Whether it is Ghibli style or Disney Pixar style, whether it is sketching or painting, AI can create every kind of art today. The boundaries that once defined artistic ability—years of training, talent, and creativity—are now being rapidly blurred as artificial intelligence can mimic and replicate these complex styles in moments.
It doesn’t matter if the demand is for whimsical animations like those of Studio Ghibli or hyper-realistic digital paintings, AI today has proven its capability to produce all forms of visual expression without traditional human intervention.
AI’s Creative Prowess in Entertainment
Within just a few seconds, AI can create songs in the voice of Mohammed Rafi, can write screenplays of films, and can write dialogues of films. This astonishing speed and adaptability naturally lead to a significant and philosophical question: In such a situation, the question arises whether AI is the end of artists? Is it the end of creativity of humans? When machines can generate what once required human emotion, training, and intuition, where do real artists stand?
Osho and the Brilliance of Jiddu Krishnamurthy
Hello friends, many decades ago, Osho had described philosopher Jiddu Krishna Murthy as the most intelligent man of the twentieth century. When he died in the year 1986, he said that such sharpness and intelligence will probably be seen in the coming centuries, whose thoughts must have been very strikingly original. But this imagination of yours will completely crash when you will hear Jiddu Krishnamurthy repeatedly talking about the conditioning of the mind. Our brains are conditioned. Whatever is conditioned is limited.
The Conditioning of the Human Mind
How our mind is conditioned from childhood—our thoughts are not our own. You live in a particular culture, that culture shapes your mind through education, through economic conditioning, through various influences of propaganda, through the religious authorities and so on. Your whole mind is conditioned. We assume our ideas are original, but they are often the product of deep cultural and psychological imprinting that started long before we had any awareness of it.
Path to Liberation According to Krishnamurthy
And that is why Krishna Murthy tells the means for liberation: one’s own non-judgmental observation. From this thought, a very important question arises—can there be any totally original ideas? Famous American writer Mark Twain adds perspective to this question. In his opinion, most of the innovations that people do, whatever new things people think, are always made of old ideas, permutation and combination of existing ideas. He compared this whole creative process to a mental kaleidoscope.
The Kaleidoscope of Creativity
Do you know Kaleidoscope, a device of this type, which makes even the colors look colored? He said that the creative process is a mental kaleidoscope where old ideas are the same old pieces of coloured glass which we rotate to make new and curious combinations. Today many people downplay the technology of artificial intelligence and say that AI cannot think original but after listening to Jiddu Krishna Murthy and Mark Twain, everyone will understand that AI cannot think in a new way. It only recombines what it already knows—just like humans.
How AI Works at a Basic Level
For those of you who have no idea about AI, I would like to tell you how AI technology works in its basic form. A lot of data is fed into it. Like in chat-GPT, a lot of books, research papers, all over the world. It recognizes different patterns, learns people’s languages, learns different art styles, and then when you ask something to AI, it imitates these things and gives you a new answer. For example, if Rabindranath Tagore’s poems are fed into AI, then it learns that specific style and rhythm.
AI Mimicking Literary Greats
And the next time you ask AI to write a prompt and write a poem in Rabindranath Tagore’s style using two manipulations, then in a few seconds AI writes a complete poem for you. This is what all the poets of the world do. They observe, learn, absorb, and recreate in their own styles. Through ChatGPT and Grog, you must have made your photos in Ghibli style or you must have seen Atliss on social media. How is AI able to do this? In the same way, Studio Ghibli’s films can be imported into AI in the form of data.
Questioning Human Artistic Originality
Manda jeeta tha khulke dedi gali mein aaya phulke ji changa bhala ji main loot put gaya loot put gaya. The flag bearers of human creativity will say that what kind of art is this, it is just copying someone else’s style and covering it. This is not how art is. But just think, when art is made by humans, when people learn to make art in art schools, what happens then? Are they not also replicating the techniques and principles of previous generations?
Academic and Artistic Training as Data Learning
When we do English honours or Hindi honours course in college, we are taught the literature of Rabindranath Tagore, Robert Frost, Shakespeare, William Blake, Kafka, Mahadevi Varma, Vinod Kumar Shukla, Nagarjun and many such famous writers. We study their writing styles, their themes, their language, their philosophy, and their structure. This is not very different from feeding AI with literary data. The human mind, too, functions like a data-fed processor when it reads, analyzes, and then creates.
Fine Arts Curriculum: Learning Through Legends
What is the curriculum of Bachelor of Fine Arts course? Study the art of great painters like Van Gogh, Rembrandt, Frida Kahlo, Tayyab Mehta, Amrita Shergil, Mughal style, Rajasthani miniature style, Warli style, Madubani etc. We observe their use of color, texture, space, subject, and emotion. We are trained to copy them first before finding our own voice. Isn’t this the same as what AI does when it mimics an artist’s style after learning from a large visual dataset?
Film School: A Data-Driven Creative System
If you go to film school, you are shown masterpieces of world cinema from Satyajit Ray, Martin Scorsese, Ingmar Bergman, Andrei Tarkoff. All these styles are analyzed—like data is fed into AI—and often these artists are proud when they talk about their art projects in the shadow of these legendary artists. Their work is praised for having elements or influences from great masters of the past. So if AI does the same thing—why is it considered imitation, and not inspiration?
Artistic Influence: A Mark of Pride for Humans
They say such things with a philosophical lug. Wang Karwai’s film In the Mood for Love. Looking at art works, it seems that your favorite painter is Paul Cézanne and you get happy on seeing his shadow and say yes, he has had a very conscious influence on my art. But when AI tries to understand Cézanne in a few seconds and imitates it, we call it fake or soulless. Is there truly a difference between an AI that learns quickly and a human who learns slowly?
Reassessing Originality in Human Learning
So if AI can learn things in a few seconds that we take years to learn and reproduce, why do we criticize it so much? This is something that needs reflection. Because if imitation is the basis of rejection, then even human creativity should be rejected—because human learning is also pattern-based. From childhood, we learn language, behavior, and even emotions by copying others. The same principle is applied in the arts, sciences, and all forms of creativity. The only real difference is time—humans take years; AI takes seconds.
The Real Difference Between AI and Humans
But the real difference between AI and humans is not that AI copies and humans do not. The real difference is that AI does not have any consciousness. AI is not sentient, it does not feel, it does not think on its own. It does not know the consequences of its creation, nor can it feel any pride, sorrow, or ethical dilemma about what it creates. In contrast, humans are aware of the social, cultural, and emotional consequences of what they produce. This awareness brings depth, responsibility, and sometimes conflict to our creativity.
AI’s Limitations in Conscious Understanding
This is the only difference. AI has no clue of what it is doing. But we humans have. If we create a painting, we know its impact. If we make a film, we know its politics. If we write a book, we understand its philosophy. AI can only simulate all this. It cannot be original in the true sense, because it has no “self” from which an original thought could arise. Even if AI writes a poem full of emotion, it doesn’t feel those emotions. It is mimicking emotion, not experiencing it.
The Power of Human Consciousness in Creation
But we humans feel. We feel fear, we feel grief, we feel anxiety, we feel wonder. We feel betrayal. We feel heartbreak. And that is why our words have value. Our brush strokes have weight. Our notes in music have power. We have memory, trauma, pain, and joy embedded in our creation. It is this experience of being alive—of suffering and overcoming, of dreaming and failing—that gives true meaning to art. This consciousness cannot be coded or downloaded.
Why Human Art Still Matters
This is what makes us artists. This is what makes us original. Not style, not language, not grammar, not visuals. The originality lies in our conscious choices, our lived experiences, and our ethical responsibilities. And this is something AI will never have. AI may draw, write, or compose—but it cannot care. And until it cares, human creativity will always hold a deeper, irreplaceable value.
