My first thought after reading both the negative and the positive is that I should stop writing reviews. In fact, recent conversations about AI have covered this effect, a general devaluation of any human endeavor that it touches. As for the criticism of your work, it reads more like an exercise in expository writing. In other words, start with the idea of cross hatching and run with it. What are all the negative things that can adhere to the idea of cross hatching? The positive one, as with the one on Michele, is full of what are essentially platitudes even if they appear to ring true and are completely merited. What I find really interesting is the initial response of an artist to a positive AI review. Jude Tallichet also sent me one over a year ago. My response was to feel seen and understood and appreciated, much like the accounts of the new phenomenon of humans in intimate relationships with AI. It took at least a couple of readings to realize that much of what was said in the review could have been said about other artists as well, and was essentially generic. Hence my use of the term platitudes. Ad
AI# 1: AI Review of Michele Araujo’s paintings à la New York Times’ Critics
AI #2: I Asked AI for a Negative Review of My Paintings (ouch!)
