Sample Detail

Despite the present ubiquity of science and technological applications in almost every realm of human life, art remains an exclusive domain where integration of AI and machines into the creative process is considered questionable, significantly necessitating human artists to carry out the tasks. This could be explained by the subjective human perspective and the preservation of cultural and memorial spirits.

To begin with, subjectivity included in the creative process is considered unique to human beings. However clever and intellectual machines are, human emotions extend beyond systematic and binary logic of any technology; they could navigate many morally grey matters and paradoxical aspects of life which include no right or wrong conclusions. That said, the manifestation of personal experience and spontaneity of human nature, whether morally rational or not, makes human arts relatable, valuable and unfabricatable. Moreover, spontaneity and normality are what make humans human, which equipment could hardly understand and deliver. Through logical analysis, machines could only take in the structured process of work, or even life, recording and highlighting main stages and core memories. Humans, on the other hand, find their inspiration through trivial details captured by chance, developing empathy towards seemingly nebulous and negligible figures who do not stand out or make any significant outcomes. In other words, only humans themselves could understand the abstract and complicated feelings of ordinariness and powerlessness appearing in normal lives, transferring their contradicting and deliberate thoughts into empathetic artistic creations.

Additionally, while technological devices can record the physical proof of cultural and communal events, only the human mind could successfully capture the spirits and emotional bonds-core values of the occasions. Pixels and records could effectively store the images, sounds and activities included in the meaningful events. However, without human vivid descriptions and moving comments, that evidence may just be soulless artefacts displayed for thoughtless exhibition. Historical and cultural memories could only be relatable and touching when the eyewitnesses truly immerse themselves in the activities, taking every random but emotionally striking detail into account, transmitting them through resonant art products. For these reasons, human nature and needs will necessitate human art in the long run.

＋In conclusion, in spite of the availability of technological applications, I believe that human art still continues to hold water due to its subjective and spirit-capturing nature