Last week, the University of Alaska Fairbanks made national headlines when a student ate another student’s AI-generated art.
It’s been since covered in the New York Post, Futurism, ARTNews and more — and has started a broader conversation about some artists choosing to use AI in their work.
Graham Granger, a film and performing arts student at UAF, was arrested on Jan. 13, and has since been released from the Fairbanks Correctional Center for criminal mischief in the 5th degree. He was there for “probably six hours.”
“It’s a protest against the school’s AI policy specifically and it’s performance art because I needed something that would elicit a reaction,” Granger said in an interview with The Nation. “So this could reach more people.”
The university’s student-run newspaper, The Sun Star, first reported on the incident. Granger was chewing and spitting out images pinned to the wall — per UAF police. Out of 160 images as part of the installation, Granger ate at least 57. The images were part of an installment from Masters of Fine Arts student Nick Dwyer, which he says were made “in collaboration with artificial intelligence.”
Fairbanks artist Addie Willsrud is “vehemently against AI” — from the environmental to societal impacts — and says Dwyer citing AI as a collaborator in his art installation is “appalling.”
“It is offensive and defeating to hear that someone can type in a prompt, print something out and get a masters degree for it,” she said.
Granger and Dwyer did not respond to comment when reached by The Alaska Current.
In his artist statement, Dwyer said his work “explores identity, character narrative creation and crafting false memories of relationships in an interactive role digitally crafted before, during and after a state of AI psychosis.” The Nation also spoke with Dwyer; when asked about using AI to create art even after experiencing psychosis himself, he said, “I’m trying to wean myself off.”
Fairbanks-based artist and UAF graduate Alyssa Quintyne says the entire situation — from both sides — is a consequence of white supremacy and white privilege. She understands why the story has blown up on the national level, but thinks the general public reaction is “misguided and missing the point.”
“A lot of people are calling what Granger did, protest and performance art,” Quintyne said. “No, it is a political statement, and I don’t say that to diminish what he did and the importance of what he did… I think what he did was justified. I think what he did is necessary, because it’s gone viral, and now that puts a lot of pressure on the University, which is a good thing to happen.”
Quintyne said her criticism lies with how the act is classified. Protests can be reactive, but they have goals and demands.
“What was the goal of his actions? What were the demands? There weren’t any,” Quintyne said. “He saw the exhibition. It sparked something for him. He felt what he felt, and he made a decision, and he did what he did. That is a political statement — a reactionary political statement — there’s a difference.”
As a community organizer who has gone through the legal process, she says she can relate to Granger. And, as an artist who has had their work stolen and destroyed before (that was not digitized), she understands how painful it can be to lose pieces you can never get back. Quintyne isn’t trying to diminish how Dwyer might feel, but challenges him to be an advocate in the community when it comes to AI.
“Lord forbid we have a data center here in Fairbanks, and now our electric bills and our water bills are three times higher, we can’t breathe, we can’t buy land, or people are getting kicked out of their houses — all the stuff that is already happening with communities of color,” Quintyne said. “I expect him to be doing that work, and I expect to hear that if the day does come where some companies want to put a data center in Fairbanks, that he’s right with us when we’re testifying, saying, ‘No, not the place for it.’”
Willsrud says she thought Granger’s decision was “brilliant” and “harmless.” As far as Dwyer’s installation and the overall theme of the piece, she felt it fell flat.
“If you want to prove a point about the evil of AI, you have to actually prove a point,” Willsrud said. “And, knowing that AI causes incredible environmental impacts — if you want to stand up against AI and prove that it is bad, I would say that it would be much more powerful and ethical to refuse to use it. Condemn it. Make a point using your own artwork.”
Dwyer has since dropped the charges against Granger. The state is still proceeding with the case.
Sam Davenport is a writer residing in Anchorage. She's a leo and a plant-person, and loves spending quality time with her dog, Aspen. She is a Real Housewives fan and has been called a Bravo historian.
