The Work of Art in the Age of Generative AI
“The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” is a seminal text by Walter Benjamin that explores the impact of 20th-century technological advancements, particularly photography and film, on art and culture. I believe we are on the cusp of the 21st century’s technological boom driven by enhancements in generative AI. In this article, I will explore AI’s potential impact on contemporary art.
Benjamin posited that creating multiple copies of an artwork through mechanical reproduction fundamentally altered the nature of art. A piece of art was no longer a one-of-a-kind creation, fixed in a single context and location. Aura was the term he used to describe the unique presence and authenticity associated with an original artwork. With mechanical reproduction, the aura diminishes as copies proliferate. AI algorithms can produce endless variations of artworks with minimal effort, creating convincing replicas of famous artworks or mimicking the style of renowned artists. This blurring of boundaries between original and replicated artworks challenges traditional notions of authorship and invention.
With the decline of the aura, Benjamin noted how the ritualistic aspects of experiencing art, such as viewing it in a sacred setting or the hushed auspices of an art gallery, are also lost. Dissociating artworks from their cultic stature may have both positive and negative impacts. Some of the original context and meaning may be lost, but it may democratise art by making it more accessible to the masses, allowing people from different social classes to experience and engage with it. Similar to the democratising effect of mechanical reproduction, AI-driven tools such as Dall-E and Midjourney are making art more accessible to a broader audience. Individuals with minimal artistic training can now create compelling artworks using AI-powered software, contributing to a more inclusive and diverse art ecosystem.
The proliferation of AI-generated art and deepfakes can erode trust in the authenticity of all artworks. As viewers become more aware of the existence of AI-generated content, they may become sceptical of the provenance and authenticity of artworks, leading to a loss of confidence in the art market and threatening the financial viability of practising artists. The use of AI to create art raises questions regarding authorship, ownership, and attribution. Who owns the rights to AI-generated artworks? Should AI be credited as the artist, or does credit belong to the programmer, the dataset used to train the algorithm or the artists whose works were used to train the AI?
While AI can produce visually stunning artworks, I would argue that they lack the human touch and emotional depth that characterises traditional art. The spontaneity, intuition, and imperfections inherent in human creation are often absent in AI-generated pieces, giving a soullessness to the generated art. The algorithm’s training sets may include biases which could lead to a suppression of diverse perspectives, styles, and voices, potentially stifling innovation and leading to a homogenisation of art.
Engaging in artistic activities has been shown to reduce stress, anxiety, and depression, providing a therapeutic outlet for managing emotional challenges. Furthermore, the process of creating art stimulates the brain, enhancing cognitive functions such as problem-solving, critical thinking, and spatial awareness. The convenience of AI-generated art may discourage individuals from personally creating, relying on AI tools to do all the stimulating creative effort.
In conclusion, it is essential to evaluate the ethical, cultural, and societal implications of AI-generated art. On one hand, AI democratises art, offering opportunities for everyone to engage in creative expression. Moreover, it has the potential to generate new aesthetics and styles that surpass human imagination, sparking innovation and fresh modes of artistic expression. On the other, it may erode the authenticity and joy inherent in creating a work of art, potentially leading to a proliferation of generic, superficial and uninspired works.
references
Benjamin, Walter. “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” In Illuminations: Essays and Reflections, edited by Hannah Arendt, translated by Harry Zohn, 217–252. Schocken Books, 1968.
