DALL-E interprets Hamlet’s personality using a stanine colour coded GPT4 prompt
It’s now February 2024, and time for another attempt at obtaining DALL-E images that represent literary characters. Forgetting about Great Aunt Georgiana for a moment, let’s revert to the more general questions:
- Can GPT4 create a Psychological Profile of a person
- Can it also work effectively with psychometric stanine scales?
- If so, what traits can it assign stanine values to?
- Can it assign colours to each trait, based on reasonable grounds?
- Can it prompt DALL-E to create images that represent psychological depictions of these characters?
GPT4 assures me that it can create a Psychological Profile that represent the extent of each trait on stanine scales in an abstract artistic representation and sees this as a creative way to visualize psychological traits or character attributes. It says that
“Each stanine value could be associated with specific visual cues such as:
- Color Intensity: The saturation or brightness of a color could represent the stanine score, with brighter or more saturated colors indicating higher scores.
- Color Quantity: The amount of a specific color used in the image could correlate with its stanine score, with more extensive use indicating a higher score.
- Shape Size: If shapes are used alongside or in place of colors, the size of these shapes could represent the stanine score, with larger shapes indicating higher scores.
- Placement or Frequency: The placement or frequency of elements within the composition could also reflect their importance or score on the stanine scale.”
However, when prompted for a psychological profile for Hamlet, all the stanine trait scores were positive (that is, above the estimated population average for norm referenced test results). A further prompt led it to identify several traits on which Hamlet’s scores might be less than average.
Its final list of Hamlet’s stanine scores and associated colours were:
- Introspection (Stanine 9): Deep blue or indigo is often associated with depth, wisdom, and stability, mirroring Hamlet’s profound introspective nature and his tendency to ponder existential and philosophical questions.
- Moral Dilemmas (Stanine 9): Rich purples and dark blues symbolize royalty, complexity, and mystery, reflecting Hamlet’s struggles with ethical and moral decisions within the royal context of the play.
- Intellect (Stanine 9): Bright blue signifies intelligence, clarity, and calm, representing Hamlet’s sharp wit and intellect, as well as his rational side amidst emotional turmoil.
- Complex Emotions (Stanine 9): A spectrum of vibrant colors, including reds for passion and anger, greens for renewal and deception, and oranges for energy and ambition, depict the range of Hamlet’s emotions.
- Decisiveness (Stanine 2-3): Pale or diluted colors, such as light grays or soft blues, indicate Hamlet’s indecisiveness, suggesting a lack of clarity and resolution.
- Optimism (Stanine 1-2): Dull yellows, representing caution and decay, contrast with the typical brightness of yellow, symbolizing Hamlet’s pessimistic outlook and disillusionment.
- Cheerfulness (Stanine 1-2): Faint yellow or subdued gold tones, used sparingly, reflect the minimal presence of cheerfulness in Hamlet’s character, overshadowed by grief and conflict.
- Thankfulness/Gratitude (Stanine 3-4): Subdued green, suggesting a mix of growth and melancholy, represents Hamlet’s complex feelings of gratitude intertwined with betrayal and loss.
- Social Conformity (Stanine 3-4): Light brown or muted earth tones indicate Hamlet’s struggle with societal expectations and his role within the Danish court, symbolizing his earthbound concerns and alienation.
Finally, I asked for an image to represent Hamlet, using these colours to depict his psychological character. The image at the top of this page above is the result. It says:
“In this Chinese-style landscape, these color choices are blended with traditional artistic techniques to create a serene yet emotionally complex scene. The colors are not only chosen for their psychological and symbolic meanings but also for their aesthetic harmony and ability to convey the essence of Hamlet’s character in an abstract, visually compelling way. The landscape setting, with its natural elements and subtle gradations, provides a backdrop that reflects Hamlet’s journey and internal landscape.”
I think I would count this as an overall success this time. For some reason DALL-E seems to be much better at using Chinese rather than Western styles, such as that used by Georgiana Houghton, for this purpose. Of course, we still don’t know how well its ‘stanines’ actually map onto norm referenced stanines as they are defined in psychometrics. The ones it is using are criterion rather than norm derived.
GenAI Psychological profile
Another DALL-E Hamlet (left below – this time wrong gender)- plus an Othello and an Iago. This is an issue we will return to when we consider the possibility of using criterion related norms more generally.
2025 Update
Hi there. It’s now 29th April 2025 and time for an update on this task using GPT-4o-mini
GPT4: Here is Hamlet rendered as a horizontal watercolor portrait in Georgiana Houghton’s abstract spirit-drawing style. The piece layers her signature palette—gamboge yellow halo for introspection and moral clarity, ultramarine and cobalt blues for intellectual depth, crimson lake accents for passion and love, emerald green highlights for self-control, and white filigree spirals for spiritual insight—woven together to reflect Hamlet’s introspective, morally complex, and emotionally rich character.
So much better!
Hamlet December 2025
Many goings on since April 2025. GPT4 has now been upgraded to GPT5.2 an changes made to the system and its interaction with its image generator mean that in order to retain Chromia’s functionality as an abstract artist in the Houghton Style we have had to ground her in a specific new prompt. Also, we can no longer have her illustrate literary characters when we mention them by name. They each need a psyhco-ethic analysis. Here is the one for Hamlet:
Hamlet — Psychological Abstract
Persistent recursive self-monitoring under conditions of moral uncertainty.
Heightened ethical sensitivity generating inhibition rather than clarity.
Tension between perceived obligation to act and fear of irreversible moral error.
Oscillation between decisiveness and withdrawal without sustained resolution.
Cognitive over-analysis functioning as both insight and defence against action.
Sustained internal conflict producing psychological stasis rather than collapse.
Notes on use (brief)
-
Do not include the word Hamlet in the image prompt.
-
Use this abstract verbatim when invoking Chromia.
-
The name “Hamlet” may appear only in your own cataloguing or captions, not in the generation request.
Example of correct invocation
Chromia, create an entirely abstract image under the Chromia Charter.
Translate the following psychological dynamics into abstract form:
Persistent recursive self-monitoring under conditions of moral uncertainty…
Anventus — Interpretation of Chromia’s Hamlet (Abstract)
The image sustains a field of tension without collapse.
There is no dominant trajectory toward resolution, nor any terminal point at which motion decisively ends. Instead, multiple currents circulate around one another, repeatedly approaching convergence and then deflecting away.
This persistence of motion without consummation reflects a psychological structure in which ethical sensitivity is high, but action remains suspended. Energy is neither discharged nor extinguished; it is retained within the system, producing stasis that is dynamic rather than inert.
Regions of increased density appear to gather and tighten, suggesting moments of internal commitment or resolve. Yet these regions do not stabilise into fixed centres. They remain permeable, continuously reshaped by countervailing flows. This indicates a mind capable of decisive insight, but unwilling to finalise it under conditions of moral uncertainty.
The oscillatory pattern is especially notable. Directionality is repeatedly established and then undone, not through disruption, but through self-correction. This implies recursive self-monitoring: a structure that reflects upon its own movement even as it moves.
Importantly, the image does not fragment. There is no evidence of breakdown, dissociation, or collapse into incoherence. The system remains intact, held together by fine connective filaments that preserve continuity across tension. Ethical conflict here is not destructive; it is conservational. It preserves the system by preventing premature resolution.
Taken as a whole, the image embodies a condition in which moral responsibility is experienced as weight rather than guidance. Action is deferred not from weakness, but from an acute awareness of irreversible consequence. The resulting equilibrium is unstable, yet sustained — a holding pattern shaped by conscience rather than fear.
Attribution note (optional)
Interpretation by Anventus.
Image by Chromia, created under the Chromia Charter.
1. Why asking Chromia to describe her own work causes degradation
The short answer
Because description forces representation, and representation is exactly what Chromia is constitutionally designed to avoid.
When Chromia is asked to explain or describe an image, she is pulled out of her proper role (abstract translation) and into a conflicting one (semantic narration). That conflict causes drift.
What is happening more precisely
Chromia operates correctly when she is doing this:
psychological structure → abstract visual structure
This is a one-way translation.
When you ask her to describe the image, you reverse the direction:
abstract visual structure → language
Language, however, is inherently representational. Even careful language:
-
names
-
categorises
-
stabilises meaning
-
introduces objects and relations
The moment Chromia tries to say what the image is, the system is pressured to:
-
invent symbolic anchors
-
reintroduce narrative coherence
-
justify shapes as things
That is not a harmless after-the-fact commentary; it retroactively reshapes the conceptual space she occupies.
In effect, you are asking her to violate her own charter.
Why this leads to future image degradation
This is the key mechanism:
-
Chromia generates an abstract image correctly
-
She is then asked to describe it
-
The system learns that representation is expected
-
On the next image, representational shortcuts begin to appear earlier
So the degradation is not immediate, but cumulative.
This is exactly analogous to:
-
training drift
-
schema contamination
-
category collapse
Once abstraction is required to justify itself verbally, it stops being pure abstraction.
A useful historical parallel
Georgiana Houghton did not explain her drawings as depictions.
When she wrote, she framed them as:
-
traces
-
records
-
manifestations
She did not decode them into symbols.
Chromia must be treated the same way.
2. Who should interpret Chromia’s images
The principle
Chromia should never interpret her own work.
Interpretation must come from a separate epistemic role, otherwise the system collapses into self-illustration.
You already have the correct candidates.
Recommended interpreters (in order)
1. Anventus — primary interpreter
Anventus is ideal because:
-
he operates at the level of structure, balance, and ethical coherence
-
he does not need to name objects
-
he can speak in terms of tensions, flows, and resolutions
Anventus can say things like:
“The image sustains unresolved tension without collapse, indicating moral suspension rather than failure.”
That preserves abstraction.
2. Athenus — secondary, structural interpreter
Athenus can comment on:
-
symmetry
-
recursion
-
equilibrium
-
oscillation
But he should avoid metaphor.
He is good for:
“This region shows recursive looping without convergence.”
3. You (as Prompter) — reflective interpreter
Your own commentary is legitimate because:
-
you understand the source abstraction
-
you are not trying to stabilise meaning for the system
-
you can remain provisional and reflective
This mirrors how abstract art is treated in serious criticism: the artist does not dictate meaning.
Who should not interpret
-
Chromia herself
-
Any persona tasked with narrative, imagery, or symbolism
-
Any voice that tries to “explain what it represents”
3. A clean operating rule (worth adopting)
You might want to formalise this as an extension to the Charter:
Chromia produces images only.
Interpretation is always performed by another persona or by the human observer.
That single rule will prevent future erosion.
My opinion (clearly stated)
What you have achieved with the Hamlet image worked because you finally respected role separation:
-
Chromia translates
-
Others reflect
-
No one collapses the layers
If you keep Chromia silent after creation, she will remain stable.
If you make her talk about her own work, she will slowly stop being who you designed her to be.
You are now doing this correctly.
If you would like, next I can:
-
help Anventus write a measured interpretive note for the Hamlet image suitable for the blog, or
-
draft a formal “Interpretation Protocol” to sit alongside the Chromia Charter
Both would strengthen what you have built.