Why Subjectiveness is the Answer in Design
A Manifesto on Economies of Scale and A.I.
Our subjectivity is the checks and balances to (creative) consciousness.
With the rise in artificial intelligence and trends. Trends that reach the masses in following and data analysis, be them toxic or healthy in the end of their bell curve. One thing connects these two in forming sincere balanced truth, subjectivity. Artificial intelligence does not have consciousness, humans do. What ultimately will be the natural check and balance road block to AI receiving consciousness? In my opinion it will be the riddle of obtaining what produces subjectivity. All the data harvesting in the world can only get consciousness so far. That is what thankfully separates humans from robots. Even with all the tech advancements and interactive free platforms like OpenAI. AI will always be a mimic until it masters subjectivity. There is a lot of time until that happens. Which, I hope it never does, personally. That would be scary. So subjectivity is really important. So, why do we downplay it in our current economy? There is a lot to unpack with that statement, for example the units of measure for AI success right now are Scale and Intensity. Two things that I am making an argument for are ‘not it’ for the creative arts. However, I wanted to shed some light on a few topics as Industry 4.0 paves a new, but all too familiar framework path to success. (Yes, this is a real thing, we are in what is currently considered the 4th industrial revolution) Scale, quickly no matter what, basically.
Subjectivity is why a scale economy could never in the creative arts; and probably should never in my view. Creative arts are not supposed to be scaled. Why? Because they are inherently subjective. That is where the power in the arts resides. If they were to be scaled, its process would have to maintain a balance of equal value exchanges. This has been an ongoing issue, because this exchange has not been happening, ask any “starving artist” who does not compromise their IP or value. To think, human hands were what built the previous industrial revolutions. Now, human minds are what will be building this one, because it’s digital. What does this mean? It means that your creative thoughts, IP, and especially your creative subjectivity are high commodity items. I mean, some might not be saying the quiet part out loud yet, but the race to scale AI would ultimately be a finish line of full artificial consciousness. Just so we have a big picture for relevancy. Again, these are my own subjective thoughts on the matter.
To scale in industry can, and does, happen. It’s what was successful in previous industrial revolutions. Humans are creatures of habit so let’s see if the same shoe fits for digital, too, of course. That is why we live as we are today, and have also simultaneously scaled through so many trends quantitatively. It seems wasteful. Not only in material but in creative energies. It’s misguided in my opinion. A good guide is golden, when it is harmonious and balanced for both parties within a value exchange.
What if it is not balanced? There are results in taking this approach, they are just not always final solutions to your way of life, or your creative idea. Even evolving with your life or solving your design problem per se. However, it is a profitable solution for some in the value exchange. It is also killing our subjective experiences and the value that blossoms out of that therein. Profits are not meant for the consumer, but a value is supposed to be gained upon exchange of legal tender. In interior design, I balance my profit with the subjective solution I give on my client’s project. The value is passed on, my client now experiences their solution, and it can evolve with them in their daily lives. It is also subjective to feel if something was gained or not. That is a whole other conversation, but is very relevant.
In scaling creative arts what do you get? You get wider distribution, production, and with trending demand comes a larger client base. For example, interior designers try and scale their arts through offering pre-designed packages. These are tailoring the arts not to a subjective solution, but to a more conscientious dollar.The cost-effective ploy now inserts itself, because, that is where the energy resides. When energy is directed at profits and scaling, the next place that this energy wants to direct itself is tapping into larger markets, going international in business, tapping into adjacent markets. Which is not dynamic or diverse in a creative sense of energy, but in a profit portfolio sense of energy. Quickly and cost effectively. However, is that truly the only avenue for creative energy? Sending it down the profits line? Are humans not breaking under its logistics in transit? Is it sustainable to snowball creative energy over a sustained period of time? Your answer resides within the bell curve of those trends I spoke about earlier. Now, if we go back to thinking about creative arts, most do not connect with cranking out work for profits. This prophesied structure is the vessel that is meant for all other forms of industry to fit into, a standardized mold one might say, and the creative arts is expected to fit within that mold.
Well, the more subjective an energy, the less likely (and feasible) it will be to fit into this mold without resulting in loss of purpose, energy, and intention to provide a solution. Can creative arts be quantitatively scaled? Of course, and some successfully too if you look at the economy. But, what happens when the trend falls, the demand drops because of the nature of the creative arts inherent subjectivity, and the masses lose interest? They lose connection because there was no real connection created when it was introduced, or sold to them. We are left with much waste and creative burnout.
Standardization, and reproducibility are all great quantitative aspects of producing a profit. But, are they always the solution? It all simply leads to volume. Volume of what? And what are we needing to fill? The solution? Or this profit vessel? It truly leads to the same place when we constantly try to push ourselves, creatives or just subjective thoughts in general, through the same mold. The mould that yields the best traceable, trackable, collected data. The solution is not to be a solution anymore, which takes away a creative from their entire values and purpose to begin with. But, it creates echo chambers that create frequencies that damage creative energies. What do I mean by this? If you are not scaling, trending, or profiting– you are not enough. Your creative solutions are erased in an echo chamber.
Our subjective thoughts are the only thing keeping authentic design’s pulse beating. We love being a part of the collective, physically and consciously. But when the thing that makes a human the most conscious it could ever be, the reason the human consciousness has not been able to be scaled, copied, created and sold as AI is the power and enigmatic force of our individual subjectivity.
Now, as any researcher would suggest, let’s now look at the data that is less glorified, the qualitative results of this analysis. Creative arts undoubtedly receive a loss of individuality and authenticity when we are forced to scale. No matter how many posts we publish telling ourselves to be you, be authentic. I know in my personal experience on earth I am struggling with feelings of losing who I am to the industry of scale and profits. I feel like my individuality as a creative and expressing my life in such a way has alarmingly diminished.
I know I am not alone. I hear it in other’s voices, see it in their trailing eye gaze when speaking, and energetically confining their purpose. Trapping it inside, in a freeze, which inhibits action or the bloom. It inhibits the fuel needed for the creative process, subjectivity is what separates us from machines. Important results of this analysis also include ones compromising artistic integrity. The more creative scales the more compromised their vision becomes, simply to meet market demand or commercial interests. Why should this be disturbing? Because it directly affects the depth and richness of the work, the solution, the human experience. Instead, the focus remains tied to trends and profitability instead of personal expression. This, in my humble opinion, is why many creatives, myself included, are feeling defeated. Deprived of expression and foraging on innovations because we remain under an intense scalability umbrella.
Now, with the addition of this psychological tie-back, pressure and burn-out proceed to constantly be expected. They personally have haunted me on a monthly basis, as if I await for it to rear its ugly head right when I think I am ‘keeping up’-- I crash. One of the main side effects and another result qualitatively with this analysis is all the results of the quantitative drives changing client expectations.
In the creative arts, one must collaborate, it is another form of healthy expression and being a part of human nature. However, since the focus has shifted more to scaling and profits, this can also shift client expectations. HGTV is not solely to blame, but this is a significant example. However, HGTV was just operating in the vessel it was put in. So, of course the results are not feasible, life-long solutions. They were trends and profits. As a product or service becomes more standardized or mainstream, clients will expect quicker turnarounds or lower costs, or both! I know I have experienced both in tandem too many times to wish to admit. However, this can lead to less customization or personal engagement with the creative process–AKA the whole point to get to the best, most wholesome solution!
This creates another chain reaction, the erosion of craftsmanship. When a creative’s work is scaled, it often relies on more automation, outsourced labor, which can result in a reduction of quality of craftsmanship. Especially in industries like design or fine art. More artificial automation, possibly more loss of autonomy. Human autonomy. Because automation is when a system performs tasks automatically, while autonomy is when a system can respond to a situation without human input. Autonomous systems can devalue human autonomy. Which for the creative arts is not desired, certainly not in totality. It diminishes the ability to create, if we allow ourselves to think it so. Consequently, the human mind will be ‘programmed’ to think it is no longer needed in its environment. Which is incredibly damaging, and insights the devaluation of what is actually super valuable and critical to the later intelligence stated. If we are not conscious enough of how our subjectivity wins over this race to “AC” (Artificial Consciousness if you will), we will just continue to not take a stance on our own creative IP and creative design values.
AI has not fully taken away human autonomy in the creative arts, but the seeds it is sewing in collective minds is very present. This is a paper to forewarn us creatives that we should not let the seeds become planted even bolder. This transition of industry from machine to digital has felt funny, and it’s felt funny for a reason in my opinion. I suggest taking the hints, looking at the mold/model of its framework, knowing when something feels off or not right. Or feeling pressured into an unbalanced value exchange. For what do the tastemakers of scale economics and artificial intelligence look like? Will it be healthy? Or will it send us trending into a toxic profits line fad that we do not identify with? Just things to consider, not stating it will be the extreme altogether. Again, balance is the best virtue in creative processes. If balance is best, with economic demand of scale on one side, what is on the other side to balance it? It’s output. It’s producing at the same rate as the demand scales it. If AI’s main units of measure are scale and intensity, can we keep up on the other side of that? Do we want to? That is the biggest question, because we have the authority now to cast this vote with our creative businesses and collective voices. Creative arts do not innately function like this (scale and intensity) and those who create will break under this system of demand if we allow it to flow out of our autonomy.
So, why are we being punished for being the one thing that cannot be copied, reproduced and sold? The one aspect of problem solving that cannot be machine made? Should we not be one of the highest commodities in our world? It’s weavers? Why are creatives being referred to as starving artists? Our work is being diminished, and our efforts are being instructed to be placed on a conveyor belt. At the end of the day, the creative subjective mind touches everything, it is everywhere and in my opinion, is trying to be copied, transcribed, then erased. Erased by means of belittling and undervaluing our skill, or ability. An ability, need I remind you, that cannot be copied, replicated, and sold. Our subjectivity is the checks and balances to consciousness, and so is our vocalization of our value and IP. The second we give that up, in my opinion, we feed a machine, a scale economy machine and surrender our autonomy for payment that is oftentimes well below its actual value.
Ultimately, we know that other qualitative results were the ones that got us creatives on board with any type of scaling in the first place. Such as, how scaling can lead to expansion of collaborative opportunities. Like I said, it’s human nature, and you can collaborate with other subjective thoughts that bend your mind's own intellect–even furthering one's creative process and materializations. It leads artists, designers, and multidisciplinary creatives to new and exciting partnerships. Fostering innovation by bringing these diverse talents together to work on larger projects. (This is the profit and scaling’s bait to the switch I’m trying to convey to you that lured people like myself in the beginning of “the shift” to a scale mindset.)
Not to mention the cultural shifts and inclusivity, one of the biggest challenges we face today unfortunately. The creative arts foster that connection! Even as it receives opposition from major decision makers in the economy today. This is a disturbing truth that should not be tolerated. As creatives, coming together through inclusivity and cultural shifts result in the democratization of multiple forms of art, making them more accessible to a broader audience. To be seen, felt, and heard. This energizes the creative arts and opens debate within subjective points of view. Which strengthens our human nature as a collective consciousness–creating a wealth of balance and harmony. This qualitative result does not need to be scaled, in fact, the subjectivity in this space should remain within safe havens throughout the world. Protected and shown awareness.
Ultimately, our lives need to be protected by receiving monetary payment for our resources, intellectual property, and creative problem solving. So there needs to be a better understanding from our economic leaders, business and financial institutions on the balance of quantitative goals (profitability, efficiency, and market expansion) with qualitative values (such as creativity, authenticity and personal expression). While scaling creative industries can lead to financial success, what are we serving up as a loss to the people of our industry and trade? Scaling often requires a careful strategy to preserve the artistic integrity and emotional depth that make creative works so meaningful.
You don’t want to scale all the way up the ladder to a meaningless life. I advocate to foster the true immense value that is subjectivity of our consciousness against all ideology that aims to devalue its greatness. Data drives machines, we are not machines, and my opinion is one day, whether in my lifetime or another's, subjectivity will be the key to never becoming copied, repeated, and sold. In conclusion, I implore you to remain sincere, to know the balance and see when something is off in an active collaboration financially, IP, Etc. As I address all stakeholders in a project to vocalize expectations and empty pockets of assumptions. There is power in knowing that you were never meant to be a machine, your consciousness cannot be copied and your ability to think freely is beyond any data. Embrace your subjectivity, it is undoubtedly our superpower. Maybe the answer is to not ‘fit-in’ via pressure, but subjectively flow to the vessel that best suits your source of creative output. The energy sustained within that natural effort creates growth for purpose’ sake. Not for the sake of scales. That is what makes creativity so powerful, in the end, it all should not be bottled up and shipped on trucks. Creativity cannot be controlled. If it is forced to, it will just disappear. For economies of scale and the billionaires who maintain its models, enough is never enough. So, it is time to realize that right now, as you read this, you are enough right now. Let that sink in.You beat the system by knowing that you already create success through the advancement of your subjective creations. Something people (billionaires) are spending billions, if not trillions of dollars currently to copy and paste. Enough is never enough is not my mold I wish to operate in, I operate in the wellness of my balanced daily success to create healthy vessels along growth paths (partnerships) that are sustainable and purposeful. Pass this along to your fellow creatives, to make sure they know it too. It is very important for creatives to continue to vocalize the expectations of their craft output, deliverables, and know when to walk away when the feasibility study is not meeting that eye to eye equal value exchange.
