The Havoc of The Art of Nietzsche

Foreword: AI and Genius A project by Anne Woodward that took place at Pulchri Studio set me thinking about the overestimation of Nietzsche in the arts. In the context of the project 'AI and Genius' (Haagse Kunstkring, March 2026), Peter Kattenberg, Wim Nijenhuis, and Brigit Law engaged in a conversation about a fundamental question: is the position of art under pressure due to the rise of generative artificial intelligence (GAI), or does it maintain its autonomy?

The Romantic Origins During this conversation (Haagse Kunstkring, March 3, 2026), art was traced back to its Romantic roots, particularly to the thinking of the early Romantic Friedrich Schelling. In a prior letter, Wim Nijenhuis proposed two hypotheses regarding the nature of genius. His central thesis: to be truly genial, AI would have to express its own materiality.

This thesis resonates with the title of the manifestation, conceived by Martin: 'Genius and AI'. To understand the relationship between the two, we must return to the definition of 'genius'. While we often think today of a hyper-intelligent individual (the Einstein type), the origin in art and technology is different. There, the word refers back to the ingeniator: the gifted maker or ingenious person who brings forth something new.

The Romantics sharpened this: they saw the genius as the artist whose work and utterances seemed to have no traceable logical cause. The genius broke rules, introduced a new perspective, and created new forms of language. With Schelling, this became philosophically anchored: nature itself is intelligent and creative but does so unconsciously. The genius is the link that expresses this unconscious, creative energy of nature.

The Impossibility of the Digital Genius In the work of a brilliant artist, the unconscious creation of nature and the conscious action of the human merge. To allow space for that natural creative power, the artist must work with 'conscious incapacity,' listening to intuition and the resistance of the material.

This is where the shoe pinches with AI. Although an algorithm—if properly directed by prompts—can imitate stunning poems or paintings, these remain simulations at a fundamental level. AI lacks the physicality, feeling, and intuition necessary for that deep fusion. In that sense, AI can never be genial; after all, the system does not 'experience' materiality.