Lovely thinking. I agree that a machine cannot make art until it has skin in the game so to speak, but I wonder how long it might be until they do have that - subjective emotions, experience of loss, futility as well as utility, fear of death. Maybe they'll do emotions better than we can.
Also re: negative attitudes to artists, historically, most work did not perhaps exactly equal lack of enjoyment. Experience of work - which was often craft I suppose - might have been closer to how Zizek describes that thing which is better than 'happiness': the flow state in which we are at one with the creative task. Then this approaches your definition of art in the end. The hatred of one's work used to imply slavery, but is now the normal condition of capitalist money gathering.
Congratulations on your anniversary! So what about AI!? It’s widely available and many are inclined to use it. How do we protect the creators and the creative process for the future?
I wish it were that easy. Where's the fun if AI does my writing for me? I do worry though if AI can write in 1 second and I need 1 year.... I'm not standing on a good foot here. I agree, do other stuff. Thanks!
My point with this piece is that AI can never do what you do, and anyone who thinks it can is mistaken. The result might look superficially similar to an outsider, but it's actually not at all the same. Even if it could do exactly what you do, it still wouldn't be the same, because what you do emerges from being human
…love the trifecta of art for artists, the artists, and anyone who might interact with the art…it is also true that art is for the machines, the money, the nothing…wondering all the folds in which it folds…and attentive to those that i fold into…appreciative of the luck…
Can you point me towards this coyote getting advice from his own shit?
I get the same sort of revulsion with AI art or essays written in which the author goes on about some conversation with chatGPT.
There's a big Aussie wedding photographer who's work with lighting and story I really admired for years and then last year he started getting into AI art and churning out portraits of 6-fingered subjects and Joe-public was going mad for them. They disgusted me and I lost all respect for him. But then I keep questioning myself, am I just being an old fuddy duddy? Do I have to get with the times?
Fuck it, I'm gonna stay repulsed.
Congratulations on two years! I hope you keep writing here or at least somewhere I can still receive your words.
Hi Leon! Well, my origin for these stories was a book I had when I was little, just a tattered old booklet with no cover, that seemed to be transcriptions of (I think) an old man telling Coyote stories. Coyote is often doing dumb stuff, like sticking his dick in a hollow log for instance. (It goes from so long he has to coil it up to carry it to just normal size, by getting eaten by whatever lives in the log.) He often dies through stupidity & throws his bones into the spring to get reborn (kind of like a new life in a video game). But yeah if he’s stuck for what to do he often shits & asks the shit for advice. Then if it gives him bad advice he gets angry ha ha.
Coyote getting advice from his own shit is referenced in the story about catching the salmon under ‘Plateau’ in the Coyote article on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_(mythology)
Interestingly Lewis Hyde in his book Coyote Makes This World says that tricksterism is a lot about the stomach and food, & that the first trick of the trickster in many mythologies is ‘catching a fish'. This holds with the mythology of my country, where the trickster demi-God Māui fishes up the North Island (where I’m writing this from: the region I live in is Te Upoko o te Ika a Māui, the Head of Māui’s Fish). Māui’s brothers won’t give him any bait so (in a version I like) he punches himself in the nose & lets the blood drip onto his Grandmother’s magical jawbone, which he is using for a hook.
Further to Coyote stories, I highly recommend Ursula K. Le Guin’s novella Buffalo Gals, Won’t You Come Out Tonight, wherein she reimagines Coyote as female.
Le Guin is my all time art hero... I'm always trying to get people to read her!... You can read anything, it's all great! But one I re-read recently & loved was her late Young Adult trilogy Gifts, Voices, & Powers.
I love The Dispossessed the most. The Left Hand of Darkness also. Both of them are quite dense and LHOD in particular starts slowly, but both reward persistence. Those are her acknowledged masterpieces, but like you say there are so many! Really anything!
Ok thanks for this! I like book recommendations. I can't say the same for music, I always seek out my own music, am a bit snobby, but for books I much prefer someone's recommendation.
This just ripped me right open. Beautifully, brutally honest. The shit metaphor is just perfect because guess what’s in compost? Not just manure but Humus, which is a mysterious element of fertile soil, just like the goodness of humanity is the mysterious thing that makes life worth living and art worth producing. Just my two cents. I’ve subscribed!
I don't know, that's an interesting question! Apart from what I said-- that taste is very subjective, what I like is maybe not what you like-- I still feel that there's some other X factor or wildness at play. The best way I can think to describe it is maybe it's like wild yeast or probiotics (or magic in general): you can create hospitable conditions, but ultimately whether the beneficial bacteria grace your endeavour is out of your hands. All we can practice is making the right conditions, & the more we do that, the higher the odds of inspiration / magic occurring.
I don't think what I like is based on a decision I make for sure, it's outside of that realm. I can see that I used to let my ego tip the balance a lot, but now I really don't know what it is? It seems like you're talking about creating something, whereas I was leaning more towards how I discern something to be 'good' work, like a book or art, or music, etc. you got me thinking along that line.
In my own work, I definitely feel like I'm putting some life into what I'm doing, I like creating living poetry or music, ideas that have the potential to evolve over time and take on new meaning, I aim for that and I think I'm successful sometimes.
I feel like when I listen to a piece of music that I really like, it's like a world that I can live inside and grow with as the years go on. Whether that's just something intentional I don't know, but it feels like a good artist is doing that on purpose?
there's definitely something in what you're saying about favourable conditions, I've literally learnt how to do that with my work, and now I can tap inspiration whenever, whether what I'm doing is good or not I don't know. And to be honest, I'm not sure I care, it's more like I just have fun doing stuff right?
Having said that.. some books are definitely REALLY ALIVE though, do you know what I mean? Sorry for the rambling..
I love this. Yes indeed. Some pieces of work are more alive. We can see that at a glance, but how does that happen??? When we're making something, we have to sort of suspend the judging of whether what we're making is good or not in order to get it made; and even afterwards, we have to just let it go into the world and let it be what it is. We try our best & let it go. When we receive the work of others, we have to seek out what is most alive. So those are two halves of the same meeting point, which is the work. My ultimate benchmark is the kind of work that is very simple but infinitely deep. For instance there are books I can read an infinite number of times-- until I know them by memory-- yet I am not bored. Or simple songs that remain deeply powerful however many hundred times you listen. World-making, as you say. How do people make something like that? That's what I want to know.
Yes I totally resonate with simplicity and depth, at first it seems a paradox but actually it’s the way our minds / the universe works, the more connections to a particular idea, the more possible perspectives, that’s how archetypes work. That’s why the bible resonates with so many, because it is closer to archetypal language and imagery. This is also the key to creating depth in your work.
I’m also moving towards the idea that intent is crucial (as it is with everything we do).
So if you want to write a book to make money for yourself, you can even create something meaningful but the depth will not be the same as a book written because the author felt that they MUST bring a certain idea to the world, perhaps to fix a certain situation.
Your question seems to be asking not ‘how to do this’ in terms of a process, but more in the way of positioning your mind, your intent, your creativity and your entire being to become a vessel for a creative work that will resonate with others, by using an archetypal perspective
I agree, intent is crucial... To be honest, I try not to think at all about how the work will be received. That's a challenging headspace to maintain when it comes to working on the Internet, though, because there is so much immediate feedback. (But I also like reading people's responses, like this conversation)... I guess I'm a purist... but this world is very impure... Compromises are always necessary
I just realized the invisible labour that goes into an artist's product is similar to the invisible labour that goes into being a therapist. Both more feminine forms of labour and so in danger of being ignored but for some reason society recognizes the latter: the subtle and back breaking work therapists do working with their inner worlds. It's not just the hour of therapy they're getting paid for - it's on an obvious level their years of study and self-therapy, and more subtly, paying for everything they've survived in their life that makes them who they are, because who they are gives you therapy you can't get anywhere or anywhen else on earth. Same as who the artist is gives you shit you can't get anywhere or anywhen else.
I came across this from Julian Bell in the London Review of Books: "With drawing, as with singing, muscular tremor is the surest yardstick, indicating how someone is grasping the form they have to articulate, how homely or strange it may be to them-- in effect, acting as a register of their personal sincerity."
Beautiful, as always, Rosie. PS What are your thoughts on staying on Substack?
Cheers,
An Admirer
Maybe it's like a pub, stay while it's still fun. When you look around & all the fun people have gone home, maybe it's time to go too...
I love that. Thank you Rosie.
Lovely thinking. I agree that a machine cannot make art until it has skin in the game so to speak, but I wonder how long it might be until they do have that - subjective emotions, experience of loss, futility as well as utility, fear of death. Maybe they'll do emotions better than we can.
Also re: negative attitudes to artists, historically, most work did not perhaps exactly equal lack of enjoyment. Experience of work - which was often craft I suppose - might have been closer to how Zizek describes that thing which is better than 'happiness': the flow state in which we are at one with the creative task. Then this approaches your definition of art in the end. The hatred of one's work used to imply slavery, but is now the normal condition of capitalist money gathering.
Robots don't have feelings. They can pretend to
On an entirely different subject…. What’s happened to Andrew Bayly?
I don't know who that is
Sorry Rosie -misplaced comment!! My apologies
Congratulations on your anniversary! So what about AI!? It’s widely available and many are inclined to use it. How do we protect the creators and the creative process for the future?
Thanks! Don't use it, keep saying it's bullshit, do other stuff instead. That's my best guess
I wish it were that easy. Where's the fun if AI does my writing for me? I do worry though if AI can write in 1 second and I need 1 year.... I'm not standing on a good foot here. I agree, do other stuff. Thanks!
My point with this piece is that AI can never do what you do, and anyone who thinks it can is mistaken. The result might look superficially similar to an outsider, but it's actually not at all the same. Even if it could do exactly what you do, it still wouldn't be the same, because what you do emerges from being human
Yes to all of this! And most fondly this image - ‘our faces covered in each other’s pollen; a web of conviviality’.
Magic! I’ve just emerged from a flower with my face covered.
A wonderful essay Rosie, with this you have woken me from my slumber....
…love the trifecta of art for artists, the artists, and anyone who might interact with the art…it is also true that art is for the machines, the money, the nothing…wondering all the folds in which it folds…and attentive to those that i fold into…appreciative of the luck…
An excellent piece, Happy anniversary.
Thank you for this Rosie.
Can you point me towards this coyote getting advice from his own shit?
I get the same sort of revulsion with AI art or essays written in which the author goes on about some conversation with chatGPT.
There's a big Aussie wedding photographer who's work with lighting and story I really admired for years and then last year he started getting into AI art and churning out portraits of 6-fingered subjects and Joe-public was going mad for them. They disgusted me and I lost all respect for him. But then I keep questioning myself, am I just being an old fuddy duddy? Do I have to get with the times?
Fuck it, I'm gonna stay repulsed.
Congratulations on two years! I hope you keep writing here or at least somewhere I can still receive your words.
Hi Leon! Well, my origin for these stories was a book I had when I was little, just a tattered old booklet with no cover, that seemed to be transcriptions of (I think) an old man telling Coyote stories. Coyote is often doing dumb stuff, like sticking his dick in a hollow log for instance. (It goes from so long he has to coil it up to carry it to just normal size, by getting eaten by whatever lives in the log.) He often dies through stupidity & throws his bones into the spring to get reborn (kind of like a new life in a video game). But yeah if he’s stuck for what to do he often shits & asks the shit for advice. Then if it gives him bad advice he gets angry ha ha.
Coyote getting advice from his own shit is referenced in the story about catching the salmon under ‘Plateau’ in the Coyote article on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_(mythology)
Interestingly Lewis Hyde in his book Coyote Makes This World says that tricksterism is a lot about the stomach and food, & that the first trick of the trickster in many mythologies is ‘catching a fish'. This holds with the mythology of my country, where the trickster demi-God Māui fishes up the North Island (where I’m writing this from: the region I live in is Te Upoko o te Ika a Māui, the Head of Māui’s Fish). Māui’s brothers won’t give him any bait so (in a version I like) he punches himself in the nose & lets the blood drip onto his Grandmother’s magical jawbone, which he is using for a hook.
Further to Coyote stories, I highly recommend Ursula K. Le Guin’s novella Buffalo Gals, Won’t You Come Out Tonight, wherein she reimagines Coyote as female.
Oy thanks so much for the detailed response! What a fantastic book to have as a kid, haha!
I still haven't read any Ursula, it's time to do something about that.
Thank you Rosie!
Cheers
Le Guin is my all time art hero... I'm always trying to get people to read her!... You can read anything, it's all great! But one I re-read recently & loved was her late Young Adult trilogy Gifts, Voices, & Powers.
Wow, that was a good read, thank you for that recommendation! Loved how all the stories came together.
Do you have any particular favourite of hers? she's written so much!!
I love The Dispossessed the most. The Left Hand of Darkness also. Both of them are quite dense and LHOD in particular starts slowly, but both reward persistence. Those are her acknowledged masterpieces, but like you say there are so many! Really anything!
Ok thanks for this! I like book recommendations. I can't say the same for music, I always seek out my own music, am a bit snobby, but for books I much prefer someone's recommendation.
P.S. Nah don’t get with the times, the times suck
This just ripped me right open. Beautifully, brutally honest. The shit metaphor is just perfect because guess what’s in compost? Not just manure but Humus, which is a mysterious element of fertile soil, just like the goodness of humanity is the mysterious thing that makes life worth living and art worth producing. Just my two cents. I’ve subscribed!
Thanks! Yeah, it's that ineffable probiotics, you can't command it, just invite it. Make hospitable conditions then hope for the best
Thanks for crafting this art-icle so passionately. Hugely inspiring!
You said it so well ‘art is alive’, I imagine, when the artist has breathed life into the work, that’s what you can discern something as ‘good’?
I don't know, that's an interesting question! Apart from what I said-- that taste is very subjective, what I like is maybe not what you like-- I still feel that there's some other X factor or wildness at play. The best way I can think to describe it is maybe it's like wild yeast or probiotics (or magic in general): you can create hospitable conditions, but ultimately whether the beneficial bacteria grace your endeavour is out of your hands. All we can practice is making the right conditions, & the more we do that, the higher the odds of inspiration / magic occurring.
I don't think what I like is based on a decision I make for sure, it's outside of that realm. I can see that I used to let my ego tip the balance a lot, but now I really don't know what it is? It seems like you're talking about creating something, whereas I was leaning more towards how I discern something to be 'good' work, like a book or art, or music, etc. you got me thinking along that line.
In my own work, I definitely feel like I'm putting some life into what I'm doing, I like creating living poetry or music, ideas that have the potential to evolve over time and take on new meaning, I aim for that and I think I'm successful sometimes.
I feel like when I listen to a piece of music that I really like, it's like a world that I can live inside and grow with as the years go on. Whether that's just something intentional I don't know, but it feels like a good artist is doing that on purpose?
there's definitely something in what you're saying about favourable conditions, I've literally learnt how to do that with my work, and now I can tap inspiration whenever, whether what I'm doing is good or not I don't know. And to be honest, I'm not sure I care, it's more like I just have fun doing stuff right?
Having said that.. some books are definitely REALLY ALIVE though, do you know what I mean? Sorry for the rambling..
I love this. Yes indeed. Some pieces of work are more alive. We can see that at a glance, but how does that happen??? When we're making something, we have to sort of suspend the judging of whether what we're making is good or not in order to get it made; and even afterwards, we have to just let it go into the world and let it be what it is. We try our best & let it go. When we receive the work of others, we have to seek out what is most alive. So those are two halves of the same meeting point, which is the work. My ultimate benchmark is the kind of work that is very simple but infinitely deep. For instance there are books I can read an infinite number of times-- until I know them by memory-- yet I am not bored. Or simple songs that remain deeply powerful however many hundred times you listen. World-making, as you say. How do people make something like that? That's what I want to know.
Yes I totally resonate with simplicity and depth, at first it seems a paradox but actually it’s the way our minds / the universe works, the more connections to a particular idea, the more possible perspectives, that’s how archetypes work. That’s why the bible resonates with so many, because it is closer to archetypal language and imagery. This is also the key to creating depth in your work.
I’m also moving towards the idea that intent is crucial (as it is with everything we do).
So if you want to write a book to make money for yourself, you can even create something meaningful but the depth will not be the same as a book written because the author felt that they MUST bring a certain idea to the world, perhaps to fix a certain situation.
Your question seems to be asking not ‘how to do this’ in terms of a process, but more in the way of positioning your mind, your intent, your creativity and your entire being to become a vessel for a creative work that will resonate with others, by using an archetypal perspective
I agree, intent is crucial... To be honest, I try not to think at all about how the work will be received. That's a challenging headspace to maintain when it comes to working on the Internet, though, because there is so much immediate feedback. (But I also like reading people's responses, like this conversation)... I guess I'm a purist... but this world is very impure... Compromises are always necessary
I just realized the invisible labour that goes into an artist's product is similar to the invisible labour that goes into being a therapist. Both more feminine forms of labour and so in danger of being ignored but for some reason society recognizes the latter: the subtle and back breaking work therapists do working with their inner worlds. It's not just the hour of therapy they're getting paid for - it's on an obvious level their years of study and self-therapy, and more subtly, paying for everything they've survived in their life that makes them who they are, because who they are gives you therapy you can't get anywhere or anywhen else on earth. Same as who the artist is gives you shit you can't get anywhere or anywhen else.
I came across this from Julian Bell in the London Review of Books: "With drawing, as with singing, muscular tremor is the surest yardstick, indicating how someone is grasping the form they have to articulate, how homely or strange it may be to them-- in effect, acting as a register of their personal sincerity."