Medium Mindfulness

I asked ChatGPT a question about the difference between Academically Trained Artists and Outsider Artists. In the visual arts industry, there are conversations about the merits of artists who contribute to visual culture. In academic circles, discussions about Outsider Artists often fall into two camps: (a) whether referencing them is appropriate due to their uniqueness and isolation, which could make incorporating their style disrespectful and unsubstantiated; or (b) if they provide a formal language that can be incorporated into one’s practice. The question I asked was: “What are the characteristics of an academically experienced artist vs. an outsider artist?”:

Academically experienced artists and outsider artists have distinct characteristics that set them apart, often related to their training, approach to art, and their place within the art world:
**Academically Experienced Artist:**
1. **Formal Education:** Academically experienced artists typically have formal training in art, often through art schools, colleges, or universities. They may hold degrees in fine arts or related fields.
2. **Technical Skill:** They have a strong foundation in artistic techniques and may excel in various mediums and styles due to their structured education.
3. **Artistic Knowledge:** They are well-versed in art history, theory, and criticism. They have a deep understanding of the broader art context and traditions.
4. **Critical Thinking:** They can critically analyze and discuss their own work and the work of others, often using art-related terminology.
5. **Exhibitions and Galleries:** They may exhibit their work in established galleries, museums, and art institutions. They often participate in the mainstream art world.
6. **Recognition:** Academically experienced artists may receive recognition, awards, and grants, and they might be represented by art dealers or agents.
7. **Artistic Evolution:** They often have a clear progression in their artistic development, influenced by their formal education and exposure to various artistic movements.
**Outsider Artist:**
1. **Lack of Formal Training:** Outsider artists typically have little to no formal art education. Their skills are often self-taught or developed outside of traditional art institutions.
2. **Unconventional Techniques:** They may use unconventional or idiosyncratic techniques and materials, often creating art on their own terms without adherence to traditional standards.
3. **Naïve or Raw Style:** Their work is often characterized by a raw, unpolished, and outsider aesthetic. They may not conform to established artistic norms.
4. **Limited Art Historical Knowledge:** Outsider artists may have limited knowledge of art history and may not engage in extensive critical analysis of their work.
5. **Marginalized or Outsider Status:** They are often marginalized or excluded from mainstream art circles and may create art as a form of personal expression rather than for public recognition or commercial gain.
6. **Independent Exhibitions:** While some outsider artists gain recognition, they are more likely to exhibit their work in unconventional settings, such as folk art museums, self-organized exhibitions, or outsider art fairs.
7. **Unique Vision:** Outsider artists often have a unique, unfiltered artistic vision that is deeply personal and may be influenced by their life experiences, personal struggles, or unconventional perspectives.
It’s important to note that the distinction between academically experienced and outsider artists is not always clear-cut, and some artists may blur the lines between these categories. Additionally, the value and significance of outsider art have grown in recent years, challenging traditional notions of what constitutes “art” and who can be considered an artist. Ultimately, both academically experienced and outsider artists contribute to the rich tapestry of the art world in their own unique ways.

The list provides a useful structure, with the language model effectively identifying and presenting characteristics of each artist in line with my knowledge of art theory. However, the concluding paragraph contains elements that are somewhat unclear and historically inaccurate. The statement, “Additionally, the value and significance of outsider art have grown in recent years, challenging traditional notions of what constitutes ‘art’ and who can be considered an artist,” lacks specificity and historical accuracy. The appreciation for outsider art has been more deeply rooted in the past than in truly “recent years.” Furthermore, it is not outsider art itself that challenges the definition of “art”; this challenge primarily originates from movements like institutional critique, notably exemplified by Duchamp’s 'Fountain.’ ChatGPT, in my view, is not particularly helpful for generating unique claims that are either historical or factual. An alternative explanation for this inaccuracy might be that my original query did not specify the generation of theoretical, factual, or historical claims.

From the standpoint of an Artist, the utilization of generative language and image models as productivity tools can significantly aid artists in generating more ideas and content, particularly during periods of creative blockage. This digital technology has the potential to enhance artistic brainstorming, research, and writing. There are two primary reasons for this. Firstly, Artists, often working independently, are responsible for developing, producing, and promoting their own work. The development phase, for instance, can be expedited by the ability to generate reference images, collages, and studies, eliminating the need for extensive image searches and long hours at a drawing desk. Secondly, a considerable portion of an Artist’s responsibilities involves paperwork, including artist statements, essays, grant proposals, emails, and correspondence. All of these tasks can be streamlined by inputting drafts into ChatGPT and editing the output.

However, a notable risk associated with AI, particularly in image creation, is that it can generate unacceptable content, including objectification, racism, stereotyping, exoticism, and a Eurocentric perspective. These qualities can be challenging to combat, as seen in instances like MidJourney, where they appear to be inherent to the system (or training data set) itself.