'Não há crise estética, há projeto estético de caos' | BdF Entrevista Kenji Ciampi (Normose)

Summary of the “BdF Entrevista” on aesthetics, AI, and power

The interview (BdF Entrevista) argues that what is often framed as an “aesthetic crisis” is actually a deliberate “aesthetic project of chaos” driven by political power—especially by the far right—using images (including AI-generated ones) to simplify politics, spread propaganda, and shape emotions.

---

Aesthetics, politics, and power

• The guest, Kenji Ciampi (Normose), argues that history shows images have long functioned as tools of control.
  • Example: Nazism used cultural categories such as “sublime” vs. “degenerate” art to target not only artworks, but the people labeled “inferior.”
• From this, he claims fascism operates through the aestheticization of politics: complex political questions are reduced to image-driven feelings, enemies, and moral binaries.
• These narratives are treated as socially constructed, spread through memes, slogans, and out-of-context image fragments that quickly “load” meaning and help “shape reality.”

---

“AI slop” as ideology, not just technology

• The discussion highlights the far right’s use of crude AI imagery (described as “AI slop”) as something more than a practical shortcut.
• Ciampi argues these images fit a larger program:
  • they embed symbols and messages efficiently,
  • rely on simplification and irony,
  • manufacture consent and emotional responses.
• He cites examples of viral political AI-style content and notes that high-profile figures—especially Trump—repeatedly use such imagery.

---

Apocalypse-as-marketing and control through fear

• Another theme is the recurring claim—even echoed by powerful tech figures—that AI could lead to humanity’s extinction.
• Ciampi suggests “end of the world” discourse can work like propaganda and marketing by:
  • naturalizing the idea that there is no escape,
  • reducing incentives for resistance,
  • making alternatives seem unviable.
• He also argues that “AI” is misrepresented as intelligence: in his view, large language models are pattern calculators, and this framing benefits industries that sell narratives of inevitability.

---

Why far-right politics favors replication (not creativity)

• He agrees with an argument from a foreign essay: far-right politics likes AI because it lacks creativity and originality.
• Philosophically, generative systems replicate patterns from the status quo, tending to reproduce existing hegemonies rather than disrupt them.
• He connects this to concerns about “AI neutrality”, using Cathy O’Neil’s Weapons of Math Destruction as a parallel: automated systems can reinforce inequality because they inherit and amplify existing advantages and structures.

---

Moving beyond domination: art as resistance and alternative imaginaries

• While the interview critiques how art/aesthetics can be weaponized, Ciampi insists art can also be a way out:
  • building new possibilities for coexistence,
  • drawing on references such as Vkhutemas and socialist-era design debates.
• He argues the left should not only analyze domination, but also:
  • produce counter-imaginaries,
  • mobilize affection and emotional engagement,
  • recognize that the far right has succeeded by reaching workers through emotionally compelling aesthetics.
• He emphasizes the value of art “from below” (peripheral/marginal art, rap/hip-hop, street cultural production).
• A key gap is noted: institutional political change moves more slowly than right-wing aesthetic campaigning.

---

“Ecce Homo of Borja” as a case study of human gesture

• Ciampi explains why he made (or promoted) a Normose video about the Ecce Homo of Borja.
  • A restoration transformed an overlooked, almost “graffiti-like” origin into an artwork that generated strong public emotion, debate, pilgrimages, and global attention.
• The case is used to argue that:
  • hierarchies of “high” vs. “low” art can be overturned through human gesture,
  • affective impact can come from what looks like an accident or “wrong” restoration.
• He ties this to a fundamental distinction: the value of art is linked to the mark of human presence and execution, which pasteurized AI production cannot replace.

---

Human resistance, policy implications, and the critique of “democratization”

• Ciampi warns that AI is being marketed as democratizing art, even though it may push human artists out and make them vulnerable to job displacement (he mentions strikes involving voice actors and artists).
• He argues brands often want the “human-made” story for marketing; even advertisements commodify craft and behind-the-scenes human labor.
• He calls for public policy focused on artists and cultural workers, repeatedly urging viewers to:
  • value local, human artists,
  • consume and support live art.
• Theater is presented as a site of “realism”—including eye contact and meaningful error—contrasted with automated repetition.

---

Closing message

The interview ends with a pro-art, pro-collectivity stance: even amid bleak conditions, the “way out is still in art,” through resistance and collective production of new ways of seeing and feeling—“take off the glasses/blindfold” of ideology.

---

Presenters / contributors

• Raquel Sets (host / interviewer)
• Kenji Ciampi (historian, creator of the Normose channel)