Do you think the title nudged your reading, or would you still read it as AI without it?
I have a routine when visiting galleries. First I look at the artwork, try to see what it is, try to understand it, then i look at the title, which may change everything, or not. Here I would have never guessed that AI is involved.
That makes sense. Titles can tilt the mind a lot, so if you would not spot AI on your own, maybe the concept sits more in the framing than in the paint. After you knew, did any shapes or rhythms start to feel coded or network like, or did it still read as pure abstraction?
Reading the title didn't change anything for me, or should I say I didn't see why AI was thrown in and decided to ignore it. Does this make sense?
Yes, it makes sense. If the work doesn’t suggest AI on its own, the title won’t make it true, so ignoring it is fair. Did any detail later hint at AI like uncanny repeats or odd blends, or did both pieces feel purely handmade in spirit?