{"id":21382,"date":"2026-06-17T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-06-17T11:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/?p=21382"},"modified":"2026-06-17T10:54:13","modified_gmt":"2026-06-17T09:54:13","slug":"the-human-soul-cannot-be-generated-why-there-is-still-hope-for-the-creative-industries","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/the-human-soul-cannot-be-generated-why-there-is-still-hope-for-the-creative-industries\/","title":{"rendered":"The human soul cannot be generated: why there is still hope for the creative industries"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

86%<\/a>. <\/strong>That, according to Adobe, is the percentage of creators that are currently using creative generative AI in their projects. Take \u2018AI Cinema\u2019, a TikTok account that produces AI generated fruit-themed Love Island videos (AI generated videos depicting fictional characters based on various fruits as Love Island contestants), or Fortnite<\/strong><\/a>, which is now making skins based on AI generated characters (Tung Tung Tung Sahur and Ballerina Cuppacina, to name two) and putting them in the game for their players to buy. Are we currently witnessing the slow and brutal death of the creative industries? Does the average consumer believe that the ends justify the means? When I graduate will I look at my degree in Creative Writing as 3 years wasted? Despite the signs screaming that it may already be over, I believe there\u2019s never been a more appropriate time to have hope.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Image description: Screenshot of a TikTok account called “AI Cinema”. It has 3 million followers.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

WHAT IS GENERATIVE AI AND WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR ART <\/h3>\n\n\n\n

First, we\u00a0need to understand what\u00a0generative AI (GenAI)\u00a0is and how it generates art. Generative AI is given data and trained using the patterns it finds within it. It then mimics those patterns to create \u2018new\u2019 art. For example, let\u2019s say some of Pablo\u00a0Picasso\u2019s\u00a0work was fed into an AI model. The AI would take notice of the abstract shapes and the intense use of colour and attempt to make something similar.\u00a0This obviously raises ethical concerns,\u00a0as the art fed as data into the AI models\u00a0is\u00a0not given consensually by its human creators; instead, the companies running the models steal the art\u00a0to\u00a0put through this training module so\u00a0GenAI can continue\u00a0to create\u00a0what the internet has coined as \u2018slop.\u2019\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Steps are being taken to\u00a0counteract this.\u00a0After initially\u00a0training its own AI model on its users work without their permission,\u00a0DeviantArt\u00a0created\u00a0an\u00a0\u2018opt-in\u2019\u00a0service, where artists using their site have to manually choose to allow their art to be used to train AI, otherwise\u00a0their account will be in an \u2018opt-out\u2019 status by default.\u00a0Licensing\u00a0agreements are also being created that allows artists\u00a0to be compensated financially when their artwork contributes to a piece generated by AI.\u00a0In addition to this, there is\u00a0GLAZE<\/strong><\/a>, which is a software that applies a layer of pixels\u00a0over the top of images. While these pixels can barely be seen by the human eye, they\u00a0manipulate AI models into seeing\u00a0these images in\u00a0a different style in comparison to how they appear to humans.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Obviously, these aren\u2019t perfect solutions, nor do they solve another big issue with generative AI:\u00a0the environmental impact.\u00a0Generating even one image can use an amount of\u00a0energy equivalent to charging your phone\u00a0battery\u00a0halfway,\u00a0and some of the most carbon-intensive models\u00a0can produce an amount of carbon equivalent to\u00a0what the average car would produce over the course of\u00a04.1\u00a0miles<\/strong><\/a>.\u00a0Then there\u2019s the data centres.\u00a0A new data planned to be built at a former coal power plant in\u00a0Northumberland, UK<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>is expected to emit more than 180,000\u00a0tons of\u00a0CO2 a year. That\u2019s the equivalent of 24,000 homes.\u00a0These data centres\u00a0also produce unnatural amounts of\u00a0e-waste<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>which contain harmful chemicals such as mercury and lead. This leads to the contamination of water and\u00a0soil, directly affecting our agriculture.\u00a0We shouldn\u2019t move away from generative AI solely\u00a0for the arts. We cannot continue to create art if the home continues to die\u00a0due to the profit-led ambitions of a few.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But I told you at the beginning that there is hope. Well, here\u2019s why. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

THINGS ARE SLOWLY CHANGING <\/h3>\n\n\n\n

You may\u00a0(or may not) have seen the recent news that OpenAI has decided to shut down\u00a0Sora, its AI video making platform.\u00a0You also may (or may not) have\u00a0also\u00a0seen that\u00a0Disney<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>subsequently decided to exit it\u2019s deal\u00a0with OpenAI. Disney had\u00a0initially agreed\u00a0to invest $1 billion into the company, even agreeing to give\u00a0them licence to use some of their own characters in\u00a0Sora.\u00a0While this doesn\u2019t necessarily mean the end of GenAI, it is a massive\u00a0victory nonetheless.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The growing public perception of GenAI is a negative one, and companies are starting to realise and capitalise on it. Major companies like Lego and Porsche are going out of their way to make it clear to their customers that no AI is being used to create their adverts. It\u2019s a recent trend that we are seeing amongst these corporations: being anti-AI is now becoming a selling point and without going into a rant on the amoral nature of capitalism, it does further back my point: YOUR opinion, PUBLIC opinion, does matter. It is true that at the end of the day, massive corporations like Disney, Warner Brothers, Netflix etc. just want to make a profit. But they know that if people don\u2019t want to see their films and don\u2019t want to pay their subscriptions, they won\u2019t make any money at all.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Image Description: Screenshot of a TikTok from the official LEGO account. The caption includes “#HonestlyIt’sNotAI”<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Back in November 2025,\u00a0Forbes<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0reported that OpenAI could be spending as much as $15 million a day (roughly \u00a311 million) on Sora and\u00a0its\u00a0AI video generation. According to the\u00a0BBC<\/strong><\/a>, OpenAI failed to \u2018prevent the creation of the creation on non-consensual media.\u2019 Plus, there is also the fear of copyright infringement. Disney may have been willing to partner up with them initially but that doesn\u2019t mean that every film studio wants in on AI.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

WHAT IS THE INDUSTRY SAYING <\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In the end credits of\u00a0The Bad Guys 2\u00a0<\/em>(2025),\u00a0DreamWorks<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>included a warning, deterring anyone from using the film to train\u00a0their AI models. It states: \u2018All rights in this work are\u00a0reserved for purposes of laws in all jurisdictions pertaining to data mining or AI training, including but not limited\u00a0to article 4(3) of directive (EU) 2019\/790. This work may not be used to train AI.\u2019 They included a similar message in the end credits of\u00a0How\u00a0to\u00a0Train Your Dragon\u00a0<\/em>(2025)\u00a0while A24 included a \u2018No Generative AI was used in the making of this film\u2019\u00a0message in the end credits for\u00a0Heretic\u00a0<\/em>(2024)\u00a0making their stance on AI very clear.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"<\/a>
Image Description: A photo of the end credits of Heretic (2024), taken by Reddit user visionaryredditor. The photo has a red circle added around the text “No Generative AI was used in the making of this film.”<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Larian Studios<\/strong><\/a>, creator\u00a0of the 2023 Game Awards\u00a0\u2018Game of the Year\u2019 winner\u00a0Baldur\u2019s Gate 3<\/em>, recently announced that\u00a0it will no longer use GenAI for concept\u00a0art nor will it use it for in-game assets.\u00a010,000 writers, including\u00a0the likes of Phillippa Greogory and Kazuo Ishiguro,\u00a0recently published a book ahead of the\u00a02026 London Book Fair titled\u00a0Don\u2019t Steal This Book<\/strong><\/em><\/a>\u00a0<\/em>in protest of their work being stolen by AI companies and being used to train their\u00a0AI models.\u00a0The\u00a0books only contents\u00a0are\u00a0the name of all the contributors, highlighting their stance against GenAI.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The big players in the creative industries are starting to take a stance. We are far away from seeing a future where no generative AI is used as the cheapness of GenAI makes it too tempting for some studios to look away, yet they are also aware of how the public perceives them and how that could affect their bottom line. In a capitalistic society such as ours, the best way to voice our opinions will always be with our wallets and the film studios and publishers are all too aware of this. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

LIVE BY AI, DIE BY AI  <\/h3>\n\n\n\n

And they are aware of this. Do not for a second believe that public outrage cannot make a difference because those who believe they can cut corners or play both sides have realised that they were mistaken. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Big Five\u2019 publisher Hachette recently cancelled the release of US author Mia Ballard\u2019s horror book\u00a0Shy Girl<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>as concerns were raised that AI was used to write it. This became the first case of a major publisher cancelling as well as\u00a0discontinuing\u00a0a new book due to the use of generative AI.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Image Description: the cover of Shy Girl by Mia Ballard, which was allegedly designed with generative AI, and included generated text within the novel.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

NaNoWriMo<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0(also known as National Novel Writing Month)\u00a0was\u00a0a\u00a0creative\u00a0writing challenge\u00a0that took place every November\u00a0tasking its users to write a\u00a050,000-word\u00a0draft by the end of the month.\u00a0Back in 2024 it proceeded to shock\u00a0its\u00a0users\u00a0regarding its stance on AI, saying that\u00a0the condemnation of AI had \u2018classist and ableist undertones.\u2019\u00a0This sparked outrage amongst the writing community, leading to four members of their\u00a0writer\u2019s\u00a0board stepping down\u00a0and the withdrawal of sponsorship deals such as Ellipsus, a google doc alternative that had made it\u2019<\/s>s anti-AI stance very clear.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The music industry has also been affected. Back in 2023\u00a0Spotify removed\u00a0thousands\u00a0of songs\u00a0\u2018produced\u2019 by Boomy<\/strong><\/a>, a\u00a0music creation platform that allowed users\u00a0to AI generate songs in minutes, upload them to the likes of Apple Music and Spotify while also\u00a0generating royalty payments.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This doesn\u2019t mean that Spotify are innocent themselves.\u00a0The band\u00a0Massive Attack<\/a>\u00a0<\/strong>became the first major-label act to remove their music from Spotify\u00a0as an act of\u00a0protest\u00a0towards\u00a0Spotify CEO Daniel EK\u2019s increased investment in AI\u00a0military company Helsing.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is also the story of\u00a0Jason M. Allen<\/strong><\/a>,\u00a0an artist whose work won first place at a\u00a0fine arts competition in 2022. He created his work using a combination of\u00a0Photoshop and GenAI services such as Midjourney and Gigapixel, generating hundreds of images before editing and\u00a0polishing them into the final piece.\u00a0While he did declare he had used AI before submitting his piece, the judges were not aware of this. After his win,\u00a0Mr. Allen decided to submit a copyright application for his piece,\u00a0but his claim was swiftly rejected\u00a0due to the use of AI. He has since gone on to sue the US Copyright Office, claiming that\u00a0he has lost millions of dollars due to people\u00a0\u2018stealing\u2019 his\u00a0work.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CREATIVITY IS THE RESIDUE OF TIME WASTED<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

There was a recent TikTok trend in\u00a0which an artist would drink a cup or bottle of water before\u00a0showing off their art as\u00a0a\u00a0way to make fun of generative AI and put that water to good use.\u00a0\u2018Feed water to artists,\u00a0not AI.\u2019\u00a0Moments like that\u00a0is what keeps me hopeful.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"\"
Image Description: Screenshot of a TikTok search page of the water drinking meme.<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

I believe that art is the result of the accumulation of one\u2019s personal experiences. Whatever you have created, whether that be a book or a short story, a film or a YouTube video, a painting or even a simple doodle in your notebook while your lecture drives you insane, it is an expression of everything you\u2019ve been through. The good and the bad. This is why AI cannot replace, nor can it adequately replicate, human expression. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI can\u2019t experience anything. It can\u2019t experience pain, or happiness, or disappointment. Most important of all, AI cannot experience boredom. Boredom is the catalyst in which artistic expression is born. When you ask AI to generate an image or a story all it can do is copy certain aspects from the various pieces its model had been fed. But it doesn\u2019t understand the why<\/em>. Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein<\/em> as a way to express her grief. Van Gogh\u2019s Starry Night<\/em> reflects his own mental health struggles. While I am not saying that one must experience trauma to create art, I am saying that you have to experience something. AI can\u2019t do that. And that\u2019s why I still feel hope despite everything. Humans will always have experiences. Moments in our lives that shape the very foundations of our souls and influence the decisions we make every day. It is what makes us human, and there is not a single AI model in the entire world that can replicate that. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

So do not be afraid to pick up a pen, a pencil, to log into WriterDuet, to record that video, to upload that song or to make that game. Your experiences have shaped your art. Your art is your soul. And your soul cannot be generated. <\/p>\n\n\n\n


<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By James Olalusi, second year Creative and Professional Writing student<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

86%. That, according to Adobe, is the percentage of creators that are currently using creative generative AI in their projects. Take \u2018AI Cinema\u2019, a TikTok account that produces AI generated […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":331329,"featured_media":21386,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[66],"tags":[4562,4566,334,366,2777,4622,4618,1942,2014],"class_list":["post-21382","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-sustainability-engagement","tag-ai","tag-artificial-intelligence","tag-canterbury-christ-church-university","tag-cccusustainability","tag-creative","tag-creative-industry","tag-generative-ai","tag-student-blogger","tag-sustainability"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"authorName":"Bethany Climpson","featuredImage":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/669\/2026\/06\/generated.jpg","postExcerpt":"86%. That, according to Adobe, is the percentage of creators that are currently using creative generative AI in their projects. Take \u2018AI Cinema\u2019, a TikTok account that produces AI generated […]","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21382","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/331329"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21382"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21382\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21422,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21382\/revisions\/21422"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/21386"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21382"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21382"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.canterbury.ac.uk\/sustainability\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21382"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}