Delegating Our Feelings: How Artificial Intelligence Is Shaping The
Future Of Art
The usage of artificial intelligence in humanistic fields has to be one of the most delicate topics, as it leads people to question whether the world is letting a machine take control over those roles which, by name, should be managed by human only. But this discussion becomes more complicated when creative industries are involved as well. Since the debate on the ethicality of art created with AI is already alive, the aim of this piece is to shed some light on the topic and questioning what consequences these changes could have on the fashion sector.
Ai and art: Is history repeating itself or are we just passing the torch?
I have been-and still am- skeptic on the use of AI in creative fields, however i came across some interesting insights that gave me a way to reflect on the topic in a more attentive way. When photography debuted, in 1839 with Louis Daguerre, despite being an astonishing innovation it found a lot of critiques in the art world. Suddenly there was something able to depict the surrounding reality better than painting. Moreover it made representations, specifically portraits, affordable to both the middle and lower classes. As this shift could not be reversed, painters had to re-invent themselves: instead of focusing on an objective reproduction of the world they enhanced brushes, light’s depictions and mostly portraits “fleeting moments”. With all these new techniques in the late 19th, in the city of Paris, Impressionism was born. Its aim was not to compete with photography, but complement it by creating what a photo could not capture.
Another example in the field of arts is the introduction of the “ready-made” of Duchamp which raised lots of doubts as well. The french artist who lived in the 20th century completely changed what the world perceived as art. After realising some of his early works in line with the Cubism movement -for instance “nude descending a star anise No. 2”, 1912- in 1913 he left the public speechless with ”Bicycle Wheel”, a bicycle wheel mounted on a wooden stool. The idea behind ready-made art is very clear: it stands for artworks created by using pre existing objects, repurposed in new contexts. If art could be created by anyone, with any means, how do we understand what is to be considered as such? While still taking into account its structural techniques, the objective of art is to communicate with people. In the form of clear portrayals or more questionable pieces what has always done is make who watches it think. It has opened debates and raised awareness. The fact that under totalitarian regimes artworks- alongside books- are the first to be censored should be taken as further confirmation of the power it holds in people’s critical thinking skills.
Having understood that, i approached the topic of AI and art more openly and decided to dive deeper into the concept. In 2019 a robot with human like appearance, named “Ai-Da” was labelled as the first artistic robot, as with the use of artificial intelligence and human inputs it was able to create works, later considered as artworks. Moreover three years later, in 2022, it addressed the role that technology will hold in the future when it came to the artistic field “the role of technology in creating art will continue to grow as artists find new ways to use technology to express themselves and reflect and explore the relationship between technology, society and culture” it stated when answering some questions asked in the UK parliament. Despite still involving human ideas why does it still feel like a different shift than what the introduction of photography and ready-made were? Granting that it’s impossible to obstacle change, the usage of AI also in this field seems to be the tipping point.
The impact of AI so far
In a study conducted by Micheal Gerlich, professor at the Swiss Business School (SBS) 666 participants, among different age groups and education backgrounds were subjected to attentive interviews with the aim of understanding how AI had impacted their critical thinking abilities. The study proved that among young individuals there is a higher reliance on AI tools and lower critical thinking scores than among the older ones. ( “AI tools in society: impacts on our cognitive offloading and the future of critical thinking” published in January 2025). To date we can access artificial intelligence with any means possible: via ChatGPT, “Ask Meta AI” on Instagram and “AI overview” on Google, but instead of taking advantage of it, our thinking capabilities are worsening. It does not have to be all or nothing, in some fields its use can be very beneficial, but by constantly consulting it, our issues will slowly become its issues, as we won’t be the ones solving them anymore.
Why Art made by AI should not be promoted
I do understand it sounds like an harsh statement and i do not desire to be an advocate for hindering progress. The reflections on the changes in the art world do bring a valid counterpart to the idea of not using artificial intelligence, still i can’t help but keep on standing in my position.
While its objectives in the different centuries may have changed art has always reflected emotions. It could have been through one’s facial expression or through a natural scenario; even during movements such as the Informalism (1943-50) while the works took a completely abstract form, they mirrored something internal to the artist. When it came to photography, the subject chosen were selected because they evoked something in the photographer, the readymade work per se may not be what is to be considered as art, but the reflections around its meaning are what is important. I can understand why incorporating AI in art works can be a way to discuss our current world but having it to do the work takes from art its human nature. Delegating even this form of expression to an emotionless machine feels like giving up on one of the purest means of creations. Rationally the constant search for improvement is likely to create better techniques, portraits or elaborated paintings but despite its superficial perfection, what kind of reflections can originate from something created by a machine?
While it is fascinating to observe the progress it makes and relate its work to our current world situation, because i am well aware of the influence artificial intelligence has on our lives, there is also the risk of creating a future where most of the galleries’ works won’t be human produced.
How this all correlates to the fashion scene
While not being a direct correlation for all, there is a tight relationship between fashion and art. Both of their aims regard communication, expression and displaying the artist’s internal reality. An example could be the last collection of Maria Grazia Chiuri for Dior-the 2026 resort-. Stating “i want to show what i love, what i really love” showcased the emotional influence behind the designs: the details of each creation were chosen in order to reflect the nature of the city of Rome, close to the heart of the designer. Meaning that, either with a brush or a pencil and later a sewing machine- it’s possible to create from emotions. And despite having arleady been used in more marketing orientated spaces, could AI expand further and have a say in the creative process of designs as well? If people were able to accept Ai-Da in the field of arts, would they embrace a human like robot able to do collections by it self? One aspect to be considered is that with the help of AI trend forecasting and product design are definitely faster, which is both a good and a bad outcome: houses and brands would be able to keep up with change and lower the chances of getting out of business, but at the same time there would be an increasing of the issues caused by fast fashion. Moreover giving AI all the power of creation would also erase the history and thought behind one piece of clothing: even if you were to insert the inputs for clothes in the AI machine, to what length are they to be considered as active counterparts in the process or “simple inputs”?
Personally i feel like the over-use of artificial intelligence is giving us the burden of isolation: when we substitute people with AI we give up on connections and the diversity of opinions. Even if with tools such as ChatGPT it is possible to create a discussion by asking it to play the counter part it is not a stimuli strong enough to inspire one’s mind. Its role should be limited to the “tool” part, not being expanded to the point of defining the human purpose to an input. Lots of people have already renounced to their logical thinking skills by delegating the hard tasks to AI and while i do not agree with it i can see the reasoning behind it: hard tasks are not pleasant and seeking comfort instead feels better. But when it comes to art, which is not classified as one of the primary goods needed to survive but is created to satisfy the innate human desire of expression, why do we feel the need to delegate it?
If humans are no longer able to create, should they be considered humans at all?
