The College of Alaska Fairbanks undergraduate arrested earlier this week for consuming an AI-generated paintings on view in an MFA exhibition has since addressed his controversial meal.
Graham Granger, a scholar within the college’s movie and performing arts program, was charged Wednesday with class B misdemeanor prison mischief for tearing up a set of Polaroids by artist Nick Dwyer, inflicting lower than $250 in injury.
“[Granger] was tearing them up and simply shoving them in as quick as he may,” a witness informed The Nation. “Like while you see folks in a hot-dog consuming contest.” In line with the police report, roughly 57 of the 160 pictures within the present had been destroyed.
Associated Articles
Granger spoke to The Nation following his launch from the Fairbanks Correctional Facility—he stated he expects to pay a high quality reasonably than serve jail time—and clarified that the vandalism was not premeditated. “I noticed the AI piece, and as an artist myself, it was insulting to see one thing of such little effort alongside all these stunning items within the gallery,” he stated. “It shouldn’t be acceptable for this ‘artwork’ to be put alongside actual, nice items. It’s a really private work, nevertheless it loses its substance by not being made by the artist himself.”
Persevering with, he described his actions as each a “protest in opposition to the college’s AI coverage particularly” and “efficiency artwork,” including that he “wanted one thing that might elicit a response.” He stated the depth of the response (it went viral) shocked him, noting that it was lined by an Italian artwork journal, and he was even contacted by a Russian newspaper.
For his half, Dwyer informed the publication that he didn’t settle for Granger’s clarification for destroying his mission, likening it to vandalizing private property as a type of protest in opposition to the oil business. He stated he had thought-about urgent prices as a result of Granger violated “the sanctity of the gallery,” however finally determined in opposition to it. “AI is a lens, and it’s viewing humanity. Some folks will see it as stealing from artists. The opposite solution to see it’s that it’s an extension of humanity,” Dwyer stated. “AI artwork is likely to be a tax on artists. Tax is nonconsensual; some folks say tax is theft. That’s one thing we’re going to should wrestle with.”
Using artificial intelligence within the inventive business has turn into a flashpoint for disputes starting from the philosophical to the authorized. In 2023, digital artists filed a class-action lawsuit focusing on Stability AI, Midjourney, and the image-sharing platform DeviantArt, whereas others sued on-line retailer Shein for appropriating their designs. A few of these fits noticed modest success in 2024, however AI’s explosive progress continues to outpace the business’s capacity to resolve its authorized and moral dilemmas.
“I feel synthetic intelligence is a really helpful instrument,” Granger stated. “I feel that it has no place within the arts. It takes away numerous the human effort that makes artwork. If artwork can’t be improved upon by criticism, it’s exhausting to name it artwork.”
