The Art of Deep Fake

Art is dangerous.

My thesis in creating this blog has been and will continue to be that art - all art everwhere and at all times - is dangerous.  It can and has been used to deceive people.  It has been used to communicate occult (in the strict sense of the word) messages.  It has and continues to be used to educate and illuminate complex ideas and concepts in a concise, distilled format.

In short, art is dangerous.

Over the past few years, we have been increasingly warned about AI "art" and real-time enhanced video and audio that create entirely unreal people, places and things in a way that looks entire real and believable.

A recent example is the story that Donald Trump, US president, retweeted a "deep fake" video of Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives, and that this video did not represent reality.

In fact, the video was no more fake than any video you would see on the evening news.  It took an actual recording of the Speaker and compressed it via editing to selected highlights.  There were no other enhancements or alterations.  It was no different than watching a highlight reel of a sporting event.  Is the video fake?  Yes and no is the appropraite answer.

If you have ever watched the evening news at any point in your life, and you are of any demographic group, then you have never seen anything but fake news and fake video.  This may seem like an outrageous claim, but hear me out.

All news operations are businesses of one kind or another.  As such, each company has its own agenda and point of view.  That agenda is communicated to management, whose job it is to execute the executive directive.

The managers in turn hire on-camera talent and technicians who most closely adhere to management's concept of how things should operate.  Management selects which stories will be covered and by whom.  Managmeent selects which point of view will be communicated through its news output, based on its interpretation of executive mandates.  This affects the entire content of the operation's workflow.

The executives may mandate a desire to show the decay of urban life.  Management interprets this as outputting content with a primary focus on crime and police.  Management hires reporters that are good at stories of this kind, and camera operators that are fearless and willing to get provacative images of crimal activity and its results.

The field producer/reporter is sent to the scene of a story, where he or she evaluates the event and decides how best to tell the story in words and pictures that will match management's directives and expectations.  The camera operator is told what to shoot and from what angles, and may have input that he hopes will enhance the narrative.

Back at the studio, an editor - also selected by management for good fit with the corporate environment - takes the footage and reporter's narration, and usually sitting with the reporter in the edit bay, will assemble the story to best match the corporate ideology, management's directives and the producer/reporter's knowledge and instincts on what makes a good story and presents them in the best possible light to enhance their career options.

The final product no more represents reality than any of the most egrigious "fake news" videos you've ever seen or heard of.  It's ALL fake.

Art may depict reality, it may communicate truth, but it is not reality, and in that sense it is fake.  From the moment a human created pigments and began painting images, reality was edited and enhanced.  From the moment Thespis assumed a role and a character, the art of faking imaginary people - called acting - was created.  Magicians have been creating fake reality for millennia, of course.  When a woman applies make-up for an evening out, she is creating a fake image of herself.

All art has a basis in reality, starts with reality, but then edits, enhances and manipulates it to project an idea or concept that is important to the artist who creates it.  The work of art itself is real - real canvas, real paint - but the content is not, never has been and never will be.

Those selfies on your smartphone?  All fake.  They representations of real events, people and places, but they are from a single perspective and do not represent objective reality.  If you take the image into an editing app and clean up your wrinkles, enhance the colors a bit, and crop out unnecessary parts of the frame, then you have taken the image even further from reality and into the realm of "deep fake".

In the current era, we are creating new and mind-bending tools to edit, enhance and process reality, but the idea of "fake news" and "fake video" is nothing new.  It is the very nature of art.

When Robert De Niro took on the role of Al Capone in the great film The Untouchables, were you fooled into thinking he WAS Al Capone?  Or were you cognizant of the fact that it was an actor portraying a character based on a real person, but that character has been modified by history, the studio executives, the writer, the director and the actor to suit the task of telling a compelling and entertaining story.  No one thought he was Al Capone, only that he was portraying the real person.  In other words, a fake.

Claude Monet created the Impressionist movement in paiting, not because he depicted reality in his works, but because he recorded the way his failing eyesight saw the world around him.  From an objective standpoint, his painting are fake.  They do not represent a true depiction of the objective world, but rather the way he saw it.  That the paintings are fake does not lessen our enjoyment of them, and perhaps we can gleen some element of objective truth from them, but they are fake, nonetheless.

Anyone who views a work of art or a recording of an event and thinks it is real is deceiving themselves, or at best allowing themselves to be deceived.

Back to the Nancy Pelosi video.  It is fake because it is recorded.  It is not happening now in objective reality.  It happened in the past and is recorded from a certain point of view.  We have no idea whether she is in a crowded room full of reporters and camera operators, or whether she is in an empty studio in front of a green screen.

(Note: apparently YouTube doesn't allow embedding now, so click the LINK HERE)

LINK HERE

<iframe width="659" height="371" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EOQG1D7oa-A" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

After watching the entire recording, we can see the that edited video did not "doctor" the recording, but simply compressed certain parts of it into a "highlight" reel.  It is no more doctored than any video on the nightly news.  It is no more edited than any video on the nightly news.  It is no more fake than any video on the nightly news.

What it does show us, judging the the outrage and panic from some quarters, is that art is dangerous.  By taking reality, and editing, enhancing and manipulating it, we can communicate certain truth even while presenting fake images.

This is nothing new.  The 1964 Lyndon Johnson Daisy ad shows us that art in the service of politics has been shocking and disgusting the masses for generations.

LINK HERE

<iframe width="610" height="448" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dDTBnsqxZ3k" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

We must realize that all art is dangerous.  The act of recording something immediately removes it from reality - it is not happening in the reality of Now.  Once the recording is edited, enhanced and modified, it is further removed from objective reality.  By any measure, recording then changing the recording is by definition creating a "fake".  It may be communicating a truth, but it is not true.

From the first etchings on a cave wall, to Thespis stepping out from the chorus, to Monet's failing eyesight, to Danish cartoons, to Pelosi videos, art has always been mystical and powerful and has changed history.  It is dangerous and changes the path of history.  It brings the powerful down and elevates the mundane.  Whether it is created by the hand of Man, or a machine programmed by a man, art will continue to provoke.

Art is dangerous.

Venus Of The Fields

Venus of Willendorf

One of the oldest, generally accepted works of art is the Venus of Willendorf.  It is estimated to be around 30,000 years old, and was found in southern Austria in 1908.  The small statue (about 11cm/4.5 inches) features a corpulent human female form, with large breasts and a curious feature of knotted hair that completely covers the head.

This design is similar to a whole classification of statuettes called Venuses that date from the same period.  Though there are many variations on the theme, they universally feature the plumb body type, large breasts, and a great number have the knotted hair feature.  The hands are typically folded over the top of the breasts and few examples have actual feet - most end in unfinished stumps, which suggests part of the design rather than missing parts.

From an art stand-point, we note the use of the female form, bilateral symmetry, and a pose that is shared by many similar examples.  The arms and legs are symmetrical through the center axis, so there is no attempt to portray motion, though the very nature of the piece implies three dimension.  This is not carved or painted on a flat piece of rock or wood, but rather a fully 3-D representation of the figure.

The knotted hair completely covering the head is another curious feature.  The fact that the same design is featured on other pieces means that this has a specific meaning.  From the detail in the breasts, the navel, the hair, and the hands, it is not for lack of ability to represent fine features.  We must therefore assume that the artist wanted the figure to be anonymous.  She does not represent any particular woman, but rather a Universal Woman - a concept not a real person.  Without an identifiable face, we are obviously meant to focus on the figure's body and not its identity.  In other words, it is not important who she is, but what she is.

Venus of Hohlefels

This is art's oldest primary function - to represent Universal Ideals.  Even in its oldest examples, humans use art to express ideals rather than one's self.  It is meant to expand the mind into shared concepts, aspirations and our innate quest for perfection.  In fact, one of the most powerful underlying motivations to create art is the concept of "hope".  We'll come back to this in a moment.

Due to the ubiquitous of the female form in these early figurines, it might also be inferred that it is males who are behind the primary impulse to create art.  Until the past few decades, when "equality" became more important than message and technique, men have dominated art since earliest times.  No matter which culture or era one examines, males are the primary progenitors of all forms of art, be it painting, sculpture, music, literature, or architecture.  Speculation on why runs the gammut of speculation, but some of the more common themes are:

• Males have more time for art, since females tend to domestic chores;
• Males desire to participate in the creative process, and since they can't bear children, they create art;
• Males are primarily tasked with attracting mates, and art is a way of displaying one's talents and intelligence, thus increasing one's value as a mate;
• In traditional gender roles, males are more concerned with conceptual thinking, while females are more mundane
• Males simply think differently than females and art is an expression of that difference.

Halaf Venus

Whatever the reasons behind this phenomenon, it is none-the-less true.  Any survey in any culture of the most valued artists and designers will create a list overwhelmingly slanted towards males.  Every rule has exceptions, no doubt, but there is no ambiguity in this conclusion.

Given this fact, we return to the Venus figures.  That the subject is a female form should not surprise us, then.  A male artist would be preoccupied with the female form and would tend to idealize it in conceptual ways.  This leads to the question of why so many of these types of figures?  What did this particular design mean to those who created them?

The female form is one of the most manipulated ideals in human history - and prehistory.  That artists are predominantly male might suggest these Venus figurines are an ancient form of pornography, but that over-simplifies things too much. 

Art concerns itself with ideals, universal truths and higher aspirations.  Given this impulse, we speculate that corpulent female forms would likely represent the broad concept of fertility, rather than the baser act of sex.  A fat female would be a luxury, implying copious amounts of food and a relaxed lifestyle.  The large breasts imply ample milk for children.  Thus, we conclude that the figures represent an ideal living situation - fertility, copious food, relaxed life - and thus, happiness and contentment.

That the Venus figures represent a Universal Ideal is demonstrated by the lack of a face, and in some cases created without a head at all.  Without a face, the figure does not represent any one individual, but rather a concept or ideal.  She is not a wife or mate, but the desire for a particular idealized lifestyle that is exemplified by the sum of features in the figures.

Having determined the style and meaning behind these figurines, we are lead to the question, "Why make these figures?"

Virgin Mary statues

For the answer, we need look no further than modern - though very old - rituals.  In Catholic-dominated countries, there is a ritual where a consecrated figurine of the Virgin Mary is placed (buried or placed on a pedestal) in the corner of a field before planting.  In other parts of the world, similar rituals are performed with different female figures, but always a female.  In older parts of Europe, digging in the corners of fields can often reveal dozens of these figures placed there over centuries.

It is reasonable to link this modern ritual to ancient ones involving Venus figurines.  Thought the ages of these figures is roughly double the generally accepted advent of agriculture, I submit that these figures demonstrate a much earlier use of agriculture, and that they are an integral part of rituals to invoke fertility and plenty.  In fact, the missingfeet and somewhat pointed legs tell me that these figures were stabbed into the corner of a field to impart blessings on the harvest, much like the Virgin Mary does in the modern ceremony.

In conclusion, we see that art, even in its oldest manifestations, express positive ideals, in this case fertility and luxurious lifestyles centered around food supplies.  The lack of individuation (a face) implies a universal ideal and not any one person.  The large breasts imply an ample supply of nutrition and the hands placed above the breasts seem to be expressing milk.  The lack of feet and pointed ends of the legs tells us that this element of the design was to facilitate stabbing the figurines into the ground, probably in the corners of fields.  We see this ritual echoed even today, with the placement of similar Virgin Mary statues in fields during spring rituals.

The Birth of Venus, Boticelli (1484)

From the earliest manifestations, art provided a symbolic and idealized message.  It represented the aspirations of the humans that created it and focused on positive messages.  This will become more apparent as art evolves into expressions of divine ideals and heroic exploits.  Art has always been meant to uplife and ennoble.  It's message has always been one of hope and desire for greater things.  It has always had symbolic elements that communication ideals, rather than reality.  In fact, the concepts of nihilism and reality are anathema to art.  These latter themes will become important when we reach the 20th century and "modern art" and cinema.

On a more mundane level, we see the impulse to represent three dimensions, either through scupture, or later through the use of pigment.  We see symmmetry and balance, though on a less developed state - mirrored features.  Even at this early stage, we see the use of line to focus attention - in this case on the breasts.  Without a face, we move on to the body.  The arms and hands are drawn in to the center of focus.  The extended belly provides and stylistic balance to the large breasts, with the navel echoing the nipples.  The legs and lack of feet mean that these features were unimportant, or had a strictly functional purpose, sich as stabbing into the ground in an upright position.

Art first lesson in Art is that humans today are little changed from humans thousands of years ago.  Our hopes, desires and aspirations, though changed in focus, are identical in form.  The Human Experience transcends time and space and is memorialized and communicated across millennia in our art.