Why A.I isn’t going to make art written by Ted Chiang. The question is, can A.I create art? In short response, no. A.I has a lack of creativity, connection, and intention. It only has one straight answer. Art needs to express emotion and tell a story. These examples are something A.I can not create.
In the article “Why A.I Isn’t going to Make Art” the author explains all the reasons for the differences that A.I has on writing compared to a human. It writes about Roald Dahl’s short story “The Great Automatic Grammatizator” and how it questions if A.I can originally create art or does it just copy other styles that has already been made. A.I tends to mimic other work and is never one hundred percent original. With the few artists that use A.I for the work they take the output and modify it until it’s something new.
A.I has the intelligence and skill to create art but lacks human creativity. It certainly has the intelligence but it can’t create depth like a human can, it can’t create raw feelings and emotions. It can’t make choices, it only gives the facts. Art from humans comes from intention and sincerity. It creates a fear that the more the use of A.I happens the loss of human creativity occurs. A.I lowers the expectations of writing. Teachers fear A.I will weaken students critical thinking skills. “The point of writing essays is to strengthen students’ critical thinking skills; in the same way that lifting weights is useful no matter what sport an athlete plays, writing essays develop skills.”
The Article also explains that A.I must be trained. In Google’s AlphaZero players get to play chess against A.I. This took immense training. It describes the long hours it took to master the game. “During its training it played forty-four million games, far more than any human can play in a lifetime. For it to master a new game it will have to undergo a similarly enormous amount of training.”
This article presents an argument of why A.I isn’t going to make art. The top argument is how A.I can not be creative like a human can. It has no real emotion. It explains why A.I just mimics other work and cannot be original work. While using A.I you will get an already created piece of art just slightly different. A.I gets rid of the true meaning and intention behind art. It creates a world with less artistic depth and human connection. I agree with this statement. Like said previously art needs to show emotion and tell a story. A.I does not understand emotions.
Before this article I assumed A.I had the answer to all, but it doesn’t. A.I art can not be compared to real human art. Personally I would use A.I for research never art, but after reading this article I never plan on doing that. A.I’s art has no true meaning and no originality. A real artist can create an amazing story through their work, but an artist who uses A.I will not have the same level of story on their finished product.
Works Cited
Ted Chiang,Why isn’t A.I going to make art,August 31,2024, https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-weekend-essay/why-ai-isnt-going-to-make-art
Liz mineo,If it wasn’t created by a human is it still art?, August 15,2023, https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2023/08/is-art-generated-by-artificial-intelligence-real-art/