User:RaniaTabbara
Cultural Heritage
The emergence of generative AI artworks throws into doubt the dynamic notion of cultural heritage that was known to value tangible and intangible legacies known to be created by humans from previous generations. Recently, AI algorithms produced acclaimed masterpieces, such as the work of Mike Tyka "Portraits of Imaginary People" and “Archive Dreaming” with whom he collaborated with Refik Anadol to create a pioneering immersive projection installation. This shift signals the start of an AI revolution that will impact how the new generations and societies will value the AI-driven unprecedented advancements in cultural legacies, demanding a discussion about a new definition of “cultural heritage” in the digital age.[1]
Many critics and artists argue that AI art messes up the creative process and generates artworks based on the fact that it has been trained on existing human-made artworks, describing it as a tool for replication without actual originality or emotional contribution. AI-generated art faces ethical and copyright issues which may have consequences on art as a profession.[2]
The author and illustrator Rob Biddulph says that AI-generated art “is the exact opposite of what I believe art to be. Fundamentally, I have always felt that art is all about translating something that you feel internally into something that exists externally. Whatever form it takes, be it a sculpture, a piece of music, a piece of writing, a performance, or an image, true art is about the creative process much more than it’s about the final piece. And simply pressing a button to generate an image is not a creative process.”[3]
On the other hand, some other critics claim that AI-generated artwork may consists artistic value within itself and thus be considered part of cultural heritage. Many Renaissance sculptors, for example, were inspired by ancient Greek and Roman art. They used similar forms and apply similar artistic styles to create new artworks that reflect their era. Historically, this phenomenon is common. However, there is a significant difference between the two. Renaissance art was made by human ability and craftsmanship. AI art is generated by entering prompts into a software that manipulates and controls existing art in its database. This distinction is a huge concern for artists nowadays, which is understandable. However, this does not exclude the possibility of AI-generated art being recognized as heritage in the future.[4]
Throughout art history, many post-modern art movements challenged traditional norms and introduced new concepts like the Anti-art Dadaism and Readymade art movements. The “Fountain” by Marcel Duchamp, for example, a urinal placed on its side and signed with R, is an everyday object whose function has been removed by turning it into art, challenging the idea that art could not have a practical function. AI-generated artworks can be seen as an extension of this concept because it is mass-produced and there is no creative process behind them that requires high artistic skills and applications.[5]
If Duchamp's works, like the “Bicycle Wheel” and the “ Fountain,” are today considered of cultural value, there is a certain chance of considering AI-generated art a new type of cultural heritage. The difference is our perspectives.
 | This user is a student editor in University_of_Houston-Clear_Lake/Social_Media_(Fall). |
- ^ Todorović, Miloš (2024-02-05). "AI and Heritage: A Discussion on Rethinking Heritage in a Digital World". Uluslararası Kültürel ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi (UKSAD). doi:10.46442/intjcss.1397403. ISSN 2458-9381.
- ^ Malanowski, Sarah C.; Baima, Nicholas R. (2024-03-05). Why It's OK to Be a Gamer. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-003-30863-8.
- ^ Malanowski, Sarah C.; Baima, Nicholas R. (2024-03-05). Why It's OK to Be a Gamer. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-003-30863-8.
- ^ Todorović, Miloš (2024-02-05). "AI and Heritage: A Discussion on Rethinking Heritage in a Digital World". Uluslararası Kültürel ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi (UKSAD). doi:10.46442/intjcss.1397403. ISSN 2458-9381.
- ^ Wang, Fu (2024-10-29). "Discussion of AIGC Technology in a Photography Course at a Higher Vocational College". Journal of Research in Vocational Education. 6 (10): 12–20. doi:10.53469/jrve.2024.6(10).04. ISSN 2408-5170.