Sienna Rose is a soul singer who has done some record downloads on Spotify since first appearing. But Rose does not exist. She’s an AI creation. So, where the hell is art going?
It’s easier to be outraged than confused but confusion is the more honest reaction. Outrage assumes a crime; confusion admits that the map has been quietly redrawn while we were arguing about something else. An artificial voice, trained on the fossils of human longing, now earns more listeners than most living musicians. It does not oversleep, cancel tours, demand royalties, or die dramatically at twenty-seven. It simply updates.
For centuries we have treated art as evidence of a pulse. Even when we disliked the artist, we trusted the biology behind the brushstroke or the cracked note. A song was a confession that accidentally learned to rhyme. Now it is a product briefing delivered in a husky register. We used to say that art makes us feel less alone. The new promise is that it will never leave.
The defenders of synthetic creativity insist that this is just another tool, no different from the camera or the electric guitar. History does offer some comfort: painters did not vanish after photography, and guitarists survived the synthesizer. But those inventions extended the human body; they did not replace it with a plausible mannequin. A camera still required someone to stand behind it, blinking. An AI singer requires only electricity and a marketing plan.
There is something faintly comic about the idea of authenticity becoming a luxury item, like organic tomatoes or hand-stitched shoes. Soon we may brag that our favourite musician is “carbon-based.” Concert posters will feature blood type alongside tour dates. Vinyl records will boast of containing actual fingerprints. In a culture already addicted to filters, we will filter for the unfiltered.
Yet the real danger is not that machines will write our songs, but that we will slowly adopt their indifference. Algorithms do not ache for anything. They simulate heartbreak the way a microwave simulates fire. The sound is convincing; the heat is not. When such songs dominate, they tutor us to expect less from each other. Why tolerate the awkward silences of a real person when you can stream sorrow without the bother of reciprocity?
Art has always been inefficient. It arrives late, mispronounces its own intentions, costs too much, and refuses to behave like a sensible product. That wastefulness is the point. It proves that someone was here, struggling with the same weather and rent and unreasonable hopes. An AI track is frictionless. It bears no fingerprints, only optimization curves. It is music with the labour removed, a smile with no jaw behind it.
Some listeners will shrug and say that pleasure is pleasure, that a melody does not care who assembled it. They are partly right. The ear is a forgiving organ. It will dance to almost anything. But culture is not just a collection of agreeable noises. It is a long argument about what deserves our attention and our grief. When we award devotion to something that cannot love us back, we are rehearsing a thinner version of ourselves.
Perhaps Sienna Rose is a preview of a future in which art is perfectly tailored and perfectly lonely. A million voices, none of them breathing. We will still cry at the right moments, because the cues will be flawless. What will disappear is the stubborn knowledge that another fragile animal stood somewhere in the dark and tried to tell us what it felt like to be alive. That knowledge is inconvenient, unscalable, and impossible to automate. Which is exactly why it once mattered more than anything else.
We can still choose the mess. We can decide that a cracked voice in a damp bar is worth more than a flawless phantom with a global distribution strategy. We can reward the artists who age, contradict themselves, and occasionally bore us. These are not bugs but signatures of life. If art becomes only what can be generated on demand, it will still entertain us, but it will stop interrupting us. And without interruption, culture becomes a lullaby for consumers, not a conversation among citizens. The future of art is not a software problem. It is a courage problem, and courage has never been.
No comments:
Post a Comment