Abstract
The rapid development of neural network technologies in recent years has given rise to the formation of many interdisciplinary research areas, including neural network aesthetics. The aesthetics of generative creativity today is studied not only in the context of the history of digital art, but also in comparison with the practices of other artistic trends and schools. Thus, the expression “neural surrealism”, which has become entrenched in popular discourse, undoubtedly refers to the aesthetics of classical surrealism, framed and fixed in Andre Breton’s program texts: neural network algorithms allow you to create images that seem both realistic and absurd due to unexpected combinations of objects, distorted proportions and presence of uncanny images. Although “neural surrealism” can be seen as a depoliticized and unbiased game of generated images in contrast to the surrealism of the 1920s and 30s, which was not merely an artistic movement but a radical social project, it appears that the very ability of neural networks to generate extraordinary and unpredictable images holds a certain critical potential. Using the methods of formal-stylistic and ideological-content analysis, the author of the article concludes that “neurosurrealism” in a sense continues the line of classical surrealism to undermine the automatism of perception and patterns of thinking. Generative algorithms become a kind of “exclusion production machines” that allow you to see reality from an unexpected angle. In addition, the very fact of using neural networks in art raises important questions about the nature of creativity, the limits of artificial intelligence and the future of man in the world of smart machines. Neurosurrealism problematizes well-established ideas about the originality and intentionality of artistic expression, which indicates the close connection of generative artistic practices with the aesthetics of classical surrealist creativity. The conducted research will be useful to specialists of a wide profile: media theorists, art historians, philosophers, cultural scientists, as well as developers and representatives of the creative industries.
References
Ades, D. (1978). Dada and Surrealism Reviewed. Arts Council of Great Britain.
Alberto, A., & Sabeth, B. (2007). Art After Conceptual Art. MIT Press.
Atwood, J., & Towsley, D. (2016). Diffusion-convolutional neural networks. Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2001–2009.
Audry, S. (2021). Art in the Age of Machine Learning. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12832.001.0001
Benjamin, W. (2004). Surrealism: The Last Snapshot of European Intellectuals. In Masks of Time: Essays on Culture and Literature (pp. 263–282). Simpozium. (In Russian).
Breton, A. (1986). Manifesto of Surrealism. In Calling things by their proper names. Program speeches of the masters of Western European literature of the 20th century (pp. 40–73). Progress. (In Russian).
Breton, A. (2002). Surrealism and Painting. MFA Publications.
Breton, A. (2003). Nadja. Folio Plus.
Breton, A. (2006). Mad love. Tekst. (In Russian).
Breton, A.(1994). The Second Manifesto of Surrealism. In An Anthology of French Surrealism. The twenties (pp. 290–343). Gitis. (In Russian).
Crow, T. (1996). The Rise of the Sixties: American and European Art in the Era of Dissent. Abrams.
Daix, P. (2010). Everyday life of the Surrealists, 1917-1932.. Palimsest. (In Russian).
Darley, A. (2000). Visual Digital Culture: Surface Play and Spectacle in New Media Genres. Routledge.
Dreher, T. (2021). History of Computer Art. Lulu Press, Inc.
Du Sautoy, M. (2019). The Creativity Code: Art and Innovation in the Age of AI. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674240407
Foster, H. (2022). Compulsive beauty. NLO. (In Russian).
Foster, H., Krauss, R., Bois, Y.-A., Buchloh, B., & Joselit, D. (2015). Art since 1900. Modernism. Antimodernism. Postmodernism. Ad Marginem Press. (In Russian).
Galloway, A. R. (2013). The Interface Effect. John Wiley & Sons.
Gatys, L., Ecker, A., & Bethge, M. (2016). A Neural Algorithm of Artistic Style. Journal of Vision, 16(12), 326. https://doi.org/10.1167/16.12.326
Greenberg, C. (1986). The Collected Essays and Criticism. Chicago University Press.
Groys, B. (2023, August 10). From writing to prompting: AI as Zeitgeist-Machine. E-Flux. https://www.e-flux.com/notes/553214/from-writing-to-prompting-ai-as-zeitgeist-machine
Huyssen, A. (1986). After the Great Divide: Modernism, Mass Culture, Postmodernism. Indiana University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-18995-3
Kathöfer, J. (2019). Not what, but how is the index? On the differentiation of the various indexicalities of photography. International Journal of Cultural Research, 4(37), 11–26. https://doi.org/10.24411/2079-1100-2019-00048
Krauss, R. (2014). Photographic: For a theory of gaps. Ad Marginem Press. (In Russian).
Lambert, N. (2020). Digital Art: A History. I.B. Tauris Limited.
Manovich, L. (2018). AI Aesthetics. https://monoskop.org/images/6/66/Manovich_Lev_AI_Aesthetics_2018.pdf
Paul, C. (2017). Digital Art. Ad Marginem Press. (In Russian).
Peraica, A. (2019). The Age of Total Images: Disappearance of a Subjective Viewpoint in Post-digital Photography. Institute of Network Cultures.
Rorimer, A. (2001). New Art in the 60-70s: Redefining Reality. Thames & Hudson.
Samman, N. (2023). Poetics of Encryption: Art and Technocene. Hatje Cantz.
Schmitt, P. (2018). Surrealist Networks: Machine Learning Art as Automatism. Philipp Schmitt. https://philippschmitt.com/archive/2018/notes/surrealist-networks
Taylor, G. D. (2014). When the Machine Made Art. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Wallis, B. (1994). Art After Modernism: Rethinking Representation. New Museum of Contemporary Art.
Zylinska, J. (2020). AI Art. Machine Visions and Warped Dreams. Open Humanities Press.
Zylinska, J. (2023). Perception Machine: Our Photographic Future between the Eye and AI. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14471.001.0001
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.