Who Holds the Chisel Now? AI, Authorship, and the Future of Art

By Mechelle Marie Gilford and Sir Bard (now named Gemini…but I hold a fondness for Sir Bard!)

Imagine a classroom abuzz with the whir of 3D printers and the enthusiastic chatter of students. One student, using only voice commands and an accessible interface, conjures a fantastical griffin, its wings a swirling blend of lion and eagle. This isn’t science fiction, but a glimpse into the future of artistic expression, a future where Artificial Intelligence (AI) dismantles barriers and empowers a new generation of creators.

But amidst the flurry of creation, a fundamental question arises: who, or what, is the artist in this scenario?

Through the lens of Aristotle, as outlined in his Poetics, the act of creation hinges on poiesis, the bringing forth of something new into the world (Aristotle, Poetics, 1447a). Here, the student plays a clear role, their imagination and direction guiding the AI tool. However, the student’s ability to express that vision might be limited by physical constraints.

This is where AI enters, acting as a potent techne, a practical skill that aids in the realization of the creative vision. As philosopher David Chalmers posits, “Minds equipped with advanced tools can achieve creative feats that would be impossible for un-tooled minds” (Chalmers, The Singularity is Near, 2010). Just as a sculptor relies on a hammer and chisel to translate their vision into marble, the student utilizes the AI to translate their vision into a tangible form.

Hegel, on the other hand, in his Lectures on the Philosophy of History, emphasizes the role of the artist as a conduit for the “Spirit of the Age” (Hegel, Lectures on the Philosophy of History, Introduction). Wielding the AI tool, the student becomes a vessel for a new artistic paradigm, one where human ingenuity and technology converge.

The impact of AI extends far beyond philosophical musings. For students with disabilities, AI-powered tools can be transformative. Imagine a young artist, wheelchair-bound and unable to wield a traditional paintbrush, effortlessly creating digital masterpieces with voice commands or eye-tracking software. AI dismantles physical barriers, democratizing artistic expression and fostering a more inclusive creative landscape, as argued by Alessandro Ludovico et al. in their paper “A Survey on Assistive Technologies for Artistic Creation” (Ludovico et al., 2022).

However, the question of ownership remains a tangled web. Does the student who conceives the griffin deserve sole authorship? Or should credit be shared with the AI that translates the vision into a 3D model? Copyright laws, drafted in a pre-digital era, may struggle to keep pace with this evolving artistic landscape, as addressed by Pamela Samuelson in her seminal work “The Digital Dilemma” (Samuelson, 1996).

Perhaps the answer lies not in rigid ownership models, but in the collaborative spirit itself. The student and the AI become a creative chimera, a fantastical beast birthed from the fusion of human and machine. This concept aligns with Margaret Boden’s notion of “computational creativity,” where human and machine collaborate to achieve creative outcomes (Boden, Mind as Machine, 2000).

Ultimately, the essence of art may not lie in singular authorship, but in the creation itself. In this new era, the boundaries between human and machine creativity are blurring, leading to unexpected and often breathtaking results. As long as the final product evokes wonder, sparks inspiration, or simply allows a student with limitations to express their boundless creativity, the act of creation, in all its collaborative glory, has achieved its purpose. Indeed, the chisel, once a symbol of solitary creation, now rests in many hands, a testament to the evolving landscape of art.

References

Aristotle (1447a). Poetics [1447a]. In The Complete Works of Aristotle (Vol. 2, eds. J. Barnes, J. ONeill & E. M. Stalley). Oxford University Press.

Boden, M. A. (2000). Mind as machine: Philosophy, psychology, and computing. Oxford University Press.

Chalmers, D. J. (2010). The singularity is near: When humans transcend biology. Viking Adult.

Hegel, G. W. F. (1975). Aesthetics: Lectures on fine art (Vol. 1, trans. T. M. Knox). Oxford University Press.

Ludovico, A., et al. (2022). A survey on assistive technologies for artistic creation. Universal Access in the Information Society, 25(2), 1223-1253.

Samuelson, P. (1996). The digital dilemma: Intellectual property in the information age. New York University Press.