The Dreamliner Paintings

Once, when god was in his infancy, I studied aeronautical engineering. I was interested in rocket science long before it became shorthand for doing something incredibly difficult. Well is it? The short answer is yes. Putting men on the moon was an extraordinary engineering feat, not that I had anything to do with it. I was simply following in the footsteps of giants like Neil Armstrong who did have a degree in Aeronautics and later taught the subject. Neil, of course, could do a lot more. But me? That took several years to find out when I later took to following other giants; I guess it got to be a habit.

I was twenty when I left university, and I was determined never to become an engineer. I was not a Luddite, but I did object to the moral vacuum that many scientists and engineers occupied when it came to designing machines that, despite protests to the contrary, could, would, and did destroy life. All very high-minded, no doubt. But more than fifty years later I am glad I made that choice. Nevertheless, I have continued to be fascinated by science, particularly physics and computing, both theoretical and practical.

Although the 787 has been in service since 2011, it was not until 2017 that I got a good look at one. I was standing outside Hatton Cross tube station when a 787 approached for landing at Heathrow and I quickly took photos on my phone.
I subsequently tried to incorporate the aircraft into a painting loosely titled Arrivals and Departures. It was a failure, and so I shelved the idea.

I have been following reports about aircraft development for many years. One in particular caught my attention. Boeing, once considered the pinnacle for aero-engineering excellence, found itself on the naughty step following accusations of cutting corners to reduce costs. John Barnett, the initial whistleblower -more followed – worked as a quality control manager at the Boeing South Carolina Plant, which manufactured the 787. You can read about his experiences here.

The 787 became my symbol for a promising future while disguising the inevitable pursuit of cold hard cash.

The same can be said for the companies, and governments, that have joined the race to develop Artificial Intelligence, only the potential repercussions are far worse.

I have written elsewhere about experimenting with AI. Suffice to say three years was enough to recognise it as an existential threat to life on earth; all of it, with no exceptions.
If you live in a big city like London, you cannot help but notice outdoor advertising. In truth, I am always drawn to it. Now, technology has raced ahead to incorporate and exploit AI.

In the early 2000s, when I worked for the Open University, I attended a talk given by one the Maths and Computing staff. He was researching technology that could identify a person in a public space and develop advertising tailored to that person. This idea was dependent on incorporating wearable computing. In other words, computer chips would be woven into clothes. However, twenty years is a long time in compuer science.

AI, via a camera, can now be integrated into the screen, thus creating a profile of an individual on the fly. AI then delivers what it ‘thinks’ will attract that individual’s attention, and, of course, generate sales of a product. There are many contentious issues surrounding this development, particularly racial profiling. However, I firmly believe this is not the most critical issue because that would be the development of autonomous AI agents and the headlong rush to develop Artificial Super Intelligence. Here is a statement from Google AI:

Artificial Superintelligence (ASI) is a theoretical form of artificial intelligence that exceeds human cognitive capacity and capability across virtually every field, including creativity, general wisdom, and problem-solving. It remains a hypothetical concept with no real-world implementation currently in existence.

Note the presence of the words theoretical and hypothetical, and also that final phrase: no real-world implementation currently in existence.
So no need to worry, right?
For those with a strong disposition, I urge you to read this book
If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies: Why Superhuman AI Would Kill Us All by Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares.

It is against this backdrop, and months of disappearing down numerous visual rabbit-holes, that I developed the first of these paintings.
Dreamliner 1, at that stage in early 2026 it was untitled, began a with a young woman seated on a deckchair in the sunshine. She is based on my daughter, Holly.
As the painting developed, I made her look slightly upwards as if in a dream, thinking of the future. I placed her on a balcony and began to think of an urban setting. Maybe she was dreaming of a foreign holiday as she watched an aircraft return from a sun-soaked land.

Voila? Dreamliner! A symbol for a dream of the future. Only there is often a gap between dreams and reality, and I am not one to ignore a dystopian opportunity.
I wanted to something to represent her dream. I invented an AI company, Autonomous Solutions, and created an advertising campaign. That campaign was projected from a digital screen.

I have no idea as to how many I will paint. There are five at the time of writing, several others started, and more developed in Photoshop. The adverts vary and depend on the people in the foreground.
I now rely on my photographs, some stock photography, and my imagination. As always, things change once the painting begins. But the intention is the same, to paint people in urban settings against a backdrop of AI generated corporate engagement.
I like to develop titles as I go along. Most never get used. Some Dystopian Shit That You Don’t Want may be one of them.