The intersection of AI and 'art'
AI has a varied history in the art world. AI-generated art is often referred to as '“generative art” which is a type of artwork that is created using a set of rules given to a computer.
If you’re wondering, yes, AI has also been prompted in the writing of this article. It’s OK, but not quite right. The concept of AI generating art is an interesting one. Art after all has been been derivative of its prior movement of the time. What we have now is the opportunity new form of expression - albeit by technology.
One could have argued the screen printer was to the demise of hand illustrated drawings so here too we find ourselves at the crossroads of how ‘art’ may be created using a ‘tool’. AI-generated art can be used to create cross movement fusions, blending current and past. I think it’s an interesting development in an artist’s tool chest. If an artist was presented with a new brush set or pigments, would they refuse? How about being able to mine all of known histories images to recast new styles? How about now not having ever set foot in an art gallery? Or having a vague interest in art but being able to create like a master? Does this reduce or change the landscape of the current artistic community?
With limited input into the creative process we can say AI art limits the capacity of creativity in the artistic process. The currency of art could be considered in ‘how good you can command a computer’ rather than pure creativity and your skill in your medium. How about if your medium is digital and programming? How do we define ‘artist’? I think AI will homogenise many visual styles across the world and commodify them to worthlessness. There will never be another Van Gogh or Picasso, but their impact will be seen in digital forever.
Overall using AI to generate ‘art’ be it in visual or written form is ‘art’ in and of itself, however whether it will be considered so, only future will tell.
Sample image of the Gold Coast if Hokusai were to be alive now.