How and why should we use AI for art, if at all? (Part 1.)

“Ah, not another one…” I hear you, but what does the tech optimists say?

and

Jul 10, 2024

Hi, confirm that you are not a robot,

I know, it’s a bone that’s already been chewed a 100 times. I’m confident, though, that we can have a bite from a curious angle without too much barking.

Dani is an artist, Jared is a writer, and they don’t like how AI is used or rather how people with the newly found power behave. Huba is a coder, a tech optimist, and a critical thinker. Let’s find out what happens if I lock them up in our imaginary dog-fight cage… while trying to minimize the damage they inflict upon their friendship.

And how do I have any agency over doing this?

I am building a social media content creator AI for Omnimorphs. Before you rush angrily toward the comment section - which you’re more than welcome to do - let me say this:

content is not ART.

Content is catering, imitation, distilling of previous knowledge.

Art is doing your own thing, combining things you like in a way that is specific to you with the hope that people like it. (e.g. this newsletter that I adore writing and occasionally even get pretty vulnerable with you, generous reader)

I think the only use of content for artists is as a medium for the ART, the substance. As a way to get people to look at the art, because of the artist’s belief that it is important to and enjoyed by their audience.

What do I hear in the back rows? Manipulation?! Ugh, yes, we can talk about that in the comment section, because I have an intimate relationship with the matter…

How and why should we use AI for art, if at all? (Part 1.)

Before we let out all the rage, angst and existential crisis, let’s step back a little. I was fortunate enough to start drawing 1,5 years ago, when AI was just starting to become a mainstream phenomenon. So playing with Midjourney, falling for the easy money dream for a couple of months and defining what it means to be an artist happened simultaneously in my life. I thought, why not replicate this process in the structure of the questions and begin at the basics:

Adrián: What is art and why do you think it is important? For you and for humanity. Why do we even make art?

Dani: Art, for me, is self-expression. When I first started as a child, I took out a sketchbook and a pencil and spent hours drawing. The process was important, and I'm still doing it for that reason. The friction of the pencil calmed me then, now I get the same feeling digitally.

Perhaps art is important to the world because it allows us to connect to others. Of course, there are some things, modern art for example, that don't move me. But other people like modern art because of the story behind it.

Huba: Wow, that's a complicated question. Maybe I'd take it from the perspective that art is one of the few things that doesn't have a practical purpose. I think people need some sort of sphere beyond the practical to function in the practical sphere at all, or on any level.

There's this strange feeling that people want to see meaning in their lives and things. I think art is classically a medium for that.

It brings a pleasant and meaningful feeling to all who create it and consume it with understanding. For someone, a vertical stripe on a white background expresses something about the world that makes them want to engage with our reality more. For some, Elden Ring does the same. For me, it's obviously the latter, which tingles your brain with mystery. But all the genres and styles have that common point.

Jared: For me it comes down to the holistic aspect of an individual that are somewhat intangible and not quantifiable. Say you've had a very good or a very bad experience. When you bring those experiences to mind, it has a shape. Not literally, but there's something whole about it.

I think that's the value of art, it deals with these ineffable qualities that other media can't.

It's more important than ever, where we've gone so much over to things that are measurable and quantifiable.

We’ve neglected that holistic part of ourselves that has a broader, emotional connection to things. Doing art you're learning more about yourself and your relation to the world.

Adrián: So for you, Dani, art is about sharing the deeper human experience through a process that the artist loves without a purpose. And for you, Huba, it is about finding something more in life. Did I get it right?

Huba: Yes. And it might sound idiotic to wander around in a virtual, fictional world where I know that every person is a character model, a texture, and a C++ class that tells them where to go. But it gives me something that I miss in my everyday life.

This is infantile mystery, but it can still convey something that makes existence and the world seem more interesting and meaningful compared to what it might actually be.

Dani: Which PlayStation game are you talking about?

Huba: Especially… all. Mainly the ones with huge open worlds where I can wander around and kill things.

Adrián: Haha, I see. And for you, Jared, art is a personal thing, a relationship to yourself, that you can share with others?

Jared: Yeah, that's exactly it. When you're creating art, it's a connection to yourself, and when someone is observing art or interacting with it, they're connecting to a part of themselves and a part of you.

Adrián: Is that the reason you make art, to connect?

Jared: I make art because it brings about a state that is otherwise inaccessible. You get into a flow state where things just start emerging. There's something very satisfying and rewarding about the process of creating without trying to put it together in that piecemeal fashion.

It's cool when you have an end product, that's awesome, but the process itself is the main thing.

It feels like there's a part of you that is able to make connections faster than you can think. It's really deep and primordial.

Adrián: What is the difference between art, entertainment, and content?

Jared: I think there's an overlap with all of those. To me, art is something that's made for yourself. Entertainment, I think, is more explicitly made for other people, often times on a shallow level. And content, I would say, is more about getting something from people, it's made to just garner attention in order to maybe monetize it.

It's almost like there’s a hierarchy of depth.

Dani: I think the difference is in how many people are working on it. A picture will not entertain as many people and for as long as a film or a game. Usually, the fewer people working on it, the more artistic the project can be. Plus, I think people are burnt out, there's a vast variety, you can't even keep track of what games are coming out.

Huba: You can, though…

Dani: Haha, okay, if you're really into it, maybe. I can bring up Marvel movies. Recent ones have been pretty flat. But if something is "too" new, which is what people want anyway, they might not get it.

Huba: Yes, making a new IP is risky everywhere, and that's a big problem. No wonder, Ubisoft is coming out with Far Cry N+10, and not something new. Because there are shareholders, and they can project how much the well-known product will bring in.

Adrián: Yes, well, Scorsese said Marvel movies are not cinema. I think he meant they are not art.

Huba: Well, I think that is hauteur, snobbery.

Dani: I agree.

Huba: For me, the definition of art is much more permissive, perhaps too permissive.

Dani: For me too. If I don't like something, it's not for me. For example, Irishman and Killers of the Flower Moon, are terribly long. They were good movies, interesting, but I will never watch them again. But I'm not saying it's not art, because I wasn't entertained.

Huba: I agree.

For me, there is not really a difference between entertainment and art. But within art there are registers.

Content is another story, because it's a practical thing. There you don't get away from reality. But with the other two, that happens a lot. And maybe the complexity of the messages we use determines whether it's entertainment or art. But both are within the category of art.

Adrián: Maybe we are just too stuck up about it. How about pop art, memes? They feel like content but they often convey deep meaning.

Jared: That's where I would say, you see content and art overlapping. I mean, memes can be a really effective way of expressing something ineffable, in a really small packet, they resonate with people.

Even though content can be kind of empty and attention-capturing, there's also that element of it that can overlap with art.

In my mind, you have these categorizations, but they're not pure, all of those things overlap. And any of them, in their purest form become less full. But when they're devoid from, how I perceive, the substance of artistic expression, then they get a little less, too.

Adrián: I see. But at the same time, it's blurry what we consider substance. Why do you think about these other worlds when we have problems here on Earth?

Jared: I've had these periods in my life where I fluctuate back and forth from “what's the point of fiction” and then on the other hand “I love fiction”. But they're almost just different states of value.

I think it's the fictitious element of you that can progress the other element. It can help you reflect on the world through stories.

It’s almost like waking state and dream state. Often times, when you're just dealing with raw data the world seems dry and substanceless. And the other way around is true, being a 100% lost in fiction results in detachment. I think substance comes from balancing these things.

Adrián: Back to the $1 million question. Dani, Huba, is that the measurement of art, that it is sold for $1 million?

Dani: Maybe, or it’s just money laundering…

Huba: It means it’s accepted, that it is very good art, because its monetary value is very high.

Dani: But it's a valid question. Why would someone pay so much money for that?

Huba: I read a very good article about this process. A rich man buys the painting for $1 million. The artist is very happy about this. Then the rich man asks an independent appraiser to value the same painting at $20 million. The appraiser does it because the painting is very fashionable, very much in tune with the zeitgeist of the time. Which is good for the rich man, because he can donate the painting to a museum and deduct the $20 million from his tax base.

That's just one of the reasons why the price of an artwork can be so high. And there's certainly snobbery and art appreciation involved. Which sounds sad, but the artist is certainly not sad that his painting is being bought for $1 million.

Adrián: Perhaps the artist regrets when a painting by an another artist he does not appreciate or consider as an artist has been bought for $1 million, too. What do you think about this?

Huba: I think that it is not the rich man who decides which painting can be truly appreciated, but the art expert, the critic, the opinion leaders. On what basis is another matter. Rich people certainly have a lot of weight in this, but perhaps professional actors have just as much say.

To sum up. When the concept of art is diluted, it is bad for artists. But the strange thing is that it is artists who have started this with a lot of momentum. It could not have been started by anybody else during the avant-garde, when montages of poster pieces, for example, started to be considered art.

It seems as if the artists themselves had lit the fire at the stake. And everything that is happening now is an extension of that. This includes the 'Fountain' by Marcel Duchamp (the urinal as a piece of art) and now AI art.

to be continued on Monday…

In the next newsletter, which will arrive in your inbox earlier than usual, you will find the second part of How and why should we use AI for art, if at all?

We’ll discuss the following topics among others…

The separation of craftsmanship and art.
Is AI art soulless?
What makes an artist?
An analogy between hamburgers and art
The best use of AI for art
The future of art: Stop, start or continue?

Until then, feel free to share your opinion in a comment. I’d love to hear what’s your definition of art and if you are optimistic about AI or not.

How and why should we use AI for art, if at all? (Part 1.)

“Ah, not another one…” I hear you, but what does the tech optimists say?

And how do I have any agency over doing this?

How and why should we use AI for art, if at all? (Part 1.)

Adrián: What is art and why do you think it is important? For you and for humanity. Why do we even make art?

Adrián: So for you, Dani, art is about sharing the deeper human experience through a process that the artist loves without a purpose. And for you, Huba, it is about finding something more in life. Did I get it right?

Adrián: Is that the reason you make art, to connect?

Adrián: What is the difference between art, entertainment, and content?

Adrián: Yes, well, Scorsese said Marvel movies are not cinema. I think he meant they are not art.

Adrián: Maybe we are just too stuck up about it. How about pop art, memes? They feel like content but they often convey deep meaning.

Adrián: I see. But at the same time, it's blurry what we consider substance. Why do you think about these other worlds when we have problems here on Earth?

Adrián: Back to the $1 million question. Dani, Huba, is that the measurement of art, that it is sold for $1 million?

Adrián: Perhaps the artist regrets when a painting by an another artist he does not appreciate or consider as an artist has been bought for $1 million, too. What do you think about this?

Discussion about this post