I think the development of Generative models for images and audio has more to do with the fact that Computer Vision research goes back decades, and the same sys

I think the development of Generative models for images and audio has more to do with the fact that Computer Vision research goes back decades, and the same systems that originally recognized and labeled images or audio were tweaked to invert the process - and it became naturally an intriguing topic of development precisely because creation is seen as an innately human thing. Beyond that, I'd speculate that the reason we keep seeing developments in "the arts" (though I disagree that an AI can make art, even if it can make beautiful images or music) is because there's no readily-agreed-upon value for that task. An AI CPA has a specific economic value, but is also a commodity service that no one wants unless they need it. Since there's a clearly comparable cost for needed CPA services, then naturally creating an AI system to do it has a readily comparable market price. People aren't going to make that AI system unless they can do it in way that will make be an improvement as compared to that existing service and price. I think "just because" has always been a justifiable reason for humans creating beauty (not the same as making art), so it works for research projects better than building a better mousetrap.