Columnists
For successful but lazy artists
You’ve probably heard about the next big thing in digital intelligence. A computer is now able— for better or worse—to replicate the style of an ancient master painter and create a brand-new work that might as well have been made by the master himself—if he hadn’t been dead for nearly 350 years.
The painting—dubbed The Next Rembrandt project—was commissioned by Dutch banking colossus ING. It’s the signature piece in a new advertising campaign that showcases ING’s sponsorship of the arts, while attempting to stress its focus on innovation. The team behind the painting, led by the J. Walter Thompson advertising agency, scanned numerous paintings by Rembrandt and created algorithms based on the brushstrokes, facial features and background lighting that made Rembrandt’s portraits so distinctive. The computer was then fed the algorithms and told, essentially, to go to it. The computer produced an eerily familiar-looking “original” Rembrandt, which, to top it off, was produced on a 3D printer, with a depth of 13 layers of ink.
Now, if Rembrandt were to somehow wake up, it is probable that he would have a hard time comprehending what a computer is and how it works (although the same could also be said for certain Times columnists). However, I think it’s also likely that he would be a little annoyed that his genius could be reduced to algorithms and then re-applied to produce something “fresh.” He would surely think that his portraiture style would belong to him alone, at least to the extent that he would be the only one allowed to use the “Rembrandt” moniker.
But let’s suppose that he could resolve those concerns and would be inclined to coast on his well-earned reputation. Would he not be tempted to forgo the dozens and dozens of hours he would have to commit to creating a new work, in favour of just feeding the parameters into his computer system and telling it to produce a new painting of a man with a hat, a frilly collar and a bulbous nose? Would he be able to claim it as an original Rembrandt, or a “By Rembrandt in the style of Rembrandt” or a “Rembrandt computergraph?” However it were to be classified, he’d probably earn a decent income from it; although the computer’s programmer might demand a share in the creative rights. So will the only breakthrough of The Next Rembrandt project be to make successful artists lazy?
The problems just begin to compound. What’s to stop some fool with an algorithm from flooding the market with a “newly discovered Chef Boyardee can” series by Andy Warhol, convincing enough to hoodwink the experts? Has anybody given any thought to what will become of art forgers, those loveable rogues who appear destined to patrol the unemployment lines alongside middle managers? What about taste? What is to stop the philistine from commissioning an “authorized Picasso” piece depicting him donning the green jacket from the Masters golf tournament?
And if a computer can now churn out an “original” Rembrandt, will the skill of the artist now lie not in the application of paint to canvas but in the selection of styles to copy? Will an artist now attract attention for originality based upon a formula that is “sixty per cent Tom Thomson and 35 per cent Salvador Dali, with a five per cent hint of Leonardo da Vinci,” or “One half Alex Colville and one half Marcel Duchamp?”
All this Rembrandt stuff serves to highlight how big an incursion into the arts side of the ledger the computer has made. There have been programs, like Bandin- a-Box, through which musicians can program computers to write original tunes. And just last year, Oscar Schwartz gave a TED talk during which he demonstrated that a computer can generate poetry that people think is more human than human poetry (the triumphant computer was raised on Emily Dickinson poems and was going toe-to-toe with Gertrude Stein).
So is the writing on the wall for the creative arts? No—but I wouldn’t mind getting a hold of those Next Rembrandt algorithms so I can knock off and quickly sell a couple of his “newly discovered” works, just in case I’m wrong.
MERLE HAGGARD
I missed the chance last week to say farewell to Merle Haggard. What I loved best about him was that ringing, convincing baritone voice that allowed him to sing just about any genre of popular music. He was no slouch in the songwriting department either. When you’ve left people with gems like Hungry Eyes and Silver Wings, we can overlook Okie from Muskogee and The Fightin’ Side of Me.
Comments (0)