The Ethics of AI Art in Education & Nostalgia: The Ghibli Effect

There’s something deeply sacred about a child’s first sketch—the awkward crayon lines, the lopsided sun, the stick figures that smile despite their missing limbs. That’s the heart of human creativity: messy, imperfect, emotional. And then there’s AI art—sleek, polished, awe-inspiring, and often eerily devoid of that same soul. So where do we draw the line when we bring this technology into schools, where the purpose of art isn’t just aesthetic, but emotional, developmental, and deeply personal?

As AI-generated art becomes increasingly accessible, educators and institutions are exploring its use in classrooms, textbooks, exhibitions, and even personalised student projects. The tools are powerful. With a few prompts, a teacher can conjure up a world map in Van Gogh’s style or generate a Ghibli-inspired version of a student’s family portrait. It’s engaging, efficient, and undeniably exciting. But in this rush to embrace innovation, are we unconsciously sidelining the raw, human act of creation?

Take, for instance, the aesthetic influence of Studio Ghibli—a name synonymous with hand-drawn magic. Hayao Miyazaki, its legendary co-founder, has publicly criticised AI-generated art as soulless. For a man who believes every frame must carry the weight of life, suffering, and intent, AI art is an affront to authenticity. And when we use Ghibli-inspired AI to recreate school memories or cultural illustrations, are we honouring that legacy or reducing it to a visual filter?

This question becomes even more relevant in educational spaces, where art is more than visual delight. It’s therapy, it’s storytelling, it’s identity-building. A classroom wall covered with AI-generated posters may look stunning, but what happens when it replaces the joy of getting paint under your fingernails or proudly misspelling your name in glitter?

Then there’s the ethical dilemma of data and labour. Who gets credited when AI art is trained on thousands of anonymous, unpaid artists? Are we inadvertently participating in a system that borrows without consent?

And what message does that send to young creators—that their work can be replicated, remixed, and resold by a machine in seconds?

Of course, this isn’t a call to ban AI art from classrooms. Quite the opposite. There’s immense potential here—to use AI as a collaborative tool rather than a replacement. Imagine students learning how to prompt ethically, understanding how AI generates images, and using it to reflect on visual storytelling, bias, and authorship. Education is the perfect place to ask these questions—not avoid them.

Advertisement

And let’s talk about nostalgia—the emotional undertow of this whole conversation. Many of us turn to AI to recreate what once made us feel safe, seen, and whole. Whether it’s turning a family portrait into a Ghibli scene or reviving the aesthetics of Amar Chitra Katha, it stems from love. But love also requires respect. And perhaps the most respectful thing we can do is to remember that some things—like a child’s first drawing, or the tremble in an old hand sketching memories—are sacred because they are human.

So as educators, creators, and curators of tomorrow’s imaginations, let us not trade soul for style. Let AI walk beside our children, not ahead of them. Let it support the messy, magical business of making art—not sanitise it.

Because in the end, the point isn’t to create perfect art. It’s to create honest ones.