Creativity & Technological Evolution
from the the-creativity-survived dept
This series of posts explores how we can rethink the intersection of AI, creativity, and policy. From examining outdated regulatory metaphors to questioning copyright norms and highlighting the risks of stifling innovation, each post addresses a different piece of the AI puzzle. Together, they advocate for a more balanced, forward-thinking approach that acknowledges the potential of technological evolution while safeguarding the rights of creators and ensuring AI’s development serves the broader interests of society. You can read the first post in the series here.
Let me show my age here—does anyone remember the movie Fame?
There’s a scene where Bruno Martelli, a confident student, declares, “Violins are on the way out, you don’t need strings today.” He insists that with “a keyboard and some oscillators,” orchestras have become obsolete. The teacher’s response is simple yet powerful: “The music survived.”
This scene perfectly captures a recurring theme in the history of creativity. Every time a new technology comes along, people predict the end of traditional art forms. Yet, time and again, creativity not only survives—it thrives.
Technology: A Tool for Growth, Not a Threat
Take the Gutenberg Press. When it was invented, many feared that the painstaking art of manuscript copying by monks would vanish forever. And yes, the printing press transformed how books were produced, but it didn’t destroy writing or creativity. Instead, it democratised knowledge, making literature accessible to a broader audience and sparking an explosion of new ideas and artistic expression.
Or consider photography. When the camera was invented, people thought painters were doomed. Why spend hours painting when a camera could capture the same moment in an instant? But painting didn’t vanish. Instead, it evolved—movements like Impressionism and Cubism flourished, as artists found new ways to express themselves beyond mere replication of reality.
Film didn’t kill theatre, and electric guitars didn’t kill acoustic ones. These technologies expanded the toolkit available to creators, offering new ways to explore their craft. In fact, new technologies have even created entirely new art forms. Just look at the video games industry—within fifteen years of its inception, it surpassed the century-old film industry in value, creating fresh opportunities for storytelling, artistry, and engagement.
AI: Expanding the Boundaries of Creativity
The same holds true for AI. Just like violins didn’t disappear when synthesizers came along, AI won’t replace human creativity. It will push boundaries, open up new possibilities, and allow artists and innovators to do things we couldn’t have imagined even a decade ago. But the essence of creativity—the spark of human imagination—remains indispensable.
Instead of fearing AI, we should embrace it as the latest in a long line of tools that expand human potential. AI will help creative industries thrive by providing new ways to create, innovate, and engage audiences. But the true magic—the core of creativity—will always come from the human mind.
The Music Will Play On
The lesson here is simple: creativity will survive. It always has. Every time a new tool, technology, or innovation emerges, there’s a tendency to think it spells the end for what came before. But history tells a different story—one of adaptation, evolution, and growth.
And as always, the creative industries will continue to thrive, building on the spark of human ingenuity.
Caroline De Cock is a communications and policy expert, author, and entrepreneur. She serves as Managing Director of N-square Consulting and Square-up Agency, and Head of Research at Information Labs. Caroline specializes in digital rights, policy advocacy, and strategic innovation, driven by her commitment to fostering global connectivity and positive change.
Filed Under: ai, creativity, creativity and ai, culture, instruments, llms, tools




Comments on “Creativity & Technological Evolution ”
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Reminder that the author is a lobbyist, since neither BestNetTech nor the author seem to feel the need to disclose that directly. Take the article with the appropriate grain of salt.
Re:
That’s what the entire closing paragraph says.
Re: Re:
It doesn’t actually say lobbying anywhere. Euphemistically, sure, you can figure it out if you read between the lines (or google it), but you really shouldn’t have to.
And it worked to some degree, because you had at least one person arguing she wasn’t one in the previous post.
Pointing to BestNetTech’s “The Sky Is Rising” is disingenuous. It points to raw money in those industries and doesn’t ackowledge how all that cash keeps funneling to the top. The games section ignored the record layoffs in the industry, for one.
Re:
That’s what happens in all industries. Ju
Re: Re:
Ugh. I hate touch screens.
That sentence was supposed to read: just look at the history of the music and movie industries for every lesson you could need about how to screw over the small players and keep the money at the top.
Re: Re: Re:
You forgot the word “entire” between the words “the” and “history”. Other than that, a very accurate assessment.
Re: Re: Re:
“That’s what happens in all industries…”
Just because the status quo is to screw over the small players doesnt mean it’s okay to do so. Things always being a certain way don’t necessarily make that way correct or more efficient. We need consumer protections in this country, starting with our data. These companies have responsibilities towards the public, and I wish Congress would just nut up and hold them accountable.
Re: Re: Re:
You and me both. Never found one that can see my fingers. It stands as my go-to example of an “innovation”, the mass adoption of which has actively made my life harder.
I hadn’t seen any of these facts outlined like this before, but I must have somehow instinctively known them already because I’m the only published author I know of who hasn’t automatically lashed out at AI and insisted its users and operators are committing copyright infringement simply because LLMs may have been trained on my works.
Re:
You’re not the only one. There are dozens of us!
Likely more, but we don’t make headlines. Melodramatic frothing at the mouth gets attention.
AI
Since the author is herself an entrepreneur, and understands that new technologies often replace older technologies, perhaps she can offer her insights into educating and training next generations to not only use but find employment with new technologies and create the next generation of ideas and tools. Synthesizers, for example, did not replace violins, but there are fewer orchestras and fewer opportunities for violinists to find employment.
Schools today are not teaching arts and music which lights up various parts of the brain that enhance mathematical thinking. Students aren’t allowed to read certain great literature for fear they will be exposed to ideas, which then prevents them from learning how to critique ideas. They don’t learn logic and other critical thinking skills that would allow them to evaluate future technologies and improve upon them. And they certainly aren’t sufficiently exposed to philosophy writers who might help them understand the moral and ethical implications of future technologies.
In fact, many of us would be far more comfortable with AI if it had not been shown to be so easily capable of lying. For many of us, the fear is that humans will be misled by AI because ethics and morality have not been built into it, and there is no oversight to ensure such rudimentary building blocks are built into AI to ensure it serves humans, not humans serving AI.