The controversial portrait was submitted through an open call for ‘Pearl Earring’ substitutes launched by the museum.
Taylor Dafoe
ShareShare This Article
The Hague’s Mauritshuis museum may have loaned out its greatest treasure, Girl With a Pearl Earring (c. 1665), to a once-in-a-lifetime Johannes Vermeer exhibition up the coast, but that doesn’t mean the room that usually holds the masterpiece is empty. Currently on view in that gallery, in fact, are five interpretations of Vermeer’s inscrutable portrait, all created by art fans.
Well, sort of. One of the imitation Vermeers was actually generated by A.I.—and its inclusion in the state museum has caused quite a stir.
The piece, called A Girl With Glowing Earrings, was submitted by German A.I. artist Julian van Dieken through an open call for Vermeer substitutes launched by the Mauritshuis last month. Created with the A.I. program Midjourney, the portrait forgoes the soft light and muted palette of the original for a sharp, synthetic look that turns Vermeer’s iconic figure into a yassified version of itself.
“One of the most famous paintings in history is literally being replaced by one of my A.I. images,” Van Dieken wrote on Instagram. He called the honor “crazy” and “completely surreal.”
Others didn’t agree. In the Mauritshuis’s own Instagram post introducing the open-call entries selected for inclusion in the museum, commenters decried Van Dieken’s piece and other A.I.-assisted submissions.
“Such a shameful decision for a museum of all things to feature A.I.-generated images,” wrote one user. “Are you unfamiliar with the legal and ethical issues with the technology as well, or is it a case of pure disregard for actual artists all around? You have shown you can’t be trusted with taking care of and upholding human cultural heritage.”
“Oh yes a lot of amazing artists and between them ai imposter which did literally nothing generating their ‘art,’” commented another.
Representatives from the Mauritshuis did not immediately respond to a request for comment, but a museum spokesperson told De Volkskrant that those in charge of selecting submissions did not consider the ethical questions of including an A.I. artwork. ‘We purely looked at what we liked,” the representative said. “Is this creative? That’s a tough question.”
The Mauritshuis launched its My Girl With a Pearl open call last month, soliciting temporary Pearl Earring substitutes made from any medium. Nearly 3,500 portraits were sent in, many quite liberal in their understanding of the prompt. Vermeer’s subject was reimagined as a dog, a dinosaur, and an elephant; she was depicted as an onion and an ear of corn. Some made her out of buttons or beads; others turned to stick figures and photographs. At least one “artist” just submitted a picture of Spongebob Squarepants.
Of these submissions, the museum selected 170 to display on rotation in a digital frame, while five others—including Van Dieken’s—were printed out and mounted on the wall.
If the online backlash to A Girl With Glowing Earrings tells us anything, it’s that the vertiginous rise in A.I. art’s popularity has left little room for shades of gray in the debate over the technology’s role in “traditional” institutions. Van Dieken’s own story suggests as much.
In his post, the artist explained that his Instagram “account had exactly 20 followers at the beginning of October 2022. Now, 4 months later, there are not only more than 1,200 times more of you here, but there’s also an image I created with Midjourney… hanging in one of the most prestigious spots in the world.”
That may but be true, but looking at Van Dieken’s other artworks suggests that his overnight success may have more to do with the concurrent boom in A.I. interest than it does with his own artistic talent. Take a look, for instance, at his portraits of Yoda riding the subway, Voldemort in therapy, and “Benedict Cumberbatch holding [a] cucumber with [a] patch.” He also previously depicted Mark Zuckerberg with a pearl earring.
