Curatorial statement
We are, quite reasonably, afraid. Afraid of what AI and robotics might do to our work, our privacy, our sense of what's real. And so it feels natural to draw a line: to say that art, at least, should stay human, untouched by the machine. But that line is harder to hold than it looks. Artists have always worked with tools, rules and machines. What if using AI isn't a betrayal of that tradition, but the latest chapter in it?
Think about how images have always been made. A pinhole camera has no lens to adjust. Its picture is decided by a fixed opening, the length of the exposure, and the plain physics of light travelling in a straight line. A print is built through a sequence of rules: lining everything up, the order in which colours are laid down, what gets covered and what gets exposed. This exhibition places these hands-on, analogue processes right next to work made with AI, and asks: what is actually new about an artist setting rules for a machine, when artists have always worked inside rules of one kind or another?
Perhaps what's new isn't the rules. It's the intent behind them. Advertising uses rules and algorithms too, but toward a single end: to sell. Art is different, not because it avoids systems, but because of what it does with them. It explores where advertising must resolve into an answer. The constraint becomes a way of asking a question rather than delivering a message, drawing on the maker's inner life to express what other media cannot.
So, can AI take over the creative spirit? No single answer is offered here. Move between the pinhole images, the prints and the AI-driven works, and look for where each artist has handed over control, and where they have taken it back. Stay with a work long enough to find its rule, and the show becomes less a demonstration of what AI can do than a set of questions about what it means to make something, with any tool, old or new.
Anne Scott Wilson
