Algorithmic Creativity: Transforming Authorship and Cultural Production in the Age of AI

AI is an emerging disruptive factor in various spheres of human activity related to creativity. This research aimed to find out whether AI is a tool of democratising creative processes or, on the contrary, tends to contribute to their dilution and homogenization. It turns out that the effect of AI in creativity is much more complex than it seems at first sight. Firstly, it is evident that the use of AI tools contributes to the expansion of opportunities for creative processes and makes them more accessible for wider groups of people. AI lowers the bar regarding skills and experience needed for creating something truly novel and interesting, making the process open for everyone, regardless of formal qualifications. Thus, from this perspective, AI is a great tool for democratizing creativity.   Secondly, while democratising creative processes, AI introduces some limitations to them. For instance, due to the nature of algorithmic thinking, AI requires less skill and effort for creation. People no longer need to experiment and discover ways of using particular tools for creating something new – all you have to do is feed the system with your ideas.   Thirdly, the increasing popularity of AI in creativity leads to the tendency towards the homogenization of creative processes. It results from the algorithmic nature of AI itself. Being based on statistical calculations, AI reproduces the dominant aesthetic tendencies observed in particular datasets, thus contributing to the homogenization of creative products. In other words, the diversity of local cultures is overshadowed by the global culture promoted through AI.   Finally, there appears to be a certain issue with the authorship of AI-created works. Based on the results of this research, we can claim that AI works do not belong to any single person, as multiple people are involved in their creation. AI-generated works represent the collaboration between human creators and the algorithm, and the final product is created based on collective effort.   To sum up, AI creates both democratising and constraining effects on creativity processes. AI opens new opportunities and accelerates the process of creating. At the same time, there appear to be some potential risks associated with skill dilution, homogenization, and ambiguity of authorship of AI-generated works. From this point of view, it becomes clear that AI should be approached critically and responsibly in the creative processes.

1.                Agency and authorship in AI art. (2025). Journal of Visual Culture and AI, 9(1), 55–72. 2.                AI and the future of creative development. (2025). AI & Society, 40(2), 245–260. 3.                Artificial intelligence reshapes creativity: A multidimensional evaluation. (2024). Journal of Creative Technologies, 15(3), 112–130. 4.                Authorship in human–AI collaborative creation. (2025). Computers and Creativity Journal, 18(2), 89–105. 5.                Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241–258). Greenwood. 6.                Generative AI as hypercommons: Rethinking ownership and creativity. (2024). Journal of Business Ethics and Technology, 21(4), 201–218. 7.                Generative AI in art and literature creation: Implications and challenges. (2024). Humanities and Technology Interface Journal, 6(2), 77–95. 8.                Kaur, J., & Gupta, N. (2019). Constructive neural network: A framework. International Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology, 9(2), 1034–1038. 9.                Kaur, J., & Gupta, N. (2020). An extended bipolar sigmoid algorithm for enhancing the performance of a constructive neural network. International Journal on Emerging Technologies, 11(2), 1034–1038. 10.             Kaur, J., & Gupta, N. (2020). Artificial neural network: A review. International Journal of Technical Research & Science, 1–4.