2004
Volume 140, Issue 3/4
  • ISSN: 0040-7550
  • E-ISSN: 2212-0521

Abstract

Abstract

It is striking how often poetry is referenced in media reports about large language models (LLMs) and in the marketing language of technology companies like OpenAI (‘it can even write poetry!’). These references have a clear rhetorical effect: they contribute to the anthropomorphization of these technologies. This article takes a close look at the poetic production of LLMs (such as ChatGPT), showing that AI poetry relies on a romantic poetics that places expression and subjectivity at its core. I contrast the romantic conception of LLM poetry with experimental and avant-garde poetry of the twentieth century, in which procedures and machines were used to counteract notions of expression. I investigate the similarities and differences between twentieth-century computer poetry and the poetry of LLMs, and argue that it is important to read contemporary computer poetry in relation to the nature and function of digital media in our postdigital era.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TNTL2024.3/4.005.BLUI
2024-12-01
2025-02-07
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Van den Akker1985 – W.J.van den Akker, Een dichter schreit niet. Aspecten van M. Nijhoffs versexterne poëtica. Utrecht: Veen, 1985.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bailey1973 – R.W.Bailey (red.), Computer Poems. Drummond Island: Potagannissing Press, 1973.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bajohr2023 – H.Bajohr, ‘Artificial and Post-Artificial Texts: On Machine Learning and the Reading Expectations Towards Literary and Non-Literary Writing’. In: BMCCT Working Papers (7maart2023); 10.5451/bmcct.2023.007.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bender et al. 2021 – E.Bender, T.Gebru, A.McMillan-Major & S.Shmitchell, ‘On the Dangers of Stochastic Parrots: Can Language Models Be Too Big?’ In: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (2021), p. 610-623. doi: 10.1145/3442188.3445922.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Benjamin2019 – R.Benjamin, Race after Technology: Abolitionist Tools for the New Jim Code. Cambridge: Polity, 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bernaerts, Bluijs & Van de Ven2023 – L.Bernaerts, S.Bluijs & I.van de Ven (red.), Het internet verbeeld. Literatuur en het digitale. Themanummer Nederlandse letterkunde28 (2023) 2.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bertram2019 – L.-Y.Bertram, Travesty Generator. Minneapolis: Noemi Press, 2019.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bluijs2021 – S.Bluijs, ‘Electronic Literature’. In: The Online Encyclopedia of Literary Neo-Avant-Gardes (22november2021); https://www.oeln.net/encyclopedia/concepts/electronicliterature.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Bluijs, Dera & Peeters2022 – S.Bluijs, J.Dera & D.Peeters, ‘Digitale literatuur in de Lage Landen: een nieuwe historische en institutionele benadering’. In: Spiegel der Letteren64 (2022) 1, p. 51-78.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brems2006 – H.Brems, Altijd weer vogels die nesten beginnen. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker, 2006.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Bürger1974 – P.Bürger, Theorie der Avantgarde. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1974.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chayka2024 – K.Chayka, Filterworld. How Algorithms Flattened Culture. New York: Doubleday, 2024.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Chun2021 – W.H.K.Chun, Discriminating Data. Correlation, Neighborhoods, and the New Politics of Recognition. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cramer2012 – F.Cramer, ‘Post-Digital Writing’. In: Electronic Book Review12december2012; https://electronicbookreview.com/essay/post-digital-writing/.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Cramer2020 – F.Cramer, ‘The Kaleidoscope Constraint: The Automation of Arts, Seen from its Dead Ends’. In: Automation and Creativity: Practice, Aesthetics and Reception of the Digital in Music and Literature. TU Braunschweig, 8oktober2020; http://cramer.pleintekst.nl/essays/kaleidoscope_constraint/.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Deckwitz2024 – E.Deckwitz, ‘ChatGPT: de dichter is dood, leve de dichter!’ In: E. du Perronlezing, Tilburg University, 16mei2024.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Dera2021 – J.Dera, Poëzie als alternatief. Amsterdam: Wereldbibliotheek, 2021.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Berry & Dieter2015 – D.M.Berry & M.Dieter (red.), Postdigital Aesthetics: Art, Computation and Design. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Van Dijck2014 – J.van Dijck, ‘Datafication, Dataism and Dataveillance: Big Data between Scientific Paradigm and Ideology’. In: Surveillance & Society12 (2014) 2, p. 197-208.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Du Sautoy2020 – M.Du Sautoy, The Creativity Code: How AI is Learning to Write, Paint and Think. Londen: Fourth Estate, 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Elam2023 – M.Elam, ‘Poetry Will Not Optimize; or, What Is Literature to AI?’ In: American literature95 (2023) 2, p. 281-303.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Foucault1969 – M.Foucault, ‘Qu’est-ce qu’un auteur?’ In: Bulletin de la Société française de philosophie63 (1969) 3, p. 73-104.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Frankfurt2005 – H.Frankfurt, On Bullshit. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2005.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Goldsmith2011 – K.Goldsmith, Uncreative Writing: Managing Language in the Digital Age. New York: Columbia University Press, 2011.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Gomperts1959 – H.A.Gomperts, De schok der herkenning. Acht causerieën over de invloed van invloed in de literatuur. Amsterdam: Meulenhoff, 1981 [1959].
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Haaf2010 – K.ten Haaf (red.), Zieteratuur: concrete en visuele poëzie uit Nederland en Vlaanderen. Groningen: Passage, 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hartman1996 – C.O., Virtual Muse: Experiments in Computer Poetry. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England, 1996.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hayles2022 – N.K.Hayles, ‘Inside the Mind of an AI: Materiality and the Crisis of Representation’. In: New Literary History53 (2022) 4, p. 635-666.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hicks, Humphries & Slater2024 – M.T.Hicks, J.Humphries, & J.Slater, ‘ChatGPT is Bullshit’. In: Ethics and Information Technology26 (2024) 38; https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-024-09775-5.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. De Jong2024 – J.de Jong, ‘Penis, sperma, vagina: wat ChatGPT betreft, horen die woorden niet thuis in een roman’. In: NRC Handelsblad, 1april2024.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Jordan2020 – S.Jordan, Postdigital Storytelling: Poetics, Praxis, Research. New York: Routledge, 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kirschenbaum2023 – M.Kirschenbaum, ‘Again Theory: A Forum on Language, Meaning, and Intent in the Time of Stochastic Parrots’. In: Critical Inquiry, 26juni2023; https://critinq.wordpress.com/2023/06/26/again-theory-a-forum-on-language-meaning-and-intent-in-the-time-of-stochastic-parrots/.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Krol1971 – G.Krol, APPI. Automatic Poetry by Pointed Information. Poëzie met een computer. Amsterdam: Querido, 1971.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Manovich2001 – L.Manovich, The Language of New Media. Cambridge: MIT University Press, 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Martin2020 – W.Martin, ‘Greta Monach en de geschiedenis van de computerpoëzie in de lage landen en omstreken’. In: Ooteoote.nl, 26maart2020; https://ooteoote.nl/2020/03/greta-monach-en-de-geschiedenis-van-de-computerpoezie-in-de-lage-landen-en-omstreken/.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Miller2022 – A.I.[sic] Miller, The Artist in the Machine: The World of AI-Powered Creativity. Cambridge: MIT University Press, 2001.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Monach1973 – G.Monach, Compoëzie. Alphen aan den Rijn/Brussel: Samson, 1973.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Mourits2018 – B.Mourits, ‘Poëzie als programmeertaal’. In: Literatuurmuseum, 24november2018; http://literatuurmuseum.com/artikelen/poezie-als-programmeertaal.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Noble2018 – S.U.Noble, Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: NYU Press, 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. O’Neil2016 – C.O’Neil, Weapons of Math Destruction. New York: Crown Books, 2016.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pasquinelli2023 – M.Pasquinelli, The Eye of the Master: A Social History of Artificial Intelligence. Londen: Verso, 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Periggo2023 – B.Periggo, ‘OpenAI Used Kenyan Workers on Less Than $2 Per Hour to Make ChatGPT Less Toxic’. In: Times Magazine, 18januari2023; https://time.com/6247678/openai-chatgpt-kenya-workers/
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Perloff2010 – M.Perloff, Unoriginal Genius: Poetry by Other Means in the New Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Piper2019 – K.Piper, ‘A Poetry-Writing AI has Just Been Unveiled. It’s … Pretty Good’. In: Vox, 15mei2019; https://www.vox.com/2019/5/15/18623134/openai-language-ai-gpt2-poetry-try-it.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Placani2024 – A.Placani, ‘Anthropomorphism in AI: Hype and Fallacy’. In: AI Ethics (2024); https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-024-00419-4.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Ramon2014 – R.Ramon, Vorm & visie. Geschiedenis van de concrete en visuele poëzie in Nederland en Vlaanderen. Gent: Poëziecentrum, 2014.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Rasch2020 – M.Rasch, Frictie. Ethiek in tijden van dataïsme. Amsterdam: De Bezige Bij, 2020.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Rees2022 – T.Rees, ‘Non-Human Words: On GPT-3 as a Philosophical Laboratory’. In: Daedalus151 (2022) 2, p. 168-182; https://doi.org/10.1162/daed_a_01908.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Rettberg2018 – S.Rettberg, Electronic Literature. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2018.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Ryan2020 – M.Ryan, ‘In AI we Trust: Ethics, Artificial Intelligence, and Reliability’. In: Science and Engineering Ethics26 (2020), p. 2749-2767.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Stephens2015 – P.Stephens, The Poetics of Information Overload: From Gertrude Stein to Conceptual Writing. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Turing1950 – A.M.Turing, ‘Computing Machinery and Intelligence’. In: Mind59 (1950) 236, p. 433-460; 10.1093/mind/LIX.236.433.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Dennean et al. 2023 – K.Dennean, S.Gantori, D.Kurnia Limas, A.Pu & R.Gilligan, ‘Let’s Chat about ChatGPT’. In: UBS, 22februari2023; https://secure.ubs.com/public/api/v2/investmentcontent/documents/XILxY9V9P5RazGpDA1Cr_Q?apikey=Y8VdAx8vhk1P9YXDlEOo2Eoco1fqKwDk&Accept-Language=de-CH.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Underwood2023 – T.Underwood, ‘The Empirical Triumph of Theory’. In: M.Kirschenbaum (ed.), Critical Inquiry Wordpress – Again Theory: A Forum on Language, Meaning, and Intent in a Time of Stochastic Parrots, 29juni2023; https://critinq.wordpress.com/2023/06/29/the-empirical-triumph-of-theory/.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Vaessens2002 – T.Vaessens, ‘Procedures voor de poëzie: Sybren Polet en het probleem van de authenticiteit’. In: Neerlandistiek2 (2002) 4.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Waytz, Joy & Nicholas2014 – A.Waytz, H.Joy & E.Nicholas, ‘The Mind in the Machine: Anthropomorphism Increases Trust in an Autonomous Vehicle’. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology52 (2014), p. 113-117.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Whalen2023 – Z.Whalen, ‘Any Means Necessary to Refuse Erasure by Algorithm: Lillian-Yvonne Bertram’s Travesty Generator’. In: DHQ: Digital Humanities Quarterly17 (2023) 2, p. 1-78.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.5117/TNTL2024.3/4.005.BLUI
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TNTL2024.3/4.005.BLUI
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error