A Basoki movie in which you write a dream painting in five seconds, a dream painting, or a book about grief that the machine writes for you. Art was never so easy – and so strange. Artists, platforms and tech companies are experiencing enthusiasm with Generative AI. Yet I keep turning to the same question: Do people really want to be impressed with something that does not have a soul? Can “easy” be just beautiful? In this article, I dive into this question.
At the Taif Art Festival of the Masterschat, I recently told someone standing before someone standing before, “It has so much spirit and passion.” The Picasso on display was made with great care, effort and life experience. It’s not perfect, but it really feels alive. This feeling of authenticity is more missing from AI art. The algorithm has no childhood memories, no sorrow, no French lily pond. So, critics say, it cannot produce real art.
But the reality is more complicated. A 2023 MIT study states that 40 % of people cannot distinguish AI inflatory art from human -made work. Platforms like Artsation, Spatifs, and Teltok are flowing with very popular AI materials – sometimes openly common, sometimes secretly. Apparently, the origin does not always matter. If the result resonates, that’s what is counted.
To cooperate with the machine
Fortunately, this is not a choice between man Or The machine views more and more creations as a threat to AI but as a creative partner. Dutch DJ Revenue Zonowold experiences live with AI in his techno -sets. With an algorithm, it makes the audience’s energy -based heartbeat, reprises the loops, and reforming. The result is a hybrid set that is born of two peers instead of one! Artists like Sugin Chung use AI as a brush: They train models at their work so that the machine can be expanded to their style. This is not an alternative – this is a new form of mutual cooperation.
People often talk about AI’s risks in art. But I believe that there are so many forced arguments In his favor. AI can expand access to creativity. You do not need to make an expensive education or record label of art school. With Generative AI, anyone can create ideas in text, icon or sound – even without technical skills. In this regard, the AI ​​has made the art democratic by reducing the obstacle to expressing the barrier.
Writing books
In the past few years, I have published three books, one of which has done four years of research. I’m already working on a new, and I am often accused: “You must let you write this for you.” Partially true. I use AI to do research for my books – dozens of other books, studies, and analysis on the forums like Reddit, which gives an incredibly interesting insight to my writing. But I still enjoy the original writing a lot – and as a speaker and coach, it realizes my daily work.
Further that, Ai can Incentive Instead of stopping human creativity. Artists cooperating with AI sometimes face unexpected patterns, ideas or deterioration that they did not imagine themselves. This can create a fresh view on their own work. Oxford’s professor Marcus Du Soutuoi saw him as an opportunity:
“Ai can wake us up with his automatic routine. People often behave like machines, and Ai helps us get out of it.”
You can say that the algorithm is not to change the artist, but rather to serve as a living heart, challenge you to think more.
Starting a new chapter?
After that I recently read more philosophical arguments: Art has always been a mirror of my time. The industrial revolution brought both realism and abstraction. The advent of photography freed the artists from the responsibility of presenting the truth. Now, under the influence of technology in our daily life (just see your phone or the Internet), it is understood that the art will respond like this. Perhaps the use of AI in art is not the end of an era, but the beginning of a new chapter.
Concerns
Nevertheless, I have serious concerns about these developments. One of the biggest real and fake is the blurred line. In the Netflix documentary film What did Jennifer do?Changed images were presented as authentic. The filmmaker acknowledged that some parts of the pictures were manipulated, but how and with what tools they remained vague. In my view, it not only creates aesthetic questions but also moral questions. If the pictures do not represent now Used to Real but only that seems proud, we harm confidence in visual information – especially in journalism or documentary context.
I also see a real risk of artistic moderation – a kind of prejudice. AI relies on existing data: what is popular, recognizable and average. This is ideally fit that we already know. In my experience, it rarely shows surprise or shock. Film Cantplace Goylem Mamford has warned about the future of tailor -made AI films in which you act in romantic humor with Marilyn Monroe:
“A movie that just follows your wishes will never surprise you.”
This is an artist’s unexpected choice that gives art its layers and meaning – AI does not yet master.
There is also the economic angle: faster, use AI to reduce film studios, publishers and platform costs. Big series posters are no longer designed by paintings, but are developed in the midwife. Tyler Perry stopped extension of his $ 800 million studio when he saw Surah:
“Jobs are about to end.”
Even the music platforms are experimenting with AIDJ. For the Reneier Zone Weld, AI is a lively partner on the stage – but for many artists, the same technology threatens their livelihood. The question is: Who benefits from easy art? And who’s quietly being displaced?
Basic questions we need to start asking ourselves: What do we find in a painting, novel, movie? Conviction, surprise, recognition? Does it not matter whether this feeling is created by a human or a machine? Perhaps this happens – maybe that’s not.
The problem begins when we leave the question
Because as long as the AI ​​is a device, the story itself is the scope of human expression. The problem arises only when we stop asking questions – when we mentally accept that “good enough” is really good. When we confuse ease with meaning.
“Easy Art” seems to be the sound of appeal: without sweating, without pressure, without pressure. Nevertheless, it is in precise efforts, not knowing, finding, living, the spirit of the spirit about which the woman spoke in Taif. If the art does not ask for anything from its maker, what does he ask his audience? Perhaps the art of art is not in the sense of how quickly it created, but how long it continues.