“AI art” is an oxymoron.
By Nguyễn Long Huy 11.3
Everything would be dull without human creativity. Art is a multifaceted concept with no universally agreed-upon definition, but it is generally understood as a form of human expression that utilizes creativity and imagination to evoke emotions, convey ideas, or produce aesthetic experiences. The key phrase is “human expression.” Yet an alarming number of people miss this point entirely. With today's AI technology, anyone can write a simple prompt and wait for the AI to generate an image. It sounds amazing on paper, but it entirely defeats the purpose of art and the process of creating art. Quite frankly, it is an absolute insult to any real artist who invests effort and continually strives to improve their craft.
Let’s be clear: this isn’t a new issue. It has been a problem ever since generative AI became available to the public, but the recent Studio Ghibli art trend on social media has reignited this conversation. People were engaging with it so frequently that the CEO of OpenAI stated it was “melting” their servers. Many individuals, lacking an appreciation for true art, argue that there is no problem with AI art. Conversely, some contend that it is indeed a significant issue. Let’s conduct a “deeper” analysis to understand the situation more clearly.
Made with DALL-E 3
Does AI art have any value?
The main argument in favor of AI art is that it makes art accessible. Once again, this sounds great at first glance. However, art has always been accessible. All you need is a pencil and paper, and perhaps some patience. Here are other arguments I’ve encountered: “It’s a good tool for referencing or finding inspiration.” There are plenty of resources and websites readily available for that without needing AI. “It’s thought of things I haven’t considered.” You just haven’t thought hard enough. Creative blocks are not uncommon, but if the AI model has thought of something, then other real artists have likely considered it many times before, which you can probably find online.
Why do most people despise AI art?
AI art is ethically problematic, and it's not up for debate. AI models are trained on large datasets containing images, text descriptions, and other forms of creative data without the consent of the original creators. Therefore, nothing it produces is original. Artists unknowingly publish their hard work, which the AI model then uses to replicate their creations. This is not a new revelation. Their work is effectively stolen, often with little regard from the AI companies. Moreover, AI art lacks genuine creativity, emotional depth, and cultural understanding, relying instead on learned patterns from existing works. More importantly, AI art diminishes the value of human effort and skill. AI can replicate styles and techniques in seconds, which is unfair to artists who spend years mastering their craft. The ease of creating AI art oversaturated the market with low-quality works, thus devaluing people's perception of art. Quick and cheap is the name of the game for big corporations; many have realized they can use AI instead of hiring real artists or designers. For instance, Coca-Cola generated an entire Christmas commercial with AI, and both Disney and Wacom disappointingly utilized generative AI in their promotional material. Practically all corporations are showing interest in or already using generative AI, whether secretly or publicly, because it saves them money. The environmental impact of generating AI images and videos is also a concern, but that is not the main focus of this article.
Which one is AI art? Source: https://goldpenguin.org/blog/ai-vs-human-art/
“It’s like they steal artwork from artists, use it to train an AI, and then claim it as their own piece of ‘art.’ Plagiarism is one issue, but those so-called AI ‘art’ pieces contain absolutely no effort, no skill, and no originality. Nothing in those images is intentional; from the colors to the composition, everything is merely a copy of something else.” – Hạo Nhiên, editor and designer from WISersTV’s creative team.
“AI art could never replace human art and never will. There will always be people who fight against it, standing with artists and what’s ethical.” – Quỳnh Hương, also an editor and designer from the creative team.
As the manager of WISersTV’s creative team, Quang Nhật expresses: “I think AI still has its limits. For instance, it doesn’t possess the originality or creativity that we humans do, because we have unique perceptions that AI cannot replicate. So I believe it will be a long time before AI can truly replace us in art.”
I’m not an artist, but one doesn’t have to be an artist to agree that AI art will only bring harm to artists and society as a whole. Since when did everyone value art so little? If you notice, technological advancements these days seem to aim to reduce the humanity of everything—from art, which lacks human emotion and creativity, to robotic workers that eliminate the need for real human interaction. Only time will tell if this trajectory will change. AI will never be able to replace human creativity, and that’s a statement. However, creative art jobs remain at risk. People often don’t recognize the harm being done unless they are directly affected, leaving many unaware of the issue. Until laws are enacted to protect artists’ and designers’ jobs, I suspect that AI art will continue to be prevalent.
