Philosophy & Technology

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 305–319 | Cite as

Creative Collaborations with Machines



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.


Human-machine collaboration Creativity Music Dance Drawing 


  1. Adams, T. (2010). David Cope. The Observer. UK. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.
  2. Campbell, D. T. (1960). Blind variation and selective retention in creative thought as in other knowledge processes. Psychological Review, 67(6), 380–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chung, S. (2015). Drawing Operations. Sougwen Chung. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.
  4. 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
  5. Cope, D. (2005). Computer models of musical creativity. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Cope, D. (2011). Response to Noah Weber’s comments on Emily Howell. New Music Box. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.
  7. Davis, C. (1996). Levinas: an introduction. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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. Accessed 19 July 2016.
  10. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Faste, H. & Walter, A. (2007). A conversation with Bill Vorn. Accessed 1 June 2014.
  13. Gunkel, D. J. (2012). The machine question: critical perspectives on AI, robots, and ethics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Gunkel, D. J. (2015). Of remixology: ethics and aesthetics after remix. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  15. 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.Google Scholar
  16. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 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
  19. Lessig, L. (2008). Remix: making art and commerce thrive in the hybrid economy. New York: Penguin Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Levinas, E. (1969). Totality and infinity. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Licklider, J. C. R. (1960). Man-computer symbiosis. IRE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-1, 4–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pinchevski, A. (2005). By way of interruption: Levinas and the ethics of communication. Pittsburgh: Dusquene University Press.Google Scholar
  23. 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
  24. Sandry, E. (2015). Robots and communication. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sawyer, R. K. (2008). Group genius: the creative power of collaboration. New York: BasicBooks.Google Scholar
  26. 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
  27. Stein, M. I. (1953). Creativity and culture. Journal of Psychology, 36, 31–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Varner, M. (2015). Artist interview with Sougwen Chung. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.
  29. Vorn, B. (2007). Grace State Machines. Bill Vorn - Robotic Art. Accessed 1 Dec 2015.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Internet Studies, School of Media, Culture and Creative ArtsCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations