We’re living in a time where efficiency is often prioritized above all else, where effort and creativity are seemingly unimportant and disposable. What matters most is getting the most done in the least amount of time possible. This is the end goal that people have worked toward throughout history. With the Agricultural Revolution, food production increased, driving population growth, in the Industrial Revolution, machines were built to hasten manual labor, increasing production rates, and in the digital revolution, communication was made almost instantaneous, allowing all kinds of information to be easily accessible. Each major technological revolution is a stepping stone in the buildup of a much more efficient world.
However, these changes were not without flaws. They caused vast shifts in the ways that humans were valued in society and often provoked backlash. The dramatic increase in food production during the Agricultural Revolution led to overpopulation, giving way for the creation of incredibly dense cities that became a playground for diseases to circulate. As the Industrial Revolution boosted production speeds of manufactured goods, many people lost their jobs, and workers were exploited by the bourgeoisie, who believed they were all replaceable. One well-known form of backlash to this was the Luddites. Although they didn’t oppose all industrialization, they stood firmly against the fact that it replaced human labor and caused many people to lose their jobs. Finally, as the digital revolution led to faster communication, it also gave rise to problems such as cyberbullying, online scamming, and information brokering.
We’re now dealing with what’s known as the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a term coined by Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum. This includes a handful of developments such as robotics, quantum computing, and biotechnology, but I’d argue that the most alarming is artificial intelligence. ChatGPT is the perfect example of the result of the popularization of AI, a program capable of answering almost any question you ask it. Although this is incredibly helpful in terms of productivity, it deteriorates people’s abilities to think for themselves. The trait of curiosity and creativity has become forgotten in the search for efficiency. Rather than taking time to fully understand and absorb information, people can now just input any chunk of text into an AI app and have it summarized for them.
Art, I would argue, is one of the main institutions of human society that’s currently under attack by the use of generative technology. There’s a lot of debate over how artificial intelligence should be incorporated into art, and even more about if it should be incorporated at all. I think the first thing one must do when approaching this issue is to consider the definition of art itself and whether AI has any place in that definition.
What is art?
Art is the use of creativity and skill to produce visual works such as paintings, drawings, sculptures, works of literature, performances, and music. Oftentimes, art is regarded as a finished product rather than a process. Although it’s not entirely wrong to suggest that art is often just a piece of work to be viewed or sold at times, the process is just as important as the piece itself. Art comes in all forms; it can be a painting made by a person applying and blending paints on a canvas, it can be a song that someone writes, or a dance that someone choreographs. These are all vastly different from each other, but there’s one thing that really ties these different art forms together: the human effort that goes into creating them. They’re made by pure will and determination, someone’s wish to see their creation come to life. They’re made by the effort that person put in. Art is a testament to someone’s skill and own creative style. Even if a work of art might not seem appealing to someone else, it is still a work that the creator has put effort into creating, and that is what makes it so special.
Art is something so uniquely human, an institution that brings people together. AI threatens to change that. Art is supposed to be a story of how it was made and what inspired it; it’s meant to be a testament to hard work and creativity. We already see many people using AI to bypass this idea, using generative technology to create pieces of art. Perhaps the most well-known one is “Théâtre D’opéra Spatial.” This was a piece generated by Jason Allen, using Midjourney, an AI image generator. This piece actually won at an art competition, sparking anger and outrage. People didn’t like the fact that an artwork made by a machine won against real human talent.
When you use artificial intelligence, you take away everything that makes a piece a work of art. Olivia Hsin’26 said, “For me, art is the act of human expression. I believe that AI art is very detrimental, not just to artists, but to the very definition of art. As its definition suggests, art loses its meaning and purpose when done by something non-human.” By using AI, none of your own skills and creativity are being brought through. You take away the process of working on bringing your own vision to life by just letting a computer program generate it. Sure, the idea that you input into the machine was still yours, but that doesn’t make it art. Everyone can have ideas; only a few can bring those ideas to life with their own hands.
Art has been around for centuries; it’s one of the main ways that we have learned about the past. It was one of the earliest forms of communication, with drawings on the walls of caves. Art is the reason we know so much about the culture of those who came before us. As more pieces made by artificial intelligence replace human works, our skills and stories become less clear to the people of the future. Of course, there are other ways to leave a mark on this world now, and other ways to have people know who you are. However, at the end of the day, nothing can beat the emotions one can feel when looking at a piece of art. It’s a completely different feeling when you know the effort that someone went through to bring their vision to life, to know all of the difficulties they might have gone through when making the piece, and the satisfaction they felt when it was complete.
AI-generated art isn’t limited to drawings, either. Artificial intelligence has found a way to mimic people, especially people’s voices. In addition, AI can now learn harmonies, melodies, and rhythms, leading to the rise of music created entirely by artificial intelligence. People can compose entire songs using artificial intelligence alone. Talent and skill have been taken off the table when it comes to drawing, and now it’s applying to music as well. Individuals no longer need to study music theory, play instruments, or master production software. Now, AI can do it all for them. Now that skill and creativity no longer need to factor into music creation, it seems that anyone can become a musician, making it increasingly difficult for genuinely talented artists to stand out.
Perhaps the most alarming example of the application of artificial intelligence in art is Tilly Norwood. She’s an actress who was completely generated by AI, created by Xicoia, an AI division in the production company, Particle6. Debuting in the film AI Commissioner on July 30th, 2025, Norwood sparked outrage and discomfort in many Hollywood actors and studios. Her creator, Eline Van der Velden, promoted her as the next Scarlett Johansson or Natalie Portman. There have been a couple of possible explanations brought up when trying to understand why some film executives might hire her. Some have argued that she would keep her looks even as time goes on since she wouldn’t age. Others have argued that she wouldn’t try to bargain for any unreasonable terms for her employment. Both of these terms are in complete disrespect, not just for human work, but for humans as a whole. It disregards the values of women by saying that Norwood is better because her looks wouldn’t change. This implies that women’s only role in this industry is to be eye candy for viewers. When people argue that Norwood is better because she wouldn’t complain about the conditions of her work, it disregards the challenges real actors endure in order to bring visions to life. They deserve to be paid fairly and to be given fair conditions while they’re working. Even if Norwood might be better for film executives, nothing can replace human effort and the reflection of human emotion in a film.
People have made a plethora of arguments in response to AI art not being considered as real art. One of these is the argument that artificial intelligence makes art more accessible. People who use artificial intelligence to create art argue that it allows everyone to be an artist. They can bring their visions to life without the need for any hard work. All they need to do is submit a prompt and get the product within a matter of minutes. However, this fails to understand that art is not just the result but also the process. Art should never be easy; it showcases the perseverance that artists go through. It’s made through the ups and downs and all the hardships the artist has gone through while creating art. I would also argue that art is already extremely accessible to all. You can’t argue that art is inaccessible if it has existed since we were Neanderthals. If our early ancestors could create art with nowhere near the amount of tools that we can access today, we should be able to without generative technology. If you have access to an electronic device, you definitely have access to a pencil and paper, and at least some basic recording software. Olivia Hsin’26said, “As long as you are alive, art will always be accessible. Art can be made using literally anything.” There have been many renowned artists with disabilities who never used or had access to AI; Beethoven composed some of his best works while going deaf. Many artists like Beethoven have had to overcome disabilities in order to produce art, yet they never gave up. They remained true to themselves and their art, and we should do the same.
Although artificial intelligence might have led to positive outcomes in certain fields, art is one that it should stay out of. Art is comprised of human creativity and dedication. It’s a testament to what a person can accomplish when they really put their mind to it. It should not be showcasing what a machine can create in a matter of minutes. The use of artificial intelligence in art is devaluing human effort. Art is meant to be a celebration of human culture, and artificial intelligence erases that. Rather than celebrating what a piece that a person made through hard work, people have begun celebrating the efficiency of generative technology. Jack Lau’26 said, “I’m sure that prompting the AI could be argued to be effortful, but ultimately, the skill and experience that comes with the creation of art is absent. Art has soul and human touch behind it, and to take that away seems almost sacrilegious.” Artificial intelligence is extremely dangerous to artists who spend time on their work, as their pieces are constantly being used to train AI to create pieces that are more and more realistic. These works created by artificial intelligence may one day replace real human talent when it comes to art, which is an idea that is both terrifying and inevitable.
Art should never be easy; it showcases the perseverance that artists go through. It’s made through the ups and downs and all the hardships the artist has gone through while creating art.