Authenticity using digital tools
I was recently discussing ideas around authenticity and the digital with a friend, and posed the question, "Does authenticity always involve the analogue, or can you also be authentic using digital means?"
There is an increasing distrust of the immateriality of the digital environment - and rightly so. There's so much AI slop around, with its various hallucinations and trickery, regurgitating and re-feeding information like some demented Ourobos. It's hard to figure out if what you're hearing and seeing from your device is actually real.
I remember the warnings when I first got online in 1996 - be careful, you never know who's actually behind the screen. Back then, it was because people could disguise themselves however they wanted. Nowadays, it's hard to tell if you're actually interacting with a fellow human being.
So it becomes comforting to fall back onto analogue ways, because at least they're tangible. For instance, sending written letters through the post. Instead of seeing words on a screen (that may, or may not have been wholly typed by a person), you see words that have been written by a human, paper that has been folded by a person, posted to you by a person.
My band, Phantom Island, recently released a limited-run vinyl of our album and one of the major appeals of vinyl is that you can actually hold the piece of art in your hand. We also went for recycled vinyl, so not only do we reduce waste, but each individual vinyl looks different.
One of the reasons I've heard about the appeal of vinyl (and, to a lesser extent, cassettes) are all the little flaws - the pops, warbles, and warps - in the audio that gives it warmth and character. Compare that with CDs, which are barely mentioned anymore - that's also a physical object, but the sound is too perfect to be interesting. Why bother with a CD when you can just stream, or, better yet, purchase and download from a service like Bandcamp and play it straight from your media player?
Arguably, "authenticity" (regardless of the medium used) is about embracing and celebrating otherwise- perceived flaws. In the digital space, it's about the quirks and bugs of hand-produced websites, the quick, off-hand and barely-edited photos, and stream-of-consciousness blogs. In my own work, I will sometimes leave behind audio artefacts in my field recordings, as a documentation of that moment: a sudden gush of wind striking the microphone, my footsteps or my breath announcing my presence in the soundscape. In that moment, I'm part of the soundscape - why not explicitly let the listener know this too, and let them into the moment?
There's an endearing moment of intimacy when you allow others to hold a completed, yet flawed, work. It's saying you are trusting others to value and understand your work for its intentions. It's a precious thing.
Returning to the initial question - I would argue that authenticity doesn't always require the analogue. Rather, it's about having clear intentions and the willingness to embrace the flaws that occur during the creative process.