People want to have it both ways.

  • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I would say yeah, art is about human connection, though also heavily about politics and culture. I’d venture to say that notions of separating art from those heavy hitters, politics and culture (which are arguably not even separate things in the first place, but I digress…), is largely a liberal capitalism thing and as unrealistic as most things about capitalism. Which, incidentally, is part of why it’s so weird when people are like, “Stop making art political!!” Like it never wasn’t political. It’s just a question of how obvious it is to any given person or group.

    In my experience around image generation tech, it appears like it’s the sharing of cool generations among other people and the resulting human connection that is more attractive in the long-term than the “generate whatever” in private, which can be fun, similar as eating candy can be fun, but can get old fast if you overdo it. There’s a lot within that subject to unpack, but I’ve seen others point out something that appears to be true to an extent, which is that people don’t tend to be all that interested in others “AI art” and are more so interested in their own, which makes a kind of sense to me because the end result is usually shlocky flashy fast food “art” that might feel more meaningful to the person who spent hours experimenting with prompts to get to it. This might seem like a contradiction to the idea of sharing in “cool generations,” but it seems to me that such sharing is in part about the sharing itself, not entirely about the perceived quality of the art. Similar to how people can go to a movie together and maybe they’re critics about it or maybe they aren’t, but either way, they have that knowing that they shared the experience of seeing it simultaneously and can talk about what that experience was like.

    • Soviet Entropy@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      ai art is art because people are mad about it.

      jokes aside, i think that machine art is going to basically just replace clip art and the like. it’s like what happened to pottery. there are still artisinal potters (i love handmade pottery and the craft itself) but for everyday dinner plates you don’t seek the connection and craftsmanship. you just need a plate.

      some art has use-value as decoration (easily replaced with machines) and other art is about personal, emotional, or political communication (even if it could be replaced, it wouldn’t be.)

      • MarxMadness@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        ai art is art because people are mad about it.

        Most persuasive point here haha

        Also seems useful to separate the economic impacts of AI art (on artists, on the environment, etc.) and larger criticisms of how AI is currently used (destroying the usefulness of search engines) from the question of whether AI art has artistic value.