Rap Beef, Creativity, and Lessons in AI
The advent of artificial intelligence is undoubtedly one of the most significant technological advancements of this generation. We are likely on the verge of witnessing something akin to an AI revolution, which harbours equally fascinating and frightening implications for human society. One of the most controversial aspects of this revolution however, is its potential effect on the entertainment industry, and human creativity in general.
The usage of AI, or even just the fear of its usage, has been present in various forms throughout the recent (and possibly ongoing) feud between rappers Kendrick Lamar and Drake. This recent cultural phenomenon surprisingly offers dramatic insight into certain implications of living in a digital world. Namely, the implication that AI has begun to firmly penetrate both the creative arts, the public consciousness of those who experience said art.
Public paranoia
We can clearly see implications of how the current cultural zeitgeist is been shaped by the arrival of AI tools in creative contexts. Originally, one of the most well-known uses of AI in music were the many viral recreations of famous AI voices reciting pre-existing songs, or entirely new ones. Public figures such as Joe Biden, Donald Trump, and even fictional characters like SpongeBob SquarePants have had AI recreations of their voices used in popular memes that have been viewed and shared by millions of people. This development serves as one of the earliest examples of how quickly digital society has changed.
As of now, the usage of AI in creative media has become so well-known that when the aforementioned Kendrick Lamar-Drake feud was in its infancy, paranoia surrounding the potential use of AI was already present. When Drake’s first diss track towards Lamar (titled “Push Ups”) was leaked online, fans awaited official confirmation of the track’s legitimacy due to suspicions of it being AI-generated. This would not have been the first example of AI-generated Drake vocals breaking into the mainstream — the rapper himself publicly denounced artificial usage of his voice in a cover of the Ice Spice song “Munch”, which went viral on TikTok in 2023.
When Push Ups was officially released shortly after the leak, its authenticity was confirmed. However, seeing as hip-hop in particular is a genre that is particularly susceptible to leaks, with thousands upon thousands of unreleased tracks floating around online and regularly listened to by fans, this is one example of how significantly AI has changed a significant aspect of popular culture — for some, there is now an ever-present feeling of paranoia when experiencing new pieces of creative art.
Weaponised Voices
Following this, a particularly contentious example can be seen in the Drake song, “Taylor Made Freestyle”. The track, released officially on April 19th, 2024, was created as a response from Drake directly addressed to Kendrick Lamar. The main source of controversy with this specific track comes down to Drake’s use of AI-generated vocals from artists Snoop Dogg, and in particular, deceased rapper Tupac Shakur. Due to the similarities in cadence and writing style, it is widely believed that Drake originally performed the song himself, but used AI technology to filter his own voice to mimic that of his peers.
The use of Shakur’s voice to portray Drake’s own words and feelings led to extreme controversy. As of now, the song is still accessible via unofficial YouTube uploads, but was delisted from official streaming services following threats of litigation from Shakur’s personal estate, who described it as a “flagrant violation” of Shakur’s publicity and the estate’s legal rights”.
The major implication we can take from this is that in our current version of digital society, any person’s voice, living or dead, can initially be used in creative media through the use of AI. It is frankly unprecedented to be living in a time where long-dead artists can be convincingly resurrected with the use of artificial intelligence. It is likely that dramatic further development will occur, considering the likely enforcement of strict laws concerning the usage of other peoples’ likenesses.
The Origins of ‘BBL Drizzy’
In one of the most unusual, but not insignificant developments of this feud, prolific music producer Metro Boomin, who has also made no attempts to hide his disdain for Drake, released a instrumental beat known as “BBL DRIZZY BPM 150”, which quickly became known to most as simply “BBL Drizzy”. The beat takes contextual inspiration from rapper Rick Ross, who previously accused Drake of having fake ab surgery and a nose job, nicknaming him “BBL Drizzy” in his own diss track towards the rapper, and across social media.
Metro’s creation spread like wildfire, birthing responses from artists and content creators all over the globe and becoming a viral sensation. BBL Drizzy’s infectious instrumentation, catchy vocals and humorous nature have resulted in the rapper being dissed by everyone and everything under the sun — from rap responses in a variety of languages, to traditional Indian dance, to a guitar solo, or even a saxophone.
However, the origins of the track, despite harbouring significant implications for the future of digital music, are often overlooked. Seemingly, even Metro himself was unaware that the sample used in his beat was that of an AI-generated vocal track from comedian and self-proclaimed ‘AI storyteller’ Willonius Hatcher, also known as KingWillonius.
Hatcher defends his use of AI, claiming that it allowed him to create music at a significantly faster pace to capitalise on the heat of the moment, and that if he followed more traditional methods of finding singers, musicians and booking a studio, the moment would have passed beforehand. In an interview with the Washington Post, he proclaimed that AI “levels the playing field for creatives … it allows me to be a much better version of myself.”
This is an undeniable breakthrough for the usage of AI in popular creative media. Perhaps one of the most fascinating aspects of this is that, for all the anxiety and paranoia surrounding AI art, with ever-increasing concerns surrounding ethics, art theft, and even the possible replacement of human artists, this specific usage of AI often gets buried in the conversation. Many are seemingly unknowing of this usage of AI, and additionally, many don’t seem to care.
While the ethics and legality of AI usage in art is inherently murky, this specific example may just offer a peek into a digital society where AI-assisted art could allow for staggering developments in artist efficiency, and greatly simplify issues such as complications regarding rights management.
Personal reflection
This course, and the digital implications showcased in this feud, have certainly challenged my pre-existing notions surrounding the usage of AI in creative media.
As a digital artist, it has been challenging exploring these themes in an objective manner. The incredibly sudden, and extremely widespread use of AI in digital art and other creative mediums, has always brought forward feelings of defeat and hopelessness for myself. It is world-shattering to dedicate years of your life to a creative pursuit, only for artificial intelligence to seemingly surpass the efforts of myself and many other artists worldwide, and become rapidly normalised to the point where Google Images is now flooded with AI-generated art of many characters. It challenges the very notion of art itself, and to me, that is terrifying to experience.
I still harbour very strong beliefs that future measures must be taken to protect the rights of hardworking artists and other creatives, and mitigate art theft. My hope is that society can eventually reach a point where the use of AI in creative media — whether it be art, filmmaking, video games or music — can be not only ethical, but also completely transparent. I believe the consumer of any kind of creative media should be made aware of the existence of any AI-generated content they engage with, and therefore be given the choice of whether or not to engage with said media in the first place. AI has already surpassed heights most of us previously thought unimaginable in the blink of an eye. It is pretty much guaranteed that it will go further — a fact that I have come to accept. My issue here is purely a matter of integrity.
Nevertheless, this course, in educating me much further on the topic of AI, has allowed me to have a more objective, less nihilistic viewpoint on the manner. Due to this, I have started to come to terms with the fact that, despite my own feelings, this rapidly-changing digital society can actually harbour positive, and relatively ethical, benefits for artists (see Hatcher’s comments on artist efficiency). While this was, in my view, always an logical conclusion, I previously remained closed off to the idea, especially considering the initial lack of well-known examples that did not simply boil down to questionable use of pre-existing artworks. I would still prefer to maintain a sense of righteousness and claim that art created by something emotionless could never compare to man-made art — but realistically, AI has already progressed so significantly in such a mind-blowingly short amount of time, that I am starting to come to terms with any and all possibilities.
I would certainly say that this course has been unlike any other that I have taken throughout my degree, and has challenged some of my very deep-rooted biases and core beliefs.
