Art in the Age of AI
Video Trailer for the Essay. Created by Robert Lester with Adobe tools, LumaAI, MidJourney, and a lot of good old fashioned elbow grease.
What happens when machines don't just reproduce art but create it? When an algorithm can generate a "new" Rembrandt or compose a symphony in the style of Mozart with a few text prompts? We're witnessing not just a shift in how art is made, but a fundamental repositioning of what creativity itself means.
AI Assisted Portrait of Walter Benjamin
I remember the shock the first time I read Walter Benjamin's seminal essay "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction"¹ in a college film class. Twenty years later, as AI generates art with unnerving efficiency, his insights feel not just relevant but urgent.
Benjamin, writing in 1935 while Europe approached catastrophe, couldn't have imagined algorithms creating art. Yet his analysis of how photography and film transformed creativity in the early 20th century provides the perfect framework for our current moment. Today, we're generating art at scale, challenging what it means to be a creator when anyone can produce "masterpieces" with a text prompt.
This essay explores the collision of Benjamin's theories with our AI reality. We'll examine how generative AI is redefining art, upending economic models, and forcing us to rethink the future of human creativity. I'll also note some other contemporary thinkers who are contributing great perspective to this discourse.
The age of AI production is here, and it's rewriting the rules of art faster than we can hit 'generate'.
When Algorithms Create: Aura and Authenticity
"Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: its presence in time and space, its unique existence at the place where it happens to be." - Walter Benjamin²
Benjamin's concept of "aura"—the unique authority of an original artwork—confronts a fundamental challenge with AI. When Midjourney can create thousands of "original" works in the style of Van Gogh in minutes, what happens to the aura of "Starry Night"? When Jason Allen's AI-generated "Théâtre D'opéra Spatial" wins a fine art competition, beating works made entirely by human hands, how do we understand authenticity? The "unique existence" Benjamin spoke of fragments across networks, forcing us to reconsider original artistic value itself.
This transformation accelerates what Benjamin identified: our desire for proximity to art and comfort with reproductions. AI satisfies our craving for immediate, personalized creative content while blurring the boundary between viewer and creator. A teenager with a laptop now wields creative capabilities once reserved for trained artists.
In this new landscape, authenticity doesn't disappear—it transforms. Value shifts from the physical object to the story behind its creation, the creator's intent, and its impact on audiences. The aura attaches not to uniqueness but to meaning.
Democratization vs Devaluation
"In principle a work of art has always been reproducible. Man-made artifacts could always be imitated by men. Replicas were made by pupils in practice of their craft, by masters for diffusing their works, and, finally, by third parties in the pursuit of gain." - Walter Benjamin⁴
"The technique of reproduction," Benjamin wrote, "detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition." AI takes this detachment further, transforming how we create and value art. Artists now collaborate with algorithms, becoming curators and prompt engineers as much as creators. When I type instructions into an AI system, am I creating art or merely directing an artificial intelligence?
The role of the artist is evolving beyond recognition. Consider digital artist Refik Anadol, who doesn’t “create” images in the traditional sense but designs algorithms that generate constantly changing visual experiences based on data. Or artist/musician Holly Herndon, who developed an AI voice clone of herself called “Holly+” as a collaborative partner and released it to the world. These artists aren’t being replaced by AI — they’re becoming directors, prompt engineers, and collaborators with their technological tools.
When algorithms generate stunning images instantly, the value must be driven by human intention, struggle, and meaning more than technical perfection.
The economics follow this transformation. AI-generated artwork derives value not from scarcity but from impact, reach, and narrative. Yes, ownership becomes ambiguous, but AI democratizes creation, potentially opening artistic expression to those previously excluded by lack of training or resources.
Economic and Cultural Implications
“For the first time in world history, mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual." - Walter Benjamin⁸
Benjamin recognized art's political dimension—how reproduction could democratize access while potentially serving propaganda. Today's open source AI models intensify this tension, shifting power away from traditional gatekeepers.
Open development means no single entity can monopolize this technology entirely. Yet this openness comes with risks—the same systems enabling creative freedom can generate convincing misinformation.
The contrast between Western and Chinese approaches highlights this tension. Open models flourish alongside sophisticated attempts to regulate outputs. The question becomes not just who can create, but who defines acceptable creation.
This struggle echoes Benjamin's concern: art's capacity to either support or resist authoritarian control. In the age of AI, this battle occurs at the level of code, data, and algorithms.
The potential for AI in political manipulation presents a double-edged sword. On one hand, it echoes Benjamin's concerns about the aestheticization of politics, where AI-generated content could be used to sway public opinion or spread misinformation at an unprecedented scale.
On the other hand, it also opens up new avenues for political resistance and expression, allowing activists and artists to create powerful, targeted content quickly and efficiently. This tension between control and liberation in AI art production mirrors the very dilemma Benjamin grappled with regarding photography and prints: how can art serve progressive political purposes without being co-opted by authoritarian forces?
Human Creativity in an Algorithmic Age
As experts of new art forms, we must become constant learners.
Twenty years after my first encounter with Benjamin's essay, I'm both unsettled and exhilarated by how AI transforms his predictions. The erosion of aura has accelerated beyond anything he could have imagined, yet human creativity persists, adapting as it always has.
What remains essentially human when algorithms generate beauty? Perhaps it's the intent behind creation, the emotional resonance of shared experience, or the narrative surrounding the work.
Throughout history, new technologies have challenged artistic traditions without diminishing creativity's importance. Photography didn't end painting—it pushed artists toward new forms of expression. Similarly, AI won't replace human creativity but will become both a tool and catalyst for redefining what makes art meaningful.
The future of art will be shaped by our choices: how we engage with these technologies, the frameworks we establish, and our commitment to preserving what makes human expression irreplaceable. Benjamin showed us how to analyze technological change without fear. Following his example, we must become thoughtful participants in art's ongoing evolution.
Footnotes:
¹ Benjamin, W. (1969). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Illuminations (H. Zohn, Trans.). New York: Schocken Books. (Original work published 1935) LINK
² Ibid.
³ Kalpokas, I. (2023). Work of art in the Age of Its AI Reproduction. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537231184490
⁴ Benjamin, W. (1969). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Illuminations (H. Zohn, Trans.). New York: Schocken Books. (Original work published 1935)
⁵ Kalpokas, I. (2023). Work of art in the Age of Its AI Reproduction. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537231184490
⁶ Benjamin, W. (1969). The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction. In H. Arendt (Ed.), Illuminations (H. Zohn, Trans.). New York: Schocken Books. (Original work published 1935)
⁷ Ibid.
⁸ Ibid.
⁹ Stephensen, quoted in Kalpokas, I. (2023). Work of art in the Age of Its AI Reproduction. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537231184490
*all images created by Robert Lester with digital and AI art tools