To create a beautiful sculpture, one needs wood extracted from a strong, solid trunk. To forge a fine blade, one needs high-quality steel. The Latin adage “Ex nihilo nihil fit,” which means nothing comes from nothing, holds true.
All artists agree on this point: to create something new, one must first nourish and stimulate creativity by exposing oneself to different works. Only then is it possible to produce a piece that, on a personal level, carries meaning. In the past, this inspiration was found in the halls of exhibitions or during formative journeys. Today, artificial intelligence (AI) has become a tool from which many creative individuals can draw inspiration. However, this new tool is often at the center of debate.
AI provides access, in record time, to a vast range of visual productions created by different artists and across multiple styles. It also allows creative individuals to refine their ideas by asking questions about concepts they have developed themselves. This represents a significant time gain in a process that can sometimes take days or even weeks.
This new technology helps eliminate “blank page syndrome,” which is characterized by a lack of inspiration over a more or less extended period. The nature of inspiration is subjective: it is up to each artist to decide what stimulates their creativity, as there is no single method.
It is therefore considered by several experts in the field, such as Professor Benjamin Brobst-Renaud, lecturer in Communication and Visual Arts (CVA) at Valparaiso University, that AI is a completely valid option.
“I think that tools like AI have incredible potential to expand how we see, experience and express ideas,” Brobst-Renaud said. “That said, I don’t see these tools, and AI in particular as making it easier to make good art.”
However, not everyone sees things in the same way. For some people, AI interferes with the process of artistic research and conception of ideas. The artwork is no longer solely the result of an intimate reflection developed by the creator, but rather of a set of suggestions that the artist evaluates and reappropriates afterward.
“It’s kind of like doping – it alters the final result and creates an imbalance,” Sarah Jantzi, associate professor of CVA said. “It doesn’t mean the work has no value, but it is not the same thing.”
Indeed, blank page syndrome can sometimes be an opportunity to question one’s limits and connect more deeply with the inner self. In this context, AI can act as a barrier to this internal challenge. It is often when under pressure that the best ideas emerge.
The use of this tool may therefore limit one’s ability to explore their own mind and the unique way each person thinks. This is where the most important issue arises: art is the ability to express human experiences in order to convey a strong emotion or message. To express this experience authentically, one must explore and examine their own thoughts and sources of inspiration without external assistance.
AI appears to be a major asset in accelerating the creative process. However, it should not replace the personal research work that the artist carries out beforehand. It is therefore up to each user to employ it wisely, as a complementary tool within an already established creative approach. How can we evaluate the value of a work when it results from a mutualized process between humans and machines? This question can only be fully answered by observing, over the long term, the evolution of artistic practices and the way in which this collaboration gradually redefines the very notion of creation.
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of The Torch.