Page 180 - AC-3-2

Arts & Communication Artificial intelligence and art

artwork’s creation merely serves to support these elements. of novelty in art, the perspectives of Boris Groys, Katarina
AI serves as a radical example to discuss the consequences Rukavina, and Lev Manovich were examined.
of rationalization in art.
Can AI be used as a tool for artists to produce art? 2. The otherness in the context of an
Before analyzing AI-generated images, it is essential to artwork’s aura
consider the conceptual differences between AI-generated What about the artwork’s aura? Is there any connection
images and AI-generated art. Given that art involves a to the passage from Mark’s Gospel: “His clothes became
dynamic interplay between form and content, between dazzling white, whiter than anyone in the world could
reference and corporality, it is questioned if AI-derived bleach them” (Mark 9:3)? If bleach cannot achieve such
images can contribute to the process of creating an an effect, then it suggests this is not a natural occurrence.
artwork, considering that AI can only simulate the effect How does bleach relate to these clothes, and what does it
of corporality. represent in this context? What is the connection between
this whiteness and the dresses, as well as the naturalness of
Art produced by AI would suggest that AI is an author
or co-author, but this is not feasible. AI cannot establish the painter’s canvas? The whiteness described in the biblical
the kind of relationship with otherness that is essential context represents a supernatural or divine transformation,
for artistic creations. Only humans can engage in such which cannot be achieved naturally through bleach or any
a relationship, which is fundamental to art. Therefore, other mundane means. Similarly, the aura of an artwork
while AI can be used by artists to create art, it cannot is not an everyday phenomenon. Through Derrida’s
be considered as the author or co-author of an artwork. interpretation of Levinas’s concept of otherness, the aura of
This limitation also prevents AI from creating a novelty artwork can be understood to otherness.
(novum), a concept that will be explored further in this Art addresses otherness by creating something that did
paper. not exist before. Levinas’s concept of otherness, as outlined

The primary concepts examined in this paper include in “Totality and Infinity,” involves a metaphysical desire for
3
the aura of an artwork, AI technology, the concept of the absolute Other, where the Other is not reducible to the
otherness, and the concept of novelty (novum) in art. Same. In this framework, the relationship between the Same
However, there are certain epistemological limitations to and the Other is such that, while the Other communicates
defining the term “aura.” One challenge is that it cannot with the Same, it remains transcendent and fundamentally
4
be precisely and positively defined; instead, it is often beyond the Same’s full grasp. Levinas describes this
described using negative terms and an apophatic approach. transcendence, which signifies a relationship with a
5
According to Janu Mieszkowski, the aura – which is reality infinitely distant from the self, as metaphysical.
characterized as unapproachable incarnate – challenges the According to Levinas, without such a separation, there
traditional experience of authenticity and its relationship would be no possibility of truth, only mere existence.
with the viewer. Robert Kaufman defines aura as the trace This separation, however, is characterized by a distance
6
presence of something no longer literally or physically that is both insurmountable and surmountable. Derrida
present but still shimmering, conjuring otherness, and builds upon Levinas’s metaphysics of desire, describing
simultaneously attracting and repelling us. In exploring it as a surrender to the call of the absolutely irreducible
2
the concept of aura, the viewpoints of several authors were externality of the Other. However, he also emphasizes that
7
examined, including Benjamin Walter, Magdalena Zięba, desire is not hapless, as it retains its openness and freedom.
Raúl Rodríguez-Ferrándiz, Reece Gielen, Badry and Lubis, The encounter is made possible by the Other, which is
and Martin Dixon. Focusing on Martin Dixon’s perspective, unpredictable, and therefore there is no predetermined
8
which describes the aura of an artwork as an oscillation conception of the Other.
between the corporality of the artwork and its reference, Derrida argues that creation is fundamentally the
the subsequent question is posed: if the oscillation between creation of the Other, and it is only possible through the
the corporality of the artwork and its reference is essential concept of fatherhood. The relationship between a father
to art, how can it be generated in AI images that simulate and son transcends all categories of logic, ontology, and
an artwork’s corporality? It is important to emphasize phenomenology. Levinas, in Derrida’s view, addresses
9
the difference between works that simulate corporality the question of original difference, highlighting that our
(e.g., with the assistance of AI) and those that lack it, such as relationship with the Other – face-to-face, without mediators
literature, which is inherently disembodied. Regarding the and unification – stands in opposition to the traditional
concept of otherness, the perspectives of Jacques Derrida understanding of logos. The messianic eschatology that
10
and Emanuel Levinas were considered. To Adorno’s notion inspires Levinas is often interpreted in terms of the most

Volume 3 Issue 2 (2025) 2 doi: 10.36922/ac.3311