Why AI can benefit creators as an ally - but never replace them | Julian Ahlquist & Dominic de Souza
Two trained artists sit down to talk about where people misunderstand AI, and how creators could learn to use this tool. AI makes creativity more accessible to everyone—especially those who can’t afford to hire real artists. At Legend Fiction, we're building an open haven for creators to push our limits, using generative AI to amplify creativity—not replace it. We prioritize artists, and generative AI has its place.
Dominic de Souza, founder of LegendFiction, chats with Julian Ahlquist from Chesterton Academy, to talk about creators and AI. The most important part: we want open discussion on how to adapt with AI, not avoid it. And definitely not to put down people who's opinions differ from our own. See the LegendFiction statement on generative AI at https://legendfiction.com/ai
“LegendFiction might just be the first Catholic/Orthodox creative community of its kind. Writing is a vocation – it is co-creation with God. We prioritize real artists, and AI can be an excellent ally. We want open conversations and responsible use of Generative AI—as long as it helps your creativity, not replaces it.”
Julian’s ChurchPop Post | About Julian & Chesterton Academy
Founder’s Note
It's probably no surprise to legends in our community that I think AI tools and generative AI art can be great benefit - and helpful ally - to creators. We have all kinds of people in our community:
Those who enjoy using it
Those who are indifferent to it
Those who avoid it all together
All are welcome together. I think it's great that we can have a space where we can all work together on what's really important, which is sharing our passion and love for creating fiction together. Where we tolerate and accompany each other.
But there are some voices who go beyond avoiding it, but actively condemn anybody who uses it. That's where I have to draw the line for our community.
From day one of LegendFiction, I decided that I was not going to let any one tell me or anyone else what to do or how to think. I’m done with the naysayers in my life who hold back our ability to explore and tell the stories that feel important to us. Many of us believe that we're able to find good talking points and even God all across pop culture, and that includes fandoms like Harry Potter and Game of Thrones.
I've been actively following, watching, and using AI tools for the last two years, and and have carefully followed all of the arguments from both sides. I'm not convinced that creators should completely avoid this tool. I am definitely convinced that nobody should be dismissing another creator because they use this tool as an ally in their creative process.
That's why from today, LegendFiction and its supporting brands aims to create a haven for all sorts of creators, who use all sorts of tools.
What unites us is that we believe in our vocation as co-creators, and our love of fun and fandoms.
I understand that not all authors can agree. That's up to them.
I believe it's smart that we learn how to accompany each other even when we have differences of opinion, or even ethics. In LegendFiction, our code is simple: we intentionally choose to uplift each other, seek the good, and build friendships.
It is obvious to me that we follow the wisdom that we all strive for unity in essentials, liberty where there is doubt, and charity in all things.
I hope that this is an uplifting, moderate stance on this topic.
Cliff’s Notes from this Conversation with Julian (not comprehensive)
Most of the arguments I’ve seen trot out the same phrase: this thing threatens artists. Photography threatened artists and their livelihoods. Stock photography threatened artists. Outsourcing to the 3rd world threatened artists. CGI threatened artists. Now AI art threatens artists…
What if it’s not about you? What if it doesn’t threaten you, but gives the rest of us a (admittedly subpar) shot at visual communication?
For creatives and writers, it’s the equivalent of having an entire production studio in your pocket. I used to dream of starting a game studio and hiring hundreds of artists, to recreate the Star Wars ideation concept rooms filled with art. For most of us who make less than 6 figures, we can barely afford rent. But we can dream. And now generative art can help us share incredible things.
The Nature of Art and Creativity
(Tongue in Cheek here) Artists are Massive Thieves, who don’t compensate their sources, and rarely credit them. And That's Okay: Artists learn by absorbing and remixing existing styles and ideas, which is a natural part of the creative process. This tool does the same thing.
Generative Art and the Misconceptions Around It: Generative art is not theft but a tool for remixing and creating new, original works. It doesn’t store content and remix. It recreates from sources it’s trained on, like an artist.
Art as Commodity vs. Art as Iconography: Art serves different purposes—some art is commodified, while other forms function as iconography with deeper meaning. We can’t confuse serving or the muse vs serving the market.
The Plague of Mediocrity in Online Art Spaces: Platforms are flooded with subpar work, and it’s important to uphold high standards for art to maintain its integrity. I also hate the use of poorly produced creative art, and generative art. We’re seeing a rolling back to real art from those who can and should afford it. Illustrative AI is like stock photography; a tool to allow visual communication to the lower income sections of the economy.
I don't believe in supporting art or artists out of pity. Just as bad AI art doesn't deserve attention, neither do artists who haven't yet refined their craft. The market should reward skill and innovation, not mediocrity.
The Market and Art as a Commodity
The Market Doesn’t Owe Artists a Living: In a capitalist system, artists must find ways to commodify their work to succeed. They’re not a protected class - in the current system. I personally agree that some kind of creatives should be like the Poet Laureates or Martin Shaws of the world - but we don’t live in that world. You can’t have it both ways - anti/un Christian and benefiting from a vocational Christian culture. The harsh reality is that artists who fail to adapt or market themselves will struggle. Find a colony/community, make a patreon, and grow an audience like the rest of us, no matter what others do in bad faith.
Factory Line Illustration: The Reality of Commodifying Art: Successful commodification often leads artists to produce art like on a factory line, which can compromise true creativity. Don’t confuse them.
Tools Adapt and Amplify According to Demand: The evolution of art tools reflects market needs, just like stock photography, Canva, and now generative AI. I’m a print and web designer which is a new form of functional iconography. We all complained as a community, and moved on. All of us must adapt. Outside of a Christian vocation to the arts, no one has a leg to stand on to demand their market contribution. Today, we have rising inflation at the same time as a hyper educated populace. This means more and more intelligent people have things to say that call for art, and less money to pay for it. The market demand for ideas that require artistic expression outstrips any capacity for artists. Photographers, stock art, CGI, and generative AI are not competing with artists. They are serving market needs.
The Limits and Acceptance of Generative Art: Generative art has many limitations, like it’s a throw of the dice every time. It is always reductive, can only use what it was trained on. It is not teaching you the human skill of embodying a predictable, stylized language for communication. Understanding and accepting these flaws allows for better use of the tool.
Artists Became an Overnight Luxury Commodity now that image generation is available to the ordinary people.
Copyright in the First World is automatically applied on a created work, not a style. AI doesn’t have that protection, and we who use it know it. If we want real copyright, we have to do remix, edit, or get an artist to recreate it.
Good AI works like good CGI: it isn’t noticeable because it works. We hate it when we see it done badly. Bad CGI is a blight on storytelling - just like our glut of bad stock photography, and potentially good stories hamstrung by poor cover art.
The Role of Art in Everyday Life
The Value of Real Art in Every Home: Beautiful art should be accessible to everyone, even if it means using prints or commodified versions. The ideal is for actual, real art, not a print, to be available in everyone’s home, for contemplative purposes. Goethe was a big advocate, I think.
Devotional Art as a Unique Category: Devotional art is distinct due to its iconographic nature and the human touch required to create it, setting it apart from other art forms. Icons demand a level of excellence and competence, most importantly the actual human touch as the medium itself.
What could all this fiasco lead to? What do we see as the future with all this?
Whenever factories roll in and replace creators, the market adapts, but then a new generation hungers to a return for authentic experiences and reality. We’re seeing that right now.
Generative AI will run its course, systems will continue to label it, and AI will get better at weeding out trolls, bots, and bad faith actors.
More underpaid overworked CGI is no longer the answer, but better stories, and more compelling visuals - that revive realworld creativity.
See my post from last year with video resources:
