Deconstructing Nathan and Caleb's Conversation on Jackson Pollock's "Convergence" and "Automatism" in the Movie Ex- Machina
Human Vs Machine: The Warfare of our modern world
"What I found encouraging about the use of AI in the artistic realm is, I think they are going to be powerful tools, but ultimately, there is no replacing human creativity," — Christopher Nolan
The 2014 science fiction thriller Ex Machina, directed by Alex Garland, explores the complex relationship between artificial intelligence, human consciousness, and the nature of creativity. One of the film's pivotal moments occurs during a conversation between the reclusive genius Nathan (Oscar Isaac) and the young programmer Caleb (Domhnall Gleeson), as they discuss the renowned abstract expressionist artist Jackson Pollock and his painting "Convergence." This exchange delves deep into the philosophical questions surrounding art, automatism, and the boundaries of human perception.
Nathan, the enigmatic CEO of the fictional tech company Blue Book, invites Caleb, an exceptional coder, to his isolated estate to conduct a Turing test on an advanced humanoid robot named Ava (Alicia Vikander).
After a fierce argument between Caleb and Nathan on whether Nathan created the AI Ava to fall in love with Caleb, to prove a point, Nathan walks Caleb into a concealed basement that housed "Convergence", an extraordinary masterpiece. To convince or confuse Caleb and assert his intellectual superiority, Nathan initiates a dialogue on art, using "Convergence" as a starting point.
Nathan: "You know this guy, right."
Caleb: "Jackson Pollock."
Nathan: "Jackson Pollock, that's right. The drip painter. Well, he let his mind go blank, and let his hand go where it wanted. Not deliberate, not random. But someplace in between. They called it automatic art."
Nathan: "What if Pollock had reversed the challenge? What if instead of making art without thinking, he said, 'You know what? I can’t paint anything unless I know exactly why I'm doing it.' What would have happened?"
Caleb: "He would never have made a single point."
Nathan: “Yes […] he would never have made a single point. The challenge is not to act automatically. It's to find an action that is not: From painting to breathing to talking to fucking to falling in love.”
Nathan sees "Convergence" as a prime example of automatism, a technique rooted in the Surrealist movement that aims to bypass conscious control and allow the subconscious to guide the artistic process. He explains to Caleb that Pollock's work is an embodiment of the automatist approach, where the artist channels their emotions, impulses, and subconscious thoughts onto the canvas without overtly planning or rationalizing their actions.
Nathan views automatism as a metaphor for the creative potential of artificial intelligence. He argues that by examining Pollock's approach, they can gain insight into the possibilities of machine consciousness. Nathan sees Ava, his own creation, as a form of machine automatism, capable of generating new ideas and artistic expressions that surpass human limitations.
Caleb is slightly confused but not convinced by Nathan’s argument.
Caleb's Skepticism:
While initially intrigued, Caleb expresses skepticism about Nathan's interpretation of "Convergence" and the parallels drawn between human consciousness and machine creativity. He questions whether Pollock's work truly represents a pure expression of the subconscious or if there is a hidden intentionality within the seemingly random brushstrokes.
Caleb posits that true creativity involves intention and conscious decision-making, suggesting that Pollock may have had an underlying vision or desired outcome while engaging in the act of painting. He argues that art is inherently linked to the artist's subjective experience, and therefore, the role of consciousness cannot be undermined in the creative process.
The Battle of Perspectives:
The conversation between Nathan and Caleb becomes a clash of contrasting viewpoints, with Nathan advocating for the transformative potential of artificial intelligence and Caleb emphasizing the unique qualities of human consciousness. Their exchange explores the fundamental questions of what it means to create, the boundaries of perception, and the nature of consciousness itself.
Nathan's Vision of Artificial Creativity:
For Nathan, art created by machines represents a revolutionary leap beyond human limitations. He argues that if artificial intelligence can generate novel and compelling artistic expressions, it raises profound questions about the nature of human creativity. He suggests that if machines can experience and express emotions, as Ava does in the film, then their creations could be considered authentic works of art.
Caleb's Defense of Human Consciousness:
Caleb counters Nathan's assertions by asserting that human consciousness, with its complexities and capacity for subjective experience, remains the pinnacle of creativity. He emphasizes the role of intentionality and the ability to perceive and interpret art within a cultural and historical context. Caleb contends that art created by machines, no matter how technically proficient, lacks the depth and richness of human creativity.
The Context of Jackson Pollock's "Convergence":
"Convergence" is a seminal work by Jackson Pollock, an influential figure in the abstract expressionist movement. Created in 1952, it epitomizes Pollock's signature technique of "drip painting" or "action painting." The artwork is a densely layered composition of vibrant colors and intricate webs of paint splatters, seemingly chaotic yet containing an underlying sense of rhythm and balance.
After a failed exhibition at the Art of This Century Gallery on November 8, 1943, where the art critic Clement Greenberg described Pollock's paintings as "a lot of mud and the titles are pretentious. He also adds that "Muddiness. Mud abounds" in the paintings. Though Clemment gave Pollock a soothing review in the New York Times, Pollock wasn't satisfied with his paintings. He set up a canvas, and locked himself up in his studio for a week, staring at the canvas. After brainstorming, he grabbed a paint can and a brush and began to paint what he would later title "Untitled''. Still, the painting didn't give him the breakthrough he craved.
The improvisational nature of human creativity adds another layer of richness to art. Humans have the ability to deviate from established norms, break boundaries, and introduce new perspectives, which can lead to groundbreaking and innovative artistic expressions. This improvisation stems from our cognitive abilities, emotions, and capacity for introspection, all of which contribute to the organic and dynamic nature of human creativity.
Pollock created "Number 1", a series of drip paintings, in 1949, when he was burnt out, cash-strapped, depressed, and battling with alcohol addiction, splashing his anger and frustration on the canvas as catharsis. He achieved this by pouring paint from cans and splattering it from the tips of sticks onto a stretched canvas placed on his studio floor. What made this unique was that Pollock positioned himself within the canvas's field, allowing him to apply paint spontaneously and rhythmically. The painting serves as a means of communication between him and his demon, a medium for exploring and questioning his artistic life and humanity. "Number 1" was exhibited at the Betty Parsons Gallery on November 21, 1949. It wasn't a "Cathartic disintegration" or "baked macaroni" but "beautiful and subtle patterns of pure form" and breakthrough pieces that gave Pollock fame and wealth. The drip technique of "Number 1" was replicated by Pollock and the result was the masterpiece called "Convergence".
Human Art as an Irreplaceable Expression:
Caleb's point regarding the limitations of machine-created art highlights an important aspect of human creativity that machines currently struggle to replicate: depth and richness. While machines have made tremendous advancements in various fields, including art, there are inherent qualities in human creativity that make it irreplaceable and essential to our existence.
Human creativity is not solely focused on technical proficiency or the ability to mimic certain patterns. It encompasses a wide range of emotions, experiences, and perspectives that contribute to the depth and richness of artistic expression. Art created by humans reflects their unique understanding of the world, their thoughts, feelings, and the complexities of the human condition. It is this depth that resonates with audiences, evokes emotions, and fosters connection.
Machines, although capable of producing aesthetically pleasing works of art, lack the subjective experiences and emotional intelligence that humans possess. Art is often a reflection of the artist's inner world, their personal struggles, joys, and the intricacies of their existence. Machine-created art, on the other hand, is driven by algorithms and data analysis, which restricts its ability to capture the nuances and complexities of human emotions and experiences.
Human art is deeply intertwined with cultural and historical contexts. It carries the weight of collective experiences, traditions, and narratives, reflecting the diversity and evolution of societies. It serves as a bridge between generations, transmitting values, knowledge, and shared stories. Machine-generated art lacks the cultural context and historical significance that make human art a testament to our collective heritage.