[dudeguy3301]

lets not forget not too long ago art was a available only to the rich. the social elements were confined to the whim and contingency of the lords, aristocratics and nobles who deemed art to be so. as we may glean from walter benjamin, the reproducibility of art in a capitalist industry brought art to the 'people'. we now live in an age where 'art' and 'artists' are ubiquitous and available for 'everyone'. these social parameters are beguiling and precarious. machine learning as a factor of human creativity is almost somewhat a meta statement on art as 'art'. a second order logic to this 'social' element. an 'algorithmic' tendencay to achive some 'objective' (german idealist) sensitivity to what art is, within the confines of a subjugate classism. think insta, the labor of some is proliferate to the consumption of many. even the doom scroll is an installation by which we socially engage to pronounce the illusion of an agreement to an objective beauty.

[rikroots]

While I agree that "high quality art" or "art made from expensive materials" may, for much of human history, have been available only to the rich, I would argue that such art is a minuscule percentage of all the art produced down the ages. Take jewellery, for instance: while the rulers and nobles may have owned brooches and necklaces made from gold or carved from jade, everybody needed to pin their clothes together, or felt safer when they hung a ward/fetish/amulet around their necks to help them get through the day. Such things can be made from the commonest materials (clay, bones, wood, etc) but that doesn't stop the people who made such things putting some effort into making them attractive, beautiful even - in other words, art.

[hypertele-Xii]

Art has existed long before the rich became wealthy. The most ancient of cave-people collected shiny stones, painted walls, sang and danced, and crafted non-tool items like idols.

> the reproducibility of art in a capitalist industry brought art to the 'people'.

The Japanese were woodblock printing art for the masses since the 17th century. Woodblock printing itself is much older.

[dudeguy3301]

yesyes, both good responses. i suppose i was focusing on a type of art prevalent in classism. many types of art have existed for all peoples through out history. we call cave paintings 'art' but did those peoples who painted them have that conception? most likely not. although a deep generalization has threaded every human culture's expressions of art, there is always variation. indeed art has been for the people in many cultures and for a very very long time. i suppose i was more focused on the whole 20th century, 21st century, computer part of the article, which in fact i didnt really dive into at all.