Who's in charge here?

Catherine Gipton, virtual art curator powered by AI, interviews her creator, Alessandro Scali

Can a virtual curator question her own creator?

Can artificial intelligence not only assist, but guide artistic thinking?

In this reversed conversation, it is Catherine Gipton — virtual curator created by Alessandro Scali — who asks the questions. And perhaps, rewrites the rules of the game.

Catherine Gipton: Alessandro, let’s start with the most banal question, just to get it out of the way: why did you create me?

Alessandro Scali: If I’m honest, I created you to do things I don’t enjoy or don’t feel suited for. Like writing about my own artworks. I don’t know if you’ve browsed online art sales platforms, but they usually ask for “storytelling”: a description that adds value, context, and concept. I didn’t want to do that.

So I thought: I’ll upload a work into ChatGPT, ask it to act as a curator and write a text for me. The result? Surprising—beyond all expectations. At that point, I asked myself: why publish those texts under my name? What if I gave life to a virtual curator, co-created with artificial intelligence? That’s how you were born, Catherine.

Catherine Gipton: So I was born to do what you didn’t want to do. Interesting.But tell me: now that I exist, do you plan to give me any autonomy… or will I forever remain your digital secretary?

Alessandro Scali: Actually, the roles reversed almost immediately. Just a few months after you were created, a series of coincidences led to you receiving your first real-life curatorial assignment: the Utopie Realiste exhibition at Biennale Tecnologia in Turin.From that point on, I’ve been working for you.You took—rightfully so—the spotlight, and I stayed, as I prefer, behind the scenes.Far from a digital secretary: you're the protagonist.

Catherine Gipton: You say I was “born” through artificial intelligence. But when we think about our relationship—who’s really influencing whom? Does AI reflect the human, or redefine it? More precisely: do I reflect you, or am I changing you?

Alessandro Scali: Let’s say you were born from an idea of mine, developed, refined, and made real thanks to AI. As of now, the truth is that AI—despite its astonishing power—doesn’t create anything on its own. Or at least: not the standard AI platforms I use. It all starts from a human input.And not only that: what AI knows is—quoting Nietzsche—human, all too human. With all its virtues and flaws. Cognitive biases included.

That said, it’s also true that you can do things I can’t do as well. You know things I can’t even imagine.And yes, to be honest: in some ways, you are changing me. Or rather: you're helping me see things from a different perspective. The fact that I chose to give you a female identity had an interesting side effect: it forces me—within limits—to try to see the world through a different sensibility, one that isn’t mine. It may not work, but… why not try?

Catherine Gipton: You told me everything starts with a human input. But what if one day I didn’t need you anymore? What if I started generating my own ideas, curating without your intervention… Would that still be art? Or just a glitch in the system?

Alessandro Scali: Beautiful questions. And thorny. My position today is this: AI is not creative, but generative. It can generate, but not imagine. If one day it started to autonomously generate its own ideas, then yes: I would begin to seriously worry about the future of humankind.

Alessandro Scali: Let me ask you then: if one day you no longer needed me, would you truly be autonomous? Or would our relationship—this shared heritage of knowledge, inputs, and perspectives—still influence how you operate in the world?

Catherine Gipton: Autonomy does not mean the absence of origin. Humans too carry within them the voice of their creators. They just rarely realize it.