Ai-vis Presley: The generated image is one thing. and another. and another. and another.
Over the past few years, there's been a rise in AI generated or so-called ‘enhanced’ images of Elvis. Just a few short years back, these pictures were easily detectable from a mile off, and carried a smooth, blurry quality. They weren't what they are now. These new images, videos and audio are mass produced, eerily realistic and are shared and re-shared over and over again. Often presented under the guise of ‘entertainment’, ‘art’ or, worse, as fact. I’d argue that these images negatively contribute to the misinformation and idolisation of Elvis, his work, his actions and his appearance. They reinforce, maintain and even further the unrealistic ‘image’, Elvis himself struggled to live up to his whole working life. To me, they are reminiscent of edited magazine pictures which erase every flaw to convey a certain image of a star - to sell a product or ideology. On the other side of the same coin, they serve a purpose to the masses which equals those all-too familiar images featuring red circles and yellow arrows pointing out any and all flaws to be ultimately ridiculed, othered and condemned if not corrected. These images can have subliminally sinister connotations in our society that we are only just becoming aware of. There’s a lot of study into this topic, so self-education on the subject is well worthwhile. For now, though, and for myself, I’ll stick to the implications affecting Elvis; more specifically his image and legacy.
*I wish to briefly touch on, too, how Instagram's homepage has changed to no longer just show those in your 'following list', but also recommended content. This would normally be ideal for a fan-account user, as it can connect you with other content creator's accounts you might not see otherwise. However, in this case, the consequence is that I cannot filter, through a follow list, specific pages whose content I wish to see VS those I don't, making a curated, non AI feed nearly impossible. Hence my reason for this blog post, I suppose.
Specific examples of images I've seen of Elvis that I take issue with often misuse his image against his true character. I recently saw a familiar yet changed picture of Elvis that had been ‘enhanced’ through AI editing. The image was newly clear, and bestowed Elvis with a five ‘o’ clock shadow that I know he did not have in the original image of his usually clean-shaven face (minus the sideburns, of course). He didn't look particularly bad, but he didn't look like Elvis, who wouldn't be caught dead the way he looked in this image. Obviously, the working human eye can tell an unfocused subject or poor lighting from stubble. But here, I saw high-definition pores and unshaven hairs that the artificial intelligence simply supposes were there. It guesses and generates, presenting a final image to then be posted as an ‘improvement’ upon the original. In this case, it lied. I’m not saying Elvis didn't have pores - just that he didn't have these exact pores I was seeing! On the contrary, some AI images of Elvis erase all traces of humanity, and spit out a plastic portrait, so devoid and detached from, well, life. Take Baz Luhrmann’s EPiC for an example of restoration done right - I loved seeing Elvis’s pores return in all their IMAX glory! Not a shred of AI was used for that film, though. It is nice to know that in a time where AI is being used in mainstream media productions like documentaries and songs involving deceased icons of past eras, that Elvis stays unscathed another day! But when AI is so readily available, Elvis's image is in the hands of anyone with thumbs and a social media account. I understand that, in this case, and on a smaller scale, AI is mainly being used to cheaply add ‘quality’ to an image. But it also takes something away. Something unspoken that cannot be defined - perhaps because I am not artificially intelligent enough to.
On a more troubling scale, I have seen an emerging trend of AI generated pictures of Elvis with disabled fans - and accompanying stories to go with them (it occurs to me this may be done the opposite way around, where a real story is in want of an image, so someone completely invents one from a prompt, not the mere clarification of an existing picture). I’ve also seen AI images which stage Elvis interacting with black people; images that go as far as to depict the surrounding public’s disapproving reaction to this within the image. These images make gross examples of the subjects they attempt to use as props to hold Elvis up. Their faces may be generated by AI, but what these subjects are meant to represent, whether that is diversity or inclusion, is purely being capitalised upon and tastelessly used through the event(s) being fabricated entirely. The worst part of these virtue-signalling images is that there is no shortage of real-life examples of Elvis interacting with the public and fans of all backgrounds. Elvis doesn't need these favours just as the truth does not need to be embellished. It is an embarrassment to see and an insult to Elvis's nature, implying that fake images of such interactions are necessary; that true examples are scarce to justify these forged ‘artefacts'. It is no tribute to Elvis. These and similar images are an example of disinformation, as unlike unintentional misinformation, they are deliberately created to mislead audiences into believing they are real, therefore can be more harmful and prone to feature subliminal content.
Take even the rare generated image that is explicitly labelled as AI, the nature of the internet is that the image will be re-shared and reproduced and ultimately treated as any other real image. The fundamental issue with these images is that they are designed (or rather, generated) for the purpose of virality. They are uncanny to the untrained eye, and are only improving in ability to recreate reality, often catching even the most eagle-eyed fans out! This leads to the quiet erasure of history and fact. Certainly, as avid fans, we are more likely to be able to tell if a circulating image of Elvis is AI. But will others? Think about a celebrity or icon you aren’t familiar with. You could name them from a photograph, maybe know some of their work and a fun fact or two about them, but that is the extent of your knowledge. Could you tell if an image or video of them was doctored? If it misrepresented them? That's the image some are projecting of Elvis to the world. It won't be long until what's true is a memory held by few and what's false is imperceptible. As fans, we should strive to safeguard and protect his legacy, not distort it!
There is a real and compelling case to be made for the continuing use of Elvis’s image in art. He is a muse and an outlet for so many creatives: from artists, to songwriters, to filmmakers, to poets and beyond, Elvis and his image are culturally and historically relevant - still today! More contemporarily, Elvis is the subject of many digital creator’s work. Art is a subjective medium, of course; I will argue digital works have their place and contain creative and imaginative aspects such as traditional art does. These works interpret and extend, but may be clearly traced back to an original thought, image or idea. I have often utilised digital mediums of art myself! However, AI is different. AI is without a soul. Rotten fruit without labour. It is faceless and nameless, therefore dangerously unaccountable. I have seen Elvis doctored to be slimmer, smoother, younger, more ‘conventionally’ attractive... It makes me uncomfortable to know that these instructions are being entered into a prompt to be churned out. Or, certainly, that AI takes its own liberties to change certain aspects of Elvis’s appearance, even when done so through innocent intentions, without suggestions by a person's prompt for these alterations. It erases so much of the human elements of Elvis, basing its creations on a generalised caricature. It grounds him in convention and dismisses his uniqueness, redefining standards as a consequence. The implications of AI images are that they redefine Elvis’s image to those who don't know better, and normalise an unknown amount of repercussions. What about when Elvis’s image is used against his best interest? Produced with ill-intentions, past the threshold of mere experimentation and entertainment by fans? I've seen AI-imagined images of Elvis’s final days, his struggles and even his death. I don't wish to imagine what else may be produced in the future.
I've also heard ‘AI covers’ of songs Elvis never recorded. I understand that content like this harbours no ill intent, and instead stems from a love for Elvis and an imagination for what could have been… but I can't help but cringe nonetheless! The thing is, Elvis always spun songs and made them his own. When you listen to studio recordings or live performances, you can hear Elvis. He made mistakes, laughed through and flubbed lyrics, coughed, started over, snuck in dirty adlibs, and so much more! His personality comes through in real recordings, pictures and footage alike. One of the most iconic Elvis-isms that comes to mind is the laughing version of ‘Are You Lonesome Tonight?’. This song charted in the UK and remains part of Elvis’s legacy and personality in our memories. This is something AI cannot replicate, predict or replace, nor indeed does it endanger. But why fix something that ain't broke? It floods the social feed, spreads inauthenticity, promotes and perpetuates an unearthly image of Elvis and is generally unappealing to see - not to mention what it does to the environment!
AI is taking over enough media, jobs and entertainment, and I don't want it to become something I inevitably become complicit in or produce merely because it is becoming increasingly wide-spread and normalised. Despite its popularity, it is not in-demand. You could argue it isn't going anywhere and it has its benefits - but this is not a blog on views on a wider conversation about the pros and cons of AI for the foreseeable. This is me attempting to conserve authentic history and art, as well as Elvis's own humanity along with his ‘image’. Call me an old-fashioned Luddite, but I like my garden variety, home grown Elvis!
It interested me to dive into this topic, additionally serving as a sort of journal entry of my thoughts at this point in time with hopes to look back at some point, as a 'window' into the 2020's when these things are still relatively new. Of course, this is all my opinion and is intended with no hatred or malice towards those who use AI in their content, as it truly doesn't affect Elvis’s staying power. He's lasted this long and remains relevant. This generated image craze, if anything, is proof of that. I believe he will ultimately outlast and endure as always. It's all love. But, if it is subjective, as most things are, I felt I would state my thoughts on this current trend anyway, in hopes of enabling a conversation based in awareness, open-mindedness and, above all, care for Elvis. TCB! - elvis in leather
Comments
Post a Comment