Jerrica makes art on Nostr: People who use AI for creative pursuits are not artists (or writers, or voice actors, ...
People who use AI for creative pursuits are not artists (or writers, or voice actors, or whatever job they don't want to pay a real living person for), imo. They are prompters, requesters, or as this tweet calls them "clients". They ask for something and the program spits something out. Their only engagement in the creative process is the initial idea.
We can debate the definition of art and artist 'til the cows come home. I took art theory for my degree and the question "What is art?" was the crux of the entire course. The takeaway was that there's no truly objective, agreed upon definition for art. So yes, by some standards I could classify AI generated images as art, and therefore these prompters as artists.
But I don't, because to me, creativity is tied too closely to "process." Writing, drawing, painting, etc. is how I think. It's how I come to understand something. It's how I question and improve and realize what I think and feel. Because across the process the idea is allowed to grow and/or evolve. AI generated content is stagnant. There is no potential or surprise beyond the initial prompt (and any stereotypes associated with it). That's why many people get a sense of shallowness from AI pieces.
As a vaguely related aside, teachers now have to crack down on kids using AI to write essays for them which... *sighs* the future of critical thinking is looking bleak.
Published at
2023-08-16 22:05:43Event JSON
{
"id": "df01ce1b374d46d53814576dd48097bd8f4834ac1be152f4c051411897d3a459",
"pubkey": "011fea66a6d48db1329e3c837b358a46e239c5ace65294bae6719372ae431a1f",
"created_at": 1692223543,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"proxy",
"https://spinster.xyz/objects/35756880-a495-4175-84f9-1f3c75688e25",
"activitypub"
]
],
"content": "People who use AI for creative pursuits are not artists (or writers, or voice actors, or whatever job they don't want to pay a real living person for), imo. They are prompters, requesters, or as this tweet calls them \"clients\". They ask for something and the program spits something out. Their only engagement in the creative process is the initial idea.\n\nWe can debate the definition of art and artist 'til the cows come home. I took art theory for my degree and the question \"What is art?\" was the crux of the entire course. The takeaway was that there's no truly objective, agreed upon definition for art. So yes, by some standards I could classify AI generated images as art, and therefore these prompters as artists.\n\nBut I don't, because to me, creativity is tied too closely to \"process.\" Writing, drawing, painting, etc. is how I think. It's how I come to understand something. It's how I question and improve and realize what I think and feel. Because across the process the idea is allowed to grow and/or evolve. AI generated content is stagnant. There is no potential or surprise beyond the initial prompt (and any stereotypes associated with it). That's why many people get a sense of shallowness from AI pieces.\n\nAs a vaguely related aside, teachers now have to crack down on kids using AI to write essays for them which... *sighs* the future of critical thinking is looking bleak.\n\nhttps://media.spinster.xyz/642b89b07ec7af5e15ac46c1aa77ca7450285b60817a8759e448f14a530d3be6.png",
"sig": "1876397658ea2928833ef880ad92a2ec353c2e06bd2b57ca8fd84c62456373531aa26369fe6c38d62a7503288bef83ca9962c3a70df133d7093813708eb7ac3b"
}
