[HN Gopher] Art and Artifice
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Art and Artifice
        
       Author : prismatic
       Score  : 35 points
       Date   : 2024-06-30 04:39 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (harpers.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (harpers.org)
        
       | neonate wrote:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20240628023958/https://harpers.o...
       | 
       | https://archive.ph/PPvGF
        
       | swayvil wrote:
       | The artist sees. The 99% doesn't. Of course popular culture is
       | utterly dominated by the 99%. Of course.
       | 
       | There's more to do with this great seeing than to create art and
       | rage that apes won't give you the respect you deserve. The seeing
       | can free you too. You don't need them.
        
       | kouru225 wrote:
       | I can't agree with this article: "Instead, Martel echoes the
       | great aesthete himself, Oscar Wilde, in his serene dictum that
       | all art is perfectly useless. And yet, as Martel writes, "It is
       | precisely the absence of political and moral interest that makes
       | art an agent of liberation wherever it appears.""
       | 
       | This seems like it's missing the point. Art deconstructs
       | communication and therefore both creates the illusion of truth
       | and represents the illusion of truth, showing us that it's an
       | illusion. Art can easily use political and moral interests to
       | seduce its audience and does so often.
       | 
       | "Instead, the Real that art helps us come into contact with is
       | something far more slippery, and far closer to what Walter
       | Benjamin called the "true surrealist face of existence." This is
       | not the surrealism of predictive AI--endlessly recircling within
       | its own sidewindings and elisions--but the bizarre wide-open Real
       | out on the edges of experience, which has a good deal less to do
       | with the measurable, quantifiable, empirical world than with the
       | unseen possible: whether hidden aspects of the future simmering
       | invisibly in the present, or mysteries so giant and unpredictable
       | that science can't begin to approach them."
       | 
       | And what makes you think this is different than AI? Seems kinda
       | like the author almost came to a valuable conclusion and then
       | shook it off because they didn't like the implications.
       | 
       | "But if true art is an instrument for transcendence and cognitive
       | freedom, then artifice--art's look-alike--is a homogenizing force
       | that blocks off possibilities and alternate modes of being"
       | 
       | Now we get to the most boring and annoying tendencies of pretty
       | much every piece of philosophy or criticism from the 18th/19th
       | century: "hey guys I have a new philosophy. There is something
       | that's perfect and wonderful but it's difference from this new
       | thing I'm gonna define that looks the exact same but is actually
       | evil and terrible. There's no way to differentiate between the
       | two except by vibes. It's kinda just like God and Satan... almost
       | like I just took my weird puritan religious values and recreated
       | them in this other field of study for no reason. Also you know
       | all those questions about my previous definition of art? All of
       | them are answered because I'll just classify any exceptions as
       | this evil and terrible thing."
        
       | motohagiography wrote:
       | Most of what you believe about the world comes from Art whether
       | it's syllogisms and parables, geometry and architecture, symbols
       | and the integrity of rituals, or even the consequences of war,
       | these are all Art. AI really is different, as if it's made of
       | language, we're going to be able to simulate it. A lot of what we
       | called art is ceasing to cohere meaning when we can generate it
       | as a representation for nothing.
       | 
       | the question to me is, if art is a way for people to scratch out
       | a bit of dignity and meaning in this life by finding and
       | expressing something essential, what is it about AI that is so
       | obviously in opposition to that value?
       | 
       | we don't like to talk about dignity because it shows some
       | materialist beliefs as hollow artifacts of narrative that we can
       | now simulate with some python scripts- but it's becoming suddenly
       | urgent. What is still Art in an age of AI will likely form the
       | map of what is still essential human dignity and experience vs.
       | simulated experiences.
       | 
       | It sounds handwavy, but consider that if AI persuades people
       | nothing is essential, then nothing is true or actually means
       | anything, then there is no ethical backstop against atrocities
       | and "state of nature," stuff. "Real Art" is the canary for that,
       | imo. I'm not against AI or anything, but I do think it is
       | suddenly on artists to get their shit together and demonstrate
       | some essential humanity, or they will just be consumed by those
       | with the reins of AI who would seek to deprive us all of it.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-07-01 23:02 UTC)