0 
0 | AI is the ultimate source of convenience. How could that not be beneficial? But it might be stealing something important in return–the opportunity for experience. |
|---|
Written by Kennedy Chinn
The Ultimate Shortcut
AI is a shortcut to shortcuts. It takes all the benefits of the internet—a modern-day Library of Alexandria, a place of convenience, and jumps straight to the immensely simplified, ‘slop’ version of the answer. There are benefits to this. Confusion on an extravagantly worded textbook section can be broken down into its basic concepts more appropriately. It does wonders when searching documents and saving time filling in information. But what does that do to the individual?
First, a major point made by anti-AI-Generative art must be discussed. The question of if AI art should be considered art frequents these debates. A claim often made by those who state that AI-Generative art doesn’t count is that it didn’t come from ‘human suffering.’
This, however, isn’t an ideal way to view art or the value behind it. While it works as an anti-AI argument for a short period, it implies some potentially harmful viewpoints. Thinking that human suffering adds value to work is only a few steps short of perspectives where individuals deserve to suffer to earn their place. This is influenced by the modern-day (and typically Western) idea that an individual’s worth is tied to their work efforts. To put it simply—if we placed a positive value on suffering, that means that a lack of suffering has a negative one—and therefore, an individual who does not suffer or struggle is inherently worth negative value.
In these arguments, oftentimes ‘suffering’ is used in place of ‘hard work,’ but putting those two in the same category has similar issues. Using this argument to protest against AI ‘making things easier’ has questionable undertones. Being against ‘making things easier,’ again, implies that people deserve to struggle. What else is that applicable to, outside of the anti-ai argument? Is a work worth less if the individual enjoyed making it? Is it worth more if an individual suffered? The argument itself isn’t inherently applying this viewpoint broadly. However, it is getting close to the heart of the issue.
AI isn’t robbing you of your ‘suffering,’ it is robbing you of the chance to develop a better understanding of yourself, the feeling of accomplishment, and the potential to find unexpected interests along the way.
It isn’t just art or work. AI advertisements show other facets of life they want their product to be used for—often depicting giving suggestions on what to add in heartfelt messages, or gifts to give. Even now, AI products summarize text threads from group chat. But it asks the question—what is left after everything is simplified? After friendships are made convenient? What becomes worth the effort?
Is Art Accessible, or a Privilege?
Another argument made against AI generative works is that art is already accessible. However, it appears to be counterproductive to the idea that art is a privilege. This topic has been highly debated—the idea that art is restricted to upper-class individuals with free time inherently disregards a significant amount of art history and research proving otherwise. Perpetuating the narrative that art was only created by rich, intellectual elites neglects important cultural works that may not fit this viewpoint. But having the time, space, disposable income, access to materials, as well as physical and mental ability, is essential for creating; which means it tends to favour privileged individuals(1). This is similar to why art is also seen as a hallmark for emerging ancient cultures, as it demonstrates that there is enough comfort and wealth for non-utilitarian activities(3). Even now, artists are required to give up time that could be dedicated to pursuing art in order to ‘make ends meet’(4).
Capturing the nuances of how art and privilege interact isn’t possible in a short article. There are fair arguments for both perspectives that are worth recognizing. Claiming that art can be made under any circumstances can be used as an excuse for not supporting artists, but the opposite perspective undermines the act of art throughout history.
For example, Henry Fraser (5), is an artist who learned to paint with his mouth after becoming paralyzed from the shoulder down. He had to ‘work around’ his inability to paint—and still did it. Henri Matisse, a painter in the 19th century who had limited mobility from a fight with cancer, created his own brushes in order to paint. Going beyond physical disabilities, the writer Franz Kafka wrote novels on top of his day job as an insurance clerk. Van Gogh, in his recovery from extreme mental illness and poverty, created artworks that are well-known today (2).
While having privilege reduces the barriers associated with creating art, there are significant figures working around their struggles. This is essential to note. Increasing accessibility in the art space—through higher wages, supporting local artists, etc.—will mean that more art is created.
So, when a new, free tool is developed that can make art in seconds from a word prompt—why isn’t it celebrated as a form of accessibility?
So, Why Not Take The Shortcut?
As stated in the first section, struggle doesn’t inherently give art its value. Using AI is the ultimate shortcut—one that both seems to bypass ‘suffering’ and accessibility barriers, but it diminishes a major aspect of working on projects. Which is the potential to be changed.
Having a completed project after the end of extensive hard work is a rewarding feeling. While using AI speeds up the process, the achievement at the end is dampened. More importantly, it is personal. You get to build new skills, develop the confidence to tackle similar work, all with something to show for it. For example, picking up the punch-needle craft kit after a year of avoiding it may make your goal of starting a small garden feel more in reach. Maybe writing that email makes writing a short story seem possible, and finishing that short story makes writing a novel less intimidating. Proving to yourself that you can complete something on your own allows you to support yourself independently in the future.
How many times have you learned something unexpected, or ‘went down a rabbit hole’ by accident? How many times have you heard of someone changing their major after taking a class just to fill a requirement? Using AI as a shortcut to avoid the journey means there’s little ‘wandering’ from the goal. While those instances may not be life-changing, building a mental library of side quests allows for skills to be used interdisciplinary. Maybe learning to file family documents on a certain platform later gave you the skills needed for a job. Maybe the fine motor skills developed from years of embroidery made pipetting easier later. Or, unrelated to careers, maybe volunteering for your local theatre leads you to find your best friend.
Sometimes putting in the work doesn’t feel worth it. Or, you don’t enjoy it. However, it still has its purpose—it clarifies what you enjoy and don’t. Perhaps you find out you strongly dislike working at a desk, or that slow-paced work bores you. It builds a better understanding of yourself.
Overall, while art isn’t inherently valued by the struggle it takes to create it, the process itself is a valuable experience. Using AI takes away your ability to learn, divert from, and feel the accomplishment of a goal—creative or not. The value of your projects, assignments, work, and art pieces is determined not by how much ‘struggle’ it took, but how much you grew along the way.
Sources
- (1) Corby, Vanessa. “Art, Prejudice and Privilege: Disciplinary Elitism, Students from Poor and Working-Class Communities and Epistemic Justice.” Yorksj.ac.uk, 27 Feb. 2024, ray.yorksj.ac.uk/id/eprint/8018/, https://ray.yorksj.ac.uk/id/eprint/8018/4/Corby_Epistemic_Justice.pdf. Accessed 28 Apr. 2026.
- (2) Van Gogh Museum . “Vincent’s Life, 1853-1890.” Van Gogh Museum, 2019, www.vangoghmuseum.nl/en/art-and-stories/vincents-life-1853-1890.
- (3) Allman, William. “The Ancient Origins of Art.” Smithsonian Second Opinion, 2 Aug. 2018, smithsoniansecondopinion.org/arts/randall-white-anthropologist-180969652/.
- (4) Art. “My Friend Dave.” My Friend Dave, 21 Apr. 2025, www.myfrienddave.ca/blog-2-1/blog-post-title-one-gm5fc-fx62e.
- (5) “Henry Fraser Art – Mouth Artist.” Henry Fraser Art, henryfraserart.com/.
- (6) Leibowitz, Glenn. “8 Extraordinary Authors Who Kept Their Ordinary Day Jobs.” Medium, Write With Impact, 24 July 2015, medium.com/write-with-impact/8-extraordinary-authors-who-kept-their-ordinary-day-jobs-9ceca23c47da. Accessed 28 Apr. 2026.
