Fiction Doesn't Claim to be Real

It’s 2:45am, and I’m thinking about non-fiction film or “documentaries”.

doc·u·men·ta·ry

noun

1. a movie or a television or radio program that provides a factual record or report.

Documentaries often claim to offer an unfiltered glimpse into real life. While documentaries can be powerful tools for education and storytelling, they come with a set of ethical challenges that, to me - and the definition provided by Google - seem overlooked.

At their core, documentaries involve taking real people's lives and shaping them into a narrative that fits within the confines of a film. This process requires editing, which means making decisions about what to include and, crucially, what to leave out. These choices, made by the filmmaker, can significantly alter the portrayal of the subject, reducing their complex reality into a simplified story designed to engage an audience.

This curation can lead to a form of objectification, where the non-fiction subject is no longer a whole person but rather a character molded to fit a particular narrative structure. Even in the best-intentioned documentaries, the filmmaker's perspective can overshadow the subject's reality, imposing a narrative structure that may not fully reflect the truth of the situation.

In fiction, filmmakers create stories from scratch, crafting characters and worlds without the ethical burden of representing real lives. This process, to me, in a backwards way, feels like a more genuine form of storytelling, as it openly acknowledges its constructed nature. Fiction doesn't claim to be real, allowing filmmakers to explore themes and ideas with creative freedom.

The authenticity in fiction lies in its honesty about being a product of imagination, whereas documentaries often blur the line between reality and crafted narrative. As consumers of media, it's important to recognize these distinctions and consider the ethical implications of how real lives are represented on screen.

I haven't yet pondered what this means for the “fictional biopic” film and I reserve the right, as always, to alter and grow into how I feel about the subject, but I think this is interesting. I've always seen documentaries as something more “genuine”, when perhaps the opposite is true. This makes me conscious of the idea that our lives have no narrative that isn't imposed upon them.

We are all just happening, structureless. Our minds impose structure in order to make sense of the world and ourselves.

Out There

I’m using this blog to put my voice “out there” - even in a small way - and to develop my ideas going into writing The End Is Nigh.

__

One of the ways that I experiment with AI and ChatGPT is to formulate my thoughts. I will talk to it about ideas I have and use it to help me articulate what I am trying to express. Today I was thinking about the intersection between Generation Z behaviorally, our current existential questions with AI, the discourse surrounding art and originality, and my hopes and my hypotheses on what it all means and where we can take this information. From my current work as a behavior analyst, I’m excited by the embrace of patterns and human behavior in order to understand the world.

__

In our rapidly evolving world, humanity faces profound existential challenges that resonate deeply with contemporary cultural and technological shifts. The infinite expanse of the universe presents a backdrop against which our lives can seem insignificant. However, meaning is not inherently absent but can be cultivated through personal choices and experiences. This notion underscores the idea that our lives matter when we choose to imbue them with significance.

This struggle for meaning is particularly pronounced among Generation Z, who grapple with identity in an era marked by unprecedented interconnectedness. In a society where traditional markers of significance are increasingly questioned, there is a competitive scramble for personal validation and relevance. This quest for individuality and identity often manifests as a clamor for uniqueness in a landscape where sameness seems to loom large.

Adding complexity to this cultural milieu is the rise of artificial intelligence, particularly in creative fields. AI's capacity to generate art challenges conventional perceptions of originality and human creativity. If art is the quintessential expression of individuality, AI-generated art raises questions about the uniqueness and value of human artistic endeavors. This technological development compels us to rethink the essence of creativity and what it means to be original in an age where machines can mimic human ingenuity.

Amidst these challenges lies a broader existential question: should humanity aspire to transcend individualism in favor of a more unified collective identity? The tension between celebrating individuality and fostering a collective consciousness is a recurring theme. While art and creativity have historically been arenas for individual expression, there is a growing discourse around the potential benefits of embracing a more communal societal structure. This perspective suggests that, as a species, we might find greater purpose and resilience in unity rather than in isolated pursuits of significance.

Ultimately, these interwoven threads of existentialism, competition for identity, the impact of AI on originality, and the potential for collective identity reflect a cultural and technological crossroads. As we navigate these complexities, the challenge lies in finding a balance between honoring individual uniqueness and fostering a sense of shared purpose and community.

Artificial Intelligence in Creativity II

I find myself in a state, consistently, of irrational frustration that I am not more “successful” than I am at this stage in my life. I am weary this perception of myself leaves me vulnerable. When it comes to AI, I believe I want to be more excited about it than I rationally am. Artificial Intelligence proposes a future that seems to me different, and in that difference, there is hope.

This statement is not AI generated, but the previous is. It’s generated with my ideas, of course, but while I do think AI is a great tool for development, it never truly pushes back, it only seems to affirm my suggestions.

Sure, it will push back if I prompt it with something standardly immoral or ethically grey, but in creative development AI has no emotional gut to suggest that my idea is wrong. There is no fight, no human ego to deal with, and for me, this lack of natural collaborative tension creates a sense of unease and makes me aware that with artificial intelligence, nothing is at stake; with human intelligence, everything is.

Artificial Intelligence in Creativity

/imagine the French term "réalisateur," which means Director.

Just as the Director orchestrates various elements to bring a creative vision to life, an AI prompter directs how we interact with AI language models. This role involves crafting and refining inputs to shape the AI’s responses, aligning them with our intended goals. It's a bit like how a director plays a crucial role in making a film or play come together.

When we think about technological advancements, it’s easy to feel they are separate from nature. But, much like birds building nests or bees making hives, our tech developments are also part of a natural process. AI, despite its high-tech appearance, is deeply rooted in human creativity and effort. It’s not something alien to us; rather, it’s an extension of our natural abilities. This viewpoint helps us see that incorporating AI into creative work doesn’t strip away the essence or “soul” of a project. The human touch, our creativity, remains integral.

AI’s impact stretches beyond just creativity; it also influences our economy. Art and creativity have long been tied to commercial value, and there’s frustration when AI enters the picture, potentially disrupting this balance. Some critics argue against using AI in art not because there’s something inherently wrong with it but because it challenges the commercial and labor dynamics associated with creative work. Many people depend on art for their livelihood, and the idea of AI replacing human roles can be unsettling.

However, I believe that the inclusion of AI in artistic processes doesn’t diminish the soul of a project. AI, like any tool or medium, is a product of human innovation. Its role in creativity should be seen as a continuation of our artistic evolution rather than a replacement. Just as artists have historically adapted new tools and techniques, AI represents a new frontier in artistic expression.

Reflecting on the history of AI, from its early concepts in the 1950s by pioneers like Alan Turing and John McCarthy to the sophisticated systems of today, it’s clear that AI development mirrors the creative journey of an artist. Each stage in AI’s evolution—from early programs like ELIZA and Shakey the Robot to the breakthroughs in deep learning and neural networks—parallels how artists refine their craft over time.

Interestingly, AI is also deeply connected to the natural world. The chip processors that power AI are made from silicon, derived from sand, and the principles of electronics that guide them are rooted in physics. Even the design of artificial neural networks is inspired by our understanding of the human brain. In essence, AI is a natural extension of human capability and innovation.

Ultimately, AI is not separate from nature; it’s part of our ongoing evolution. By recognizing this interconnectedness, we can appreciate AI as a natural extension of our creativity and intellect. This perspective helps us embrace new technologies in a way that’s harmonious with our environment and our creative spirit.