Rebecca's Thoughts

With the recent rise in AI and its presence in society, there is a degree of autonomy that is given to people when it comes to technology. People can ask a machine learning software a question and receive answers in seconds. This has also allowed people to make art, and although questionable, that passes as digital art. There is an ethical question that comes into play about the role of AI in art, but also the democratization of art.

“The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” by Walter Benjamin is a paper that discusses the mechanical reproduction of art and how it pertains to uniqueness and production of art. In the reading Benjamin discusses the idea of an “aura” and how that pertains to art, reproductions, and value. He explains that “even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: Its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be.” I think this idea of the place in the universe is interesting and shows that there is something in art that gives it value and essence. There is a discussion around AI art that calls for the intent of art and how that differs between art made by humans and art made by AI or machine learning. This brings up the idea of “art for art’s” and art with intent whether political, religious, or for some other purposeful reason.

In the class for this reading, we discussed the role of film and how movies, despite having messages to the contrary or servicing a particular ideology, function, and service a capitalistic system. They are a pure product of capitalism and that supersedes their messaging or reason for existing. I think that much of the same ideas presented in that sentiment can be applied to AI art and the environment it is both created and exists in. The “Cult of the Movie Star” and the “Cult of the Audience” are things that, I think, exist within the presence of contemporary AI algorithms like ChatGPT and the art that they create. These services contribute to and are byproducts of a major capitalistic system where the creations are used to further perpetuate the machine.

This ethical conundrum only gets worse when things like plagiarism or theft come into the picture. I think that many people’s issues around the usage of AI art come in the form of theft and the erasure of real-life human artists who feel like their art is being stolen and taken advantage of. Their art is being used to feed and teach this machine learning software without knowledge of doing so or any form of compensation. This leads to some AI images looking like or taking heavy inspiration from the original works. These images by default and legal ruling generally public domain and can thus be use by anyone. This leads to art that looks a lot like art created by humans with distinct and unique styles being free. This makes the role of the original artist somewhat obsolete and in some people’s, minds negate the need for artists.

This idea is addressed by Benjamin in saying “it might be stated as a general formula that the technology of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the sphere of tradition. By replicating the work many times over, it substitutes a mass existence for a unique existence. And in permitting the reproduction to reach the recipient in his or her own situation, it actualizes that which is reproduced.” This “technical reproduction Benjamin discusses is centered around photography, but I think that many of the same sentiments can be applied to AI generated art.