• WithoutFurtherBelay
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    People don't actually consider it that deeply. Dadaism has a cultural backdrop of artistic conflict that the creator thinks about when making it. When they make these art pieces and installations, they do so purposely knowing it's base nature, and riff off of it. This would be fine if AI artists actually did this... but no. They think they're actually Picasso. If there's any artistic value to it, it's own statement reflects negatively on itself.

    Edit: This is because the toilet, which is a physically manifested object in reality, the AI generated pieces are effectively manifestations of societal attitudes, so using it without any modification or thought is just reproducing those attitudes.

    • Omniraptor [they/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Just remembered, this Tumblr has good takes on ai art and argues them better than I do. https://www.tumblr.com/txttletale/737649090420195328/hey-im-not-here-to-say-ai-art-isnt-art-the

      She has other good posts about it (tagged ai-art)

      • WithoutFurtherBelay
        ·
        6 months ago

        This completely ignores my main point, though. I don’t care how much effort someone put into something, the problem is that manual art is a depiction of how the artist personally experiences the things they’re portraying, AKA societal attitudes filtered through their own experiences, while AI art is the unmitigated portrayal of what they tell it to state. Both take effort from both machine (tool) and computer, but only AI art reproduces societal attitudes without reflection