Once again, the intersection of art and technology has sparked a significant backlash as a social media user leveraged AI to ‘complete’ Keith Haring‘s ‘Unfinished Painting’.
Haring’s “Unfinished Painting” (1989), a white canvas with a purple background that covers only the top-left quadrant, is layered over with the illustrator’s iconic, heavy-lined figuration and designs that end abruptly. Aside from a few streaking purple drip lines that slide down the untouched canvas beneath, the punctuated painting is ear-splittingly silent beyond the broken edges of what Haring had rendered in his recognizable visual language, alluding to the thousands of lives cut short during the beginning of the AIDS epidemic that affected many in the LGBTQ+ community.
The controversy unfolded recently when an AI rendition attempted to fill the white space on the canvas. Critics argue that this modification undermines the artwork’s powerful social message, prompting ethical concerns about the posthumous use of an artist’s work. The debate delves into accusations of unethical practices, lack of consent, plagiarism, and a disregard for the original context of the work, particularly the gravity of the AIDS crisis. This incident sheds light on broader issues surrounding generative AI, artist consent, and the ethical use of AI in art. Concerns have been raised regarding the quality of AI-generated art in comparison to Haring’s distinctive style. The Keith Haring Foundation, responsible for managing Haring’s artworks and intellectual property, has yet to comment on the situation.
Although AI alteration may not be illegal yet, it can be viewed as disrespectful and unethical. The least you can say is that it underscores the urgent need for more clear & bold educational and regulatory frameworks addressing ethical AI usage and respect for artists’ rights.