, not by their social life and sex tapes. The pop culture paraphilia is a very recent thing.
  - tchaffee 3y ago
    You're claiming that gossip and hero worship and celebrity didn't exist before the 20th century which is a wild claim that you'd need to back up with evidence. Humans haven't changed that much over the centuries.
    - kevindamm 3y ago
      ..but our ability to communicate quickly and broadly has.
      - tchaffee 3y ago
        That doesn't validate the claim.
  - voitvod 3y ago
    Picasso died an inflation adjusted billionaire. Like most things I read outside programming on this board, it is people talking out their ass about things they don't know much about but they think they do because they are well paid to write javascript.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
taopai 3y ago
What does it mean "becoming commodified"? And how it relates to art?
- est 3y ago
  I think it differentiates "uniquely created by a single soul" vs "mass-produced standardized item"
Musikstueck 3y ago
Popularity is only relevant for making money; Previously it was also a way of showing it to others in a way of a filter, also it was so crazy creating new 'styles'. But this time is over. We are in a Post art discovery face. I have not really seen (at least not regular) something totally/complelty/utterly new in art. But thats good. The search space is much deeper now, art is much more accessable.
prmoustache 3y ago
Most K-POP, reggaeton or even Pop music hits in general wouldn't be so popular if popularity was based on quality.
2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
We are already there- take a gander at the latest Grammy nominees. It's about to get a whole lot worse.
ImaCake 3y ago
I would argue spotify is more consequential than a new tool generate music then. Spotify et al commodify the access to very obscure and niche music so people are now much more able to access or express themselves with whatever they want. Maybe punk music was partly a consequence of mass media pop and rock music for these reasons too.

threeseed 3y ago

Already been seeing this play out in photography. Huge trend back to 90s CCD digital cameras, film, polaroid etc.

sirwitti 3y ago

Quality never was the only or even the most important aspect of popularity in music and probably art in general. So I'm not sure your projection is valid.

vouaobrasil 3y ago
His projection is valid because it's not a qualitative problem, it's a quantitative one. Music may already have been turned into a commodity selected by traits other than quality, but tools like this bring the effect up to a whole new level, a whole new order of magnitude.
- kkzz99 3y ago
  Every tool that makes it easier to create art is good in my book. In years past you had to actually have the instruments and had to know how to work them. Now you can much easier learn to use simpler tools to get even better results, which just increases the amount of people that can actually realize their creativity.
  - vouaobrasil 3y ago
    But part of the whole point of listening to music is enjoying the expression of the people playing the instrument. Music is much more than just the final output of a machine, it's an expression of the soul. You may be able to create music more easily with this tool, but I guarantee it will be soulless, just like Google. The results certainly will not be better. They will be a hideous amalgam from a computer. Just listen to real music created by real people (preferably live) and you will know how hideous these results really are. Everything, even EFFICIENCY, has its limits to how much we should have.
    - soco 3y ago
      The sheer amount of pop music and its pop-ularity contradicts you a bit here. Because one can play live AI generated music just as well, hop around on the beat and prompt the viewers to put their hands in the air - a live performance is (arguably much) more than the music. But I may be wrong, maybe the pop assembly line is not the sign of commoditization I seem to see, and won't gain that much from AI support.
      - vouaobrasil 3y ago
        You are right. The pop assembly line is EXACTLY what you describe. However, that does not mean we should create new technology to make that assembly line even MORE efficient! Instead, we should work on changing and dismantling society so that it is LESS efficient.
    - tchaffee 3y ago
      The same arguments were made to dismiss rock music when compared to classical music. And a world without the Velvet Underground would be more soulless to me. I've heard soulless music performed by highly trained musicians playing on great instruments. And soulful music played on crappy instruments by untrained musicians. On average, the great music comes from the more trained musicians on the better tools. AI is just another tool. The vast majority of music is terrible. It will continue to be terrible. And a few geniuses will use AI the way Hendrix used the electric guitar. I'm excited to hear what that will sound like.
bambax 3y ago
You're right that pure formal perfection is not the only component in art; art has to mean something. But quality has always been a very important aspect of popularity in art as well as in music (see: Renaissance sculptors & painters, Baroque and Classical composers, etc.) Great art is when a unique, profound emotion or insight is expressed with great execution. AI helps with the last part; real artists should still provide the emotional seed.
- andsoitis 3y ago
  > Great art is when a unique, profound emotion or insight is expressed with great execution. Emphasis on unique
  - tchaffee 3y ago
    Can you give an example of a unique insight or emotion? A lot of the classic books I read, the greatest films of all time, and the most celebrated visual artists are unique mostly in style or execution, but all express the same basic universal human truths.
- criddell 3y ago
  > But quality has always been a very important aspect But what is quality? I used to think it was just degree of goodness, then I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and now I have no idea what it is (or what it isn’t).
  - coldtea 3y ago
    It doesn't have to be something that you can objectively measure to exist and people to be able to recognize it (even if not perfectly) - which is the whole point of Z.A.M.M. by the way.
- jacquesm 3y ago
  But effort itself is also a quality. The fact that a human took out a substantial fraction of their time on planet earth to create something is already a sign that at least one individual cared about the work: the creator. If art is like vomit then that initial round of validation is absent.
seydor 3y ago
Hm. It was before the 20th century maybe. People knew of artists by name, not by their social life and sex tapes. The pop culture paraphilia is a very recent thing.
- tchaffee 3y ago
  You're claiming that gossip and hero worship and celebrity didn't exist before the 20th century which is a wild claim that you'd need to back up with evidence. Humans haven't changed that much over the centuries.
  - kevindamm 3y ago
    ..but our ability to communicate quickly and broadly has.
    - tchaffee 3y ago
      That doesn't validate the claim.
- voitvod 3y ago
  Picasso died an inflation adjusted billionaire. Like most things I read outside programming on this board, it is people talking out their ass about things they don't know much about but they think they do because they are well paid to write javascript.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

taopai 3y ago

What does it mean "becoming commodified"? And how it relates to art?

est 3y ago
I think it differentiates "uniquely created by a single soul" vs "mass-produced standardized item"

Musikstueck 3y ago

Popularity is only relevant for making money; Previously it was also a way of showing it to others in a way of a filter, also it was so crazy creating new 'styles'. But this time is over. We are in a Post art discovery face. I have not really seen (at least not regular) something totally/complelty/utterly new in art. But thats good. The search space is much deeper now, art is much more accessable.

prmoustache 3y ago

Most K-POP, reggaeton or even Pop music hits in general wouldn't be so popular if popularity was based on quality.

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago

We are already there- take a gander at the latest Grammy nominees. It's about to get a whole lot worse.

ImaCake 3y ago

I would argue spotify is more consequential than a new tool generate music then. Spotify et al commodify the access to very obscure and niche music so people are now much more able to access or express themselves with whatever they want. Maybe punk music was partly a consequence of mass media pop and rock music for these reasons too.