I encountered this issue a lot when it came to outreach of opera and getting wider audiences to be curious about opera. Most don’t care. It’s true - what he says is right. Most consumers do not care about artistry. They don’t care about the deeper meaning for why something is made: does it run? Does it play well? Is it fun? That’s what matters to most. So the discussion between AI and artists frankly isn’t something that most care about not only because it doesn’t affect them but because they simply aren’t aware. They do not know why a painting takes weeks. They do not see the individual brush strokes of a monet, or the way the Pietá was carved. What they care about is the result.
Is this bad? Does it matter? Maybe maybe not. But artists are in a different category: artists are in the work of expression.
Again, I think this inherently stems from a lack of education. Or a limited education, in any case. Some people see a flower and they say “oh’ a flower” someone else sees a flower and says “wow look the bee is floating around it - it is giving life to the flower and the flower to it” - I don’t know if that stems from nature or nurture. Are people born more sensitive? Or with a desire to create? Or is it an inherent aspect of what it means to be human?
In the studio Ghibli movie Spirited Away: no face represents many things - but to me he has always represented consumption. More more more. Feed me. And that is the danger of being purely a consumer. One becomes an empty shell. With one purpose.
That may be the world we live in or a world that we are headed to but there will always be artists hoping to introduce people to another way of viewing through world.
@iMissSeanPayton @BaronessGio It's called shitpost art for a reason. It was made obviously for laughs and nothing more, but you ended up making it seem sexualized. I hope that's not a hard concept for you to understand?