Discovered lately while ego-surfing that my work was mentioned in a scholarly journal, by a PhD candidate, Tace McNamara, from SensiLab (which sounds cool) at Monash University in Australia.

The article is entitled, “Artificial Intelligence and the Emergence of Co-Creativism in Contemporary Art” and you can see the info page there, and the PDF here.

From the intro, regarding the term Co-Creativism:

This era transcends the traditional confines of the art world, signifying a transition from a unidirectional model, where one entity produces and others consume, to a more dynamic, interactive, and collaborative model involving multiple contributors in the creation process.


Co-Creativism is defined by a symbiotic relationship between humans and AI, with both entities contributing to and shaping the creative process. The rise of human and AI co-creation is not only a new approach to artistic creation but stems from broader societal changes. AI technology is becoming an intrinsic part of our daily lives and the co-created art birthed from this period mirrors our
evolving dependency on AI technology.

Interesting direction! Here is the main passage where my early 2023 artist’s statement is referenced (I need to write a new one! I feel like my thinking has grown a lot since then on these things).

Blurred Reality and Fiction


In the realm of Co-Creativism, the distinction between what is real and what is fake is not just blurred – it is fundamentally questioned, deconstructed, and reassembled. In the artist statements themes such as questioning truth and the blurring boundaries of real and fake were evident. Artists also commonly referred to reality (Maat & Lancel 2018; Maurice, 2023), whether it be an uncertain reality (Denney 2023), alternative reality (Anadol 2019), recurring reality (Tö yrylä n.d.), dream reality (Kollias Interactive Composition 2023), hyperreality (Boucher 2023), a complex-layered reality (Suzuki n.d.) or a hyperconsensus reality (Boucher 2023). Artists also mentioned truth (Andrew 2020; Ouchhh 2022; Zhang & Luo 2019) and contrasted the real and the imagined (Rosenbaum 2023; Shpanin 2022; O’Donnell, n.d.). All these concepts grouped together to form a common questioning of reality and fiction which sees Co-Creativist artists as less concerned with adhering to a singular version of ‘truth’, and more involved in challenging and redefining it.

I’m happy to be included in that group, and have my work & intent referenced accurately for once. And later on, one other reference:

The recurrent theme of the future appeared to permeate contemporary artistic endeavours revealing an intrinsic desire to peer into the nebulous realms of the future, to predict and harness its possibilities. Artist referred to the speculation (Boucher 2023; Chung 2020, Geck 2023; Stern n.d.; Moreton-Griffiths 2023), whether dystopian or utopian. They spoke of envisioning (Anadol 2019; Dinkins 2020; Fagioli 2023), foreseeing (Lacey 2019; Denney 2023), and imagining possibilities (Andrew 2020; Hautamäki 2021; Moreton-Griffiths 2023) and the future (Bogart 2022; Chang 2018; Rosenbaum 2023; McCarthy 2022).


AI, in this context, becomes a prophetic lens, and a visionary tool that artists are using to bridge our present realities with imaginative possibilities.

Pretty cool stuff. Some other elements in this paper remind me of my recent interview in The Register, actually. Maybe hidden in there are the seeds of this year’s “Artist Statement.” Maybe I can issue it on goatskin vellum this year, with a wax stamp of some kind.