Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Creative Collaborations with Machines

  • Published:
Philosophy & Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper analyzes creative practice including virtual music composition by a human and sets of computer programs, improvisation of music and dance in human-robot ensembles, and drawings produced by a human and a robotic arm. In all of these examples, the paper argues that creativity arises from a process of human-robot collaboration. Human influences on the machines involved exist at many levels, from initial creation and programming, via processes of reprogramming and setup of underlying data and parameters, to engagement throughout the process of creative production. The decision to value a machine as a creative other is supported most strongly when collaborating with the machine directly, while witnessing the creative team at work, as opposed simply to seeing the result, is more likely to bring an audience to a similar understanding. The creativity of the human-machine collaborations analyzed in this paper relies on close interaction, within which there is a continual recognition of the otherness of the machine and its nonhuman abilities. Such relations can be theorized by extending Emmanuel Levinas’ conception of the face-to-face encounter within which self and other are brought into proximity, but the alterity of the other is nonetheless retained. The paper’s analysis of creative interactions between humans and robots supports the idea that machines need not be regarded as challenging human artistic practice, but rather enable new ways for creativity to arise through human-machine collaborations within which human and nonhuman creative abilities are combined.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, T. (2010). David Cope. The Observer. UK. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/jul/11/david-cope-computer-composer. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.

  • Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67(6), 380–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, S. (2015). Drawing Operations. Sougwen Chung. http://sougwen.com/Drawing-Operations-D-O-U-G. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.

  • Clark, D. (1997). On Being “the last Kantian in Nazi Germany”: Dwelling with animals after Levinas. In J. Ham & M. Senior (Eds.), Animal acts: configuring the humans in western history (pp. 165–198). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope, D. (2005). Computer models of musical creativity. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cope, D. (2011). Response to Noah Weber’s comments on Emily Howell. New Music Box. http://www.newmusicbox.org/articles/response-to-noah-webers-comments-on-emily-howell/. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.

  • Davis, C. (1996). Levinas: an introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, J. (1986). Animal art: Variation in bower decorating style among male bowerbirds Amblyornis inornatus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 83(9), 3042–3046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eck, D. and Schmidhuber, J. (2002). A first look at music composition using lstm recurrent neural networks. Istituto Dalle Molle Di Studi Sull Intelligenza Artificiale, 103. http://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/blues/IDSIA-07-02.pdf. Accessed 19 July 2016.

  • Endler, J. A. (2012). Bowerbirds, art and aesthetics: Are bowerbirds artists and do they have an aesthetic sense? Communicative & Integrative Biology, 5(3), 281–283. doi:10.4161/cib.19481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endler, J. A., Endler, L. C., & Doerr, N. R. (2010). Great bowerbirds create theaters with forced perspective when seen by their audience. Current Biology, 20(18), 1679–1684. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.08.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faste, H. & Walter, A. (2007). A conversation with Bill Vorn. http://www.haakonfaste.com/conversation_with_bill_vorn. Accessed 1 June 2014.

  • Gunkel, D. J. (2012). The machine question: critical perspectives on AI, robots, and ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gunkel, D. J. (2015). Of remixology: ethics and aesthetics after remix. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, G. (2008). Achieving fluency through perceptual-symbol practice in human-robot collaboration. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (pp. 1–8). Presented at the HRI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: ACM.

  • Hoffman, G., & Ju, W. (2014). Designing robots with movement in mind. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 3(1), 89–122. doi:10.5898/JHRI.3.1.Hoffman.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, G., & Weinberg, G. (2011). Interactive improvisation with a robotic marimba player. In J. Solis & K. Ng (Eds.), Musical robots and interactive multimodal systems (pp. 233–251). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstadter, D. (2002). Staring Emmy straight in the eye—and doing my best not to flinch. In T. Dartnall (Ed.), Creativity, cognition, and knowledge: an interaction (pp. 67–104). Westport, Conn: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessig, L. (2008). Remix: making art and commerce thrive in the hybrid economy. New York: Penguin Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Licklider, J. C. R. (1960). Man-computer symbiosis. IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-1, 4–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinchevski, A. (2005). By way of interruption: Levinas and the ethics of communication. Pittsburgh: Dusquene University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92–96. doi:10.1080/10400419.2012.650092

  • Sandry, E. (2015). Robots and communication. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2008). Group genius: the creative power of collaboration. New York: BasicBooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonton, D. K. (2010). Creative thought as blind-variation and selective-retention: Combinatorial models of exceptional creativity. Physics of Life Reviews, 7(2), 156–179. doi:10.1016/j.plrev.2010.02.002

  • Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. Journal of Psychology, 36, 31–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varner, M. (2015). Artist interview with Sougwen Chung. http://newhive.com/newhive/sougwen-chung-interview. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.

  • Vorn, B. (2007). Grace State Machines. Bill Vorn - Robotic Art. http://billvorn.concordia.ca/robography/GraceState.html. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Internet Studies, School of Media, Culture and Creative Arts, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia, 6845, Australia

    Eleanor Sandry

Authors
  1. Eleanor Sandry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eleanor Sandry.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sandry, E. Creative Collaborations with Machines. Philos. Technol. 30, 305–319 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-016-0240-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-016-0240-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation