On April 24, 2025, the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism hosted "Art Policy Talk at 3PM" at Art Korea Lab in Seoul under the theme of "Art in the Age of AI." Despite its promising topic, the event ultimately fell short of presenting a deep critical engagement or offering concrete alternatives. Instead, it served as a case study revealing how Korea's cultural policy struggles to adequately reflect the complexities and urgency of the contemporary art scene.

At the event, researcher Yoonkyung Kim from the Korea Culture & Tourism Institute presented the keynote address. It was asserted that AI technology had already been widely integrated into the Korean art world. However, while a few artists have been experimenting with AI, it remains premature to say that AI has brought about transformative changes across the field. Moreover, discussions on the aesthetic definitions, art historical contexts, and the fundamental nature of artistic creation have not yet been sufficiently developed. In this context, presenting AI as a definitive force leading the future of art only highlighted the disconnect between policy narratives and the realities on the ground.
 
It is natural for art to pay attention to advances in cutting-edge technology. However, policies must be grounded in present realities and the actual needs of the field. Future-oriented visions should be constructed upon meticulous analysis and clear understanding. From this perspective, the discourse on "Art in the Age of AI" failed to address concrete issues such as the ethics of AI-driven creation, disparities in technological access, unequal resource distribution, and the lack of institutional infrastructure. As a result, the concerns and urgent challenges faced by practicing artists were left unaddressed, replaced by generalized and abstract discussions.
 
This disconnect was further evident in the composition of the event's speakers and panelists. Rather than featuring artists, curators, or critics with firsthand experience of the creative field, the discussions were led primarily by researchers and administrators. Consequently, the realities and struggles of artists engaged in daily experimentation and creation were marginalized. Instead of fostering genuine dialogue with the field, the event seemed more focused on securing attention through newly emerging technological keywords.
 
The First Vice Minister of Culture, Sports and Tourism remarked, "Art has always found new directions by asking questions." While preparing for the advent of the AI era is undoubtedly important, the event leaned heavily toward presenting predetermined answers rather than cultivating critical inquiry. Emphasizing the rapid adoption of technology without sufficient reflection on the nature of creation, artistic autonomy, and the potential of human imagination risks undermining the very essence of art. What the art world urgently needs is not simply faster technology adoption, but a deeper engagement with preserving artistic integrity amidst change.
 
Korean contemporary art today faces a complex set of crises: market fluctuations, institutional instability, generational divides, and the growing impact of digital technology. In such a moment, what is required is not an abstract embrace of the future nor hasty acceptance of new tools, but careful questioning rooted in reality and a profound understanding of the era we live in. Unfortunately, the event fell short of responding to these urgent needs, leaning instead toward a premature and ungrounded setting of discourse.
 
Cultural policy must move beyond the mere proliferation of surface-level keywords. While the ambition to lead technological discourse is understandable, it must be preceded by a thorough understanding of the actual field and the careful construction of well-founded policies. Above all, the starting point must be an earnest engagement with the experiments, struggles, and aspirations of artists working on the ground.
 
Anticipating the new possibilities that technology can bring to the arts is important. However, a technocentric approach that neglects the field itself risks weakening the very foundations of cultural policy. When discussing art in the AI era, the essential task is not simply to champion technological advances but to explore how art and technology can coexist meaningfully. This requires consistent listening to voices from the field and an unwavering commitment to reading the true currents of our time.