Great analogies! I think there must be a connection between how aggressively the arts have been devalued in recent years and how people have subsequently reduced it to an output-only exercise they can replicate easily, then act surprised to learn about the hidden craft behind it.
Ooo I hadn’t really thought of that element of it. Yes, thank you for sharing. It’s all linked isn’t it? I was thinking this the other day about why AI has, in some ways, taken a foothold in corporate settings. It’s easy to think oh companies are just pushing it. But in that context it’s inextricably linked to burnout, people being told to do too much, toxic productivity culture, etc. Important to never see an issue in a vacuum.
I think you do touch on important points about effort, meaning, and participation here, and I fully agree that we shouldn’t optimize away every meaningful struggle. But I’m not sure your examples fully map onto all the different reasons why people use AI art.
A lot of your analogies (like taking a taxi in a marathon, using a jet ski in a triathlon, or pressing the "DEMO" key on a Casio keyboard in a piano competition) are situations with agreed-upon rules, shared expectations, and/or a competitive frame. In those contexts, yes, I agree that bypassing the process undermines the whole point.
But that’s not the same as, say, my own use cases. I use AI to create images for my newsletter. Often, I want to make a piece more visually interesting than if I'd used yet another generic stock photo (or, as is more often the case, because there is no existing imagery that depicts the scene/image I have in mind). But at the same time, I don’t have the time or skill to create custom artwork, nor do I have the budget to commission any. When I include those images, I’m not claiming to have mastered illustration. I'm not entering those images into an art contest, nor am I asking anyone to admire my "brushwork" (or prompts, as it were). I’m simply using a tool to communicate more effectively, within very real constraints.
I also think there’s a danger in treating “process” as though it’s always the thing being defended within the Discourse. Sometimes it is, sure. And sometimes, often, maybe even usually, the process is the meaning, in and of itself. But sometimes the meaning is in the finished thing: the idea within an essay, the argument, the things you are trying to communicate. So considering this, not every instance of reducing friction is necessarily a moral or artistic failure.
And practically speaking, we’re now in a world where refusing to use these tools can create a real competitive disadvantage. For independent writers, small businesses, teachers, more niche creators, and other people without huge audiences or institutional backing, the choice is almost never between AI and a human artist, but between AI and nothing at all. So am I supposed to make my work less compelling, lose ground professionally, or struggle more financially in order to uphold a purity standard that people with more resources can more easily afford?
I posit that there’s no shame in making life less difficult where you can, especially when life is already enough of a struggle as it is. To me, the more useful distinction is not whether someone used AI at all, but whether they've used it honestly, respectfully, in an appropriate context, and without pretending it's something that it's not.
Firstly, thank you for your comment! Though I should be clear this is meant to be a short thought experiment around values. When you wrote that it doesn’t map onto all the different reasons why people use AI art, I mean, it absolutely doesn’t. And nor could it!
I also didn’t claim it’s a moral or artistic failure to use AI, as I don’t believe that. I’m not claiming I’m right here either btw, the reason I shared this is to get people thinking about how contradictions can show up in the way they think about these topics. As I say in the post, it’s interesting to me that people tend to dislike the idea of shortcutting things that matter to them and not other things. I think that’s absolutely worth sitting with.
I disagree that not using these tools puts people at a disadvantage. That might be case and industry dependent. I know some people are mandated to at their jobs. But on the whole I think the narrative that you’re at a disadvantage or AI is inevitable etc is all marketing. Very effective marketing! But a narrative spun by investors and AI companies.
And I’m not suggesting people feel shame at all. But I also fundamentally don’t agree that as long as something is making life easier it’s justified. My personal opinion on that is it’s only making things easier that we should not be making easier, it’s stripping them of their humanity. Thinking, relationships and creativity are just three examples that come to mind that are the most pressing and interesting to me.
But look, I’m not here to police anyone’s use or make them feel shameful! If you feel good using it, keep doing it. I feel very strongly about questioning dominant narratives, especially when they come from the tech industry. The dominant narrative right now is use it or get left behind, use it or you’ll suffer, etc. But if you genuinely feel you’re using it with awareness and that’s your choice then you’re more than entitled to keep doing that. I know plenty of other people will.
Though on the reason you use it, I find that fascinating too. How different everyone’s preferences must be. Because I would always prefer a generic stock image to an AI generated one, but hey that’s just me!
Anyway, thanks again for sharing! We may not have the same opinion on some of these issues but it’s good to be able to talk them through.
Oh I agree fully, it’s nice to be able to discuss disagreements like adults, which is why I much prefer Substack to, say, X.
Anyway, thanks for thoughtfully engaging with my comment! Points taken, all around; agree to disagree in places, but I think we both recognize there’s a lot of nuance that gets lost in the Discourse, and it’s good to hash it out in spaces like this.
It is, absolutely! And I'm currently working on a piece about the power of changing your mind and being open to dissenting views, so I think it's always worthwhile when conversations like this take place respectfully. Also, you've got me thinking about a few things after this interaction too. Around that idea of ease and convenience. But also whether my language, tone, etc, in the piece came across as a little too shaming here. Which wasn't my intention but is now something to consider for future posts, so thank you for that as well!
Oh I wouldn’t worry about that, Becca. Part of it might have been projection on my part; I’m so used to dealing with highly shaming/moralizing language when arguing my position that I (probably subconsciously) unfairly assumed that of you. I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to make you worry so much! 😅
Really, there was nothing wrong with your tone! (And even if it were scold-ish… ultimately, it’s still your right to say it how you want, and my reaction is squarely a “me” issue… though if persuasion is your main objective, then of course I understand if you want to watch out for that!)
Great analogies! I think there must be a connection between how aggressively the arts have been devalued in recent years and how people have subsequently reduced it to an output-only exercise they can replicate easily, then act surprised to learn about the hidden craft behind it.
Ooo I hadn’t really thought of that element of it. Yes, thank you for sharing. It’s all linked isn’t it? I was thinking this the other day about why AI has, in some ways, taken a foothold in corporate settings. It’s easy to think oh companies are just pushing it. But in that context it’s inextricably linked to burnout, people being told to do too much, toxic productivity culture, etc. Important to never see an issue in a vacuum.
I think you do touch on important points about effort, meaning, and participation here, and I fully agree that we shouldn’t optimize away every meaningful struggle. But I’m not sure your examples fully map onto all the different reasons why people use AI art.
A lot of your analogies (like taking a taxi in a marathon, using a jet ski in a triathlon, or pressing the "DEMO" key on a Casio keyboard in a piano competition) are situations with agreed-upon rules, shared expectations, and/or a competitive frame. In those contexts, yes, I agree that bypassing the process undermines the whole point.
But that’s not the same as, say, my own use cases. I use AI to create images for my newsletter. Often, I want to make a piece more visually interesting than if I'd used yet another generic stock photo (or, as is more often the case, because there is no existing imagery that depicts the scene/image I have in mind). But at the same time, I don’t have the time or skill to create custom artwork, nor do I have the budget to commission any. When I include those images, I’m not claiming to have mastered illustration. I'm not entering those images into an art contest, nor am I asking anyone to admire my "brushwork" (or prompts, as it were). I’m simply using a tool to communicate more effectively, within very real constraints.
I also think there’s a danger in treating “process” as though it’s always the thing being defended within the Discourse. Sometimes it is, sure. And sometimes, often, maybe even usually, the process is the meaning, in and of itself. But sometimes the meaning is in the finished thing: the idea within an essay, the argument, the things you are trying to communicate. So considering this, not every instance of reducing friction is necessarily a moral or artistic failure.
And practically speaking, we’re now in a world where refusing to use these tools can create a real competitive disadvantage. For independent writers, small businesses, teachers, more niche creators, and other people without huge audiences or institutional backing, the choice is almost never between AI and a human artist, but between AI and nothing at all. So am I supposed to make my work less compelling, lose ground professionally, or struggle more financially in order to uphold a purity standard that people with more resources can more easily afford?
I posit that there’s no shame in making life less difficult where you can, especially when life is already enough of a struggle as it is. To me, the more useful distinction is not whether someone used AI at all, but whether they've used it honestly, respectfully, in an appropriate context, and without pretending it's something that it's not.
Firstly, thank you for your comment! Though I should be clear this is meant to be a short thought experiment around values. When you wrote that it doesn’t map onto all the different reasons why people use AI art, I mean, it absolutely doesn’t. And nor could it!
I also didn’t claim it’s a moral or artistic failure to use AI, as I don’t believe that. I’m not claiming I’m right here either btw, the reason I shared this is to get people thinking about how contradictions can show up in the way they think about these topics. As I say in the post, it’s interesting to me that people tend to dislike the idea of shortcutting things that matter to them and not other things. I think that’s absolutely worth sitting with.
I disagree that not using these tools puts people at a disadvantage. That might be case and industry dependent. I know some people are mandated to at their jobs. But on the whole I think the narrative that you’re at a disadvantage or AI is inevitable etc is all marketing. Very effective marketing! But a narrative spun by investors and AI companies.
And I’m not suggesting people feel shame at all. But I also fundamentally don’t agree that as long as something is making life easier it’s justified. My personal opinion on that is it’s only making things easier that we should not be making easier, it’s stripping them of their humanity. Thinking, relationships and creativity are just three examples that come to mind that are the most pressing and interesting to me.
But look, I’m not here to police anyone’s use or make them feel shameful! If you feel good using it, keep doing it. I feel very strongly about questioning dominant narratives, especially when they come from the tech industry. The dominant narrative right now is use it or get left behind, use it or you’ll suffer, etc. But if you genuinely feel you’re using it with awareness and that’s your choice then you’re more than entitled to keep doing that. I know plenty of other people will.
Though on the reason you use it, I find that fascinating too. How different everyone’s preferences must be. Because I would always prefer a generic stock image to an AI generated one, but hey that’s just me!
Anyway, thanks again for sharing! We may not have the same opinion on some of these issues but it’s good to be able to talk them through.
Oh I agree fully, it’s nice to be able to discuss disagreements like adults, which is why I much prefer Substack to, say, X.
Anyway, thanks for thoughtfully engaging with my comment! Points taken, all around; agree to disagree in places, but I think we both recognize there’s a lot of nuance that gets lost in the Discourse, and it’s good to hash it out in spaces like this.
It is, absolutely! And I'm currently working on a piece about the power of changing your mind and being open to dissenting views, so I think it's always worthwhile when conversations like this take place respectfully. Also, you've got me thinking about a few things after this interaction too. Around that idea of ease and convenience. But also whether my language, tone, etc, in the piece came across as a little too shaming here. Which wasn't my intention but is now something to consider for future posts, so thank you for that as well!
Oh I wouldn’t worry about that, Becca. Part of it might have been projection on my part; I’m so used to dealing with highly shaming/moralizing language when arguing my position that I (probably subconsciously) unfairly assumed that of you. I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to make you worry so much! 😅
Really, there was nothing wrong with your tone! (And even if it were scold-ish… ultimately, it’s still your right to say it how you want, and my reaction is squarely a “me” issue… though if persuasion is your main objective, then of course I understand if you want to watch out for that!)