Art at the touch of a button? On the value of artistic work in the age of AI

The real question

I have been working on this text for a very long time. I have researched, deliberated, formulated and discarded again. I have also had a few ‘conversations’ with AIs. About whether AI-generated works can be considered art. Their tenor is basically: ‘You can see it this way or that way, it depends on your concept of art.’ A very diplomatic answer. And not a point of view at all.

Then I realised that I was actually concerned with something completely different. Namely, the question of whether my artistic work still has any value in view of the flood of AI-generated content.

Art as an experience

Since the age of modern art, at the latest, any medium can theoretically be art. What has value depends primarily not on the material, but on the concept. The task of artists is to share their worldview with us and express themes in new ways. And they do so in every conceivable medium, from abstract paintings to concept albums, from toilet bowls placed in museums to shocking performances.

If I have learned one thing in my three semesters of art history at FKAF, it is that you can never know how much something will move you or not. For example, from an aesthetic point of view, I particularly like painting. In contrast, photographs or objects usually do not have the same emotional effect on me. But a few months ago, we were at an exhibition where the first room looked like this:

Olia Fedorova, „We Are Now Leaving“, 2025, of the exhbition "Undermining the Immediacy“at MMK Tower, Frankfurt am Main

So far, so good. A few signs. But as we explored the project, it became clear that these weren't just any signs – they were Ukrainian town exit signs. Without names. Empty spaces in the room. We had to ‘walk through’ them to continue on to the exhibition. As we did so, we left behind, in a figurative sense, all the erased, now nameless places that the war in Ukraine has cost. Wow.

I'm getting goosebumps again just writing this. THAT is art. This connection between artist, artwork and recipient, this feeling that it ‘does something to me’.

The journey is the destination – or at least one of the goals

From the artist's perspective, I find the process of artistic work very fulfilling. For me, it's about flow, intuition and letting go of my expectations. It's about the dance between feeling and thinking, between doing and evaluating, between movement and pause. The most authentic artistic expression only emerges when you are completely at one with yourself.

And it's about growing in this process. Using skills you've learned because you've tried again and again – from your first clumsy attempts to developing your own style. I believe that this is something deeply human – who hasn't seen children who are proud because they've done something themselves for the first time?

The process is often rocky. Especially when you want to break new ground, there are no shortcuts. But how good it feels when you've made it through the valley of tears, the ugly middle stage, or whatever you want to call it – when that first exciting idea has turned not just into a series of pitiful attempts, but into something finished, something you've made yourself. (Are you also hearing Tom Hanks’ voice shouting ‘I have made fire!’ in Cast Away?)

But what AI enables us to do is to cross the finish line directly, without tears and without detours, in the fastest way possible. A prompt – a task – is turned into a text, an image or a song in no time at all. Input in, output out, from one moment to the next.

In my view, this can only backfire. How can you improve? How can you even judge whether what you read, see or hear is what you wanted? And how can you be proud of something you didn't make yourself, but only roughly outlined?

Space for reflection

What is also missing from discussions on this topic is the fact that artistic work can also be a way of processing things. The search for one's own form of expression is a way of coming to terms with what surrounds us or happens to us.

For example, during a difficult phase in my life, I painted a self-portrait in which I poured all my emotions, all the sadness and anger. When it was finished, I thought about the person in the picture: she may be worn out, but she is looking directly at me. She is not looking away. She is strong and she can get through this – – – I can get through this, because I painted this meaning into it, more or less unconsciously. I would never have had that feeling from an image created ‘just like that’ by AI.

In relation to each other

I realise that the line between ‘AI-generated’ and ‘AI-assisted’ is blurred and that, as a recipient, it may already be impossible to distinguish how much of an artist's work is actually their own. It is also clear that AI as a tool is here to stay and that there will certainly be artists who find their honest expression with the help of AI.

Perhaps, when evaluating a work, we simply need to ask ourselves whether we can establish a relationship with the creator behind it. I believe that people actively seek and want to feel this connection. We are not only interested in the end result, but also in the person behind it. This relationship does not end in an exhibition, but continues in the spaces of those who live with a work of art. I believe that this has a value that AI cannot easily replace.

Live and in colour

In my current paintings, I deal with technological issues. The works in my HaBits series are an expression of my exploration of the digital reality in which we live. Some of them can still be seen this weekend in Groß-Umstadt – completely analogue ;)

Exhibition: "Leben in der Main-Metropole (Life in the Main Metropolis aka Frankfurt)", Kunstforum Säulenhalle, Markt 1, 64823 Groß-Umstadt, Saturday + Sunday 10 a.m.–6 p.m.