Critics at Large | The New Yorker

Episode: Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Date: October 23, 2025
Hosts: Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, Alexandra Schwartz

Episode Overview

In this episode, New Yorker staff critics Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, and Alexandra Schwartz dive into the complex, controversial, and rapidly evolving relationship between artificial intelligence (AI) and the arts. The conversation explores generative AI as a creative force, the cultural anxieties it provokes, current examples of AI-generated art, and the lingering question: can AI ever truly create meaningful art? The trio examines the promise and peril of AI, its presence in music, film, and fiction, and whether art without humanity at the helm can ever really move us.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Proliferation of Generative AI in Culture

Opening Context ([01:40])
Alexandra Schwartz sets the stage by noting AI’s growing ubiquity, especially generative AI, and poses big questions about its impact on the arts.
Quote:

"...generative AI...built to create new content, not just to enable analysis or organization...is starting to become pervasive in the arts."
— Alexandra ([01:40])

2. AI in Music: The Case of Tata Taktumi

Intro to Tata ([03:35–08:58])
Timbaland’s new “artist” Tata Taktumi—a fully AI-generated female rapper—represents a major, polarizing foray of AI into pop music.
Vinson’s Reaction:

"Its existence is just a true shame to me... This ungodly creature has released a single and a music video for that single."
— Vinson ([07:06])
Alex’s Discomfort:
"If I didn't know Tata was AI, I might just think this was another serviceable pop product. That's what's so disconcerting—how easily this slides into our existing aesthetics.” ([12:44])
Artistic & Labor Critique:
- Nomi and Vinson connect Tata to broader cultural trends—blandness, efficiency, and automation—echoing the hyper-perfection of K-pop.
- Vinson notes the music’s credits are sparse, underlining the potential labor implications and loss of human collaboration ([15:20]).
“It's almost a visual ode to the fact that this is also a way to cut jobs.”
— Vinson ([15:20])
- Nomi adds:
"It just means [Timbaland] doesn't wanna pay a new artist. I don't think it has anything to do with being washed up..."
([15:46])

3. AI as “Actor”: Tilly Norwood

Who is Tilly? ([16:22–20:59])
Tilly Norwood is an AI-generated actress seeking real world Hollywood representation, causing consternation and satire in the industry.
- Created by Dutch technologist Alina van der Velden for her company Particle 6.
- Betty Gilpin’s open letter to Tilly highlights anxiety about replacing real, lived experience—including both privilege and vulnerability—with synthetic perfection.
Panel’s Response:
Alexandra argues Tilly represents a shallow, market-driven vision of beauty and talent, while Vinson calls out the disingenuousness of those claiming Tilly is “just another creative work.”

"Nobody thinks that it's just, you're gonna put her on the wall like a Picasso... everybody knows what the end game is."
— Vinson ([20:30]) "Who do you think you're fooling with this slick browed broad?"
— Vinson ([20:52])

4. Are There AI Art Projects Worth Admiring?

Hopeful Examples ([21:14–22:03])
- Vinson cites Jacoby Satterwhite, whose video work interrogates digital aesthetics with a recognizably human perspective.
- Alexandra highlights musician Holly Herndon, whose project “Holly+” uses AI to clone and extend her own voice’s creative potential.
“She’s made recordings of her voice that can be used to sing anything...participate in all kinds of collaborations she may not even know about. Brave new world, but I find it fascinating.”
— Alexandra ([22:03])

5. AI in the Human Imagination: From HAL 9000 to Simone ([25:02–39:10])

AI as Fictional Menace:
- Naomi recalls HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey as a chilling model of AI crossing from helpful tool to existential threat. ([25:24-27:55])
- Vinson frames HAL as the embodiment of a technocratic dream gone awry—cool, clinical, and terrifying.
  
  "We have, like, unsheathed our kind of unvarnished longing for precisely this. A machine to tell us what is the way through all this human muck..."
  ([28:52])
AI as Fictional Sympath:
- Naomi and Alexandra discuss “the Pinocchio effect”—AI characters that become moving, even lovable (Blade Runner, Ex Machina).
- Alexandra:
  
  “There’s something about our feeling for other creatures, even if they’re clearly fictional. I mean, this is what art is all about, in a way.”
  ([38:34])

6. The Human Impulse, Meaning, and the “Aura” of Art

Human Authorship vs. Machine Output ([43:10–49:54])
- Alexandra and Naomi both experiment with ChatGPT writing in their style; find the results “uncanny” but ultimately thin—AI is derivative, missing real life’s messiness.
- Vinson:
  
  “It starts on an act of theft. It is just giving you back things that you might have said from reading you.”
  ([46:34])
Theory Corner ([47:09–51:37])
- Alexandra draws a thread from Walter Benjamin (“The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”) and Roland Barthes (“The Death of the Author”)—AI art seems a “death of the author” taken to the extreme, threatening art's unique, human aura.
- Vinson’s rejoinder:
  
  “AI...can replicate the form of things, but cannot pull on the experience of being in the world.”
  ([49:54])
Where is This Headed?
- Alexandra:
  
  “I am waiting for the moment when I love the thing, and I, you know, am deeply moved by the thing. And then it turns out that Tilly was behind it.”
  ([52:46])

7. The Panel’s Ultimate Position

Art made by AI may amuse or disturb, and it can mimic the surface well, but the critics agree: what matters is the "felt" presence of a human life behind art's creation. Without that, both beauty and relevance are diminished.

Memorable Quotes & Moments

On AI Artists:

“She’s to the evidence of the eyes, of course, an unholy monster who will have to make an account for itself before God.”
— Vinson on Tata Taktumi ([08:27])
On AI’s Place in Mass Culture:

“Is that so different from some other stuff we might see nowadays? Aimed at a kind of young audience that is looking for quick product rather than intricate...complex works that serve emotion and creativity to the listeners.”
— Naomi ([10:16])
On Machine Art:

“The only reason I like art is because people make it.”
— Vinson ([32:00])
On the Death of the Author:

“AI is the ultimate death of the author, and not in a good way.”
— Alexandra ([49:54])
On Collective Experience & Meaning:

“AI...can replicate the form of things, but cannot pull on the experience of being in the world.”
— Vinson ([49:54])

Notable Timestamps

[01:40] Alexandra introduces the theme; generative AI’s pervasiveness in arts
[03:03] Nomi introduces AI “actress” Tilly Norwood
[03:35] Vinson introduces AI “artist” Tata Taktumi
[07:06] Vinson’s critique of Tata Taktumi and Stage Zero
[10:14] Naomi discusses cultural trends toward uniformity/AI aesthetics
[12:44] Alexandra on AI art “sliding in” to human experience
[15:20] Vinson on labor issues in AI music
[20:30] Alexandra and Vinson on Tilly Norwood and art as labor replacement
[21:14] Are there any AI projects the panel likes?
[22:03] Holly Herndon as a hopeful AI+human collaboration example
[25:24] Naomi introduces HAL 9000/2001: A Space Odyssey
[28:52] Vinson on technocratic longing/AI’s societal appeal
[32:00] Vinson’s categorical humanism on art
[43:10] Alexandra and Nomi’s ChatGPT writing experiments
[47:09] Benjamin, Barthes, and the “aura” of art discussion
[52:46] Alexandra’s closing thought—waiting to be truly moved by an AI artwork

Conclusion

“Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence” blends wit and skepticism to ask: Can AI ever create truly meaningful art, or does it only serve as a mirror—sometimes kitsch-laden, sometimes uncanny—to our own tastes and anxieties? While all three critics see value in certain hybrid AI-human experiments, what persists is their collective insistence on the irreplaceable role of human experience in the making—and meaning—of art.

(Ads, podcast intro/outro, and sponsor mentions have been omitted in accordance with user instructions.)

Critics at Large | The New Yorker

Episode: Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Date: October 23, 2025
Hosts: Vinson Cunningham, Naomi Fry, Alexandra Schwartz

Episode Overview

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Proliferation of Generative AI in Culture

Opening Context ([01:40])
Alexandra Schwartz sets the stage by noting AI’s growing ubiquity, especially generative AI, and poses big questions about its impact on the arts.
Quote:

"...generative AI...built to create new content, not just to enable analysis or organization...is starting to become pervasive in the arts."
— Alexandra ([01:40])

2. AI in Music: The Case of Tata Taktumi

Intro to Tata ([03:35–08:58])
Timbaland’s new “artist” Tata Taktumi—a fully AI-generated female rapper—represents a major, polarizing foray of AI into pop music.
Vinson’s Reaction:

"Its existence is just a true shame to me... This ungodly creature has released a single and a music video for that single."
— Vinson ([07:06])
Alex’s Discomfort:
"If I didn't know Tata was AI, I might just think this was another serviceable pop product. That's what's so disconcerting—how easily this slides into our existing aesthetics.” ([12:44])
Artistic & Labor Critique:
- Nomi and Vinson connect Tata to broader cultural trends—blandness, efficiency, and automation—echoing the hyper-perfection of K-pop.
- Vinson notes the music’s credits are sparse, underlining the potential labor implications and loss of human collaboration ([15:20]).
“It's almost a visual ode to the fact that this is also a way to cut jobs.”
— Vinson ([15:20])
- Nomi adds:
"It just means [Timbaland] doesn't wanna pay a new artist. I don't think it has anything to do with being washed up..."
([15:46])

3. AI as “Actor”: Tilly Norwood

Who is Tilly? ([16:22–20:59])
Tilly Norwood is an AI-generated actress seeking real world Hollywood representation, causing consternation and satire in the industry.
- Created by Dutch technologist Alina van der Velden for her company Particle 6.
- Betty Gilpin’s open letter to Tilly highlights anxiety about replacing real, lived experience—including both privilege and vulnerability—with synthetic perfection.
Panel’s Response:
Alexandra argues Tilly represents a shallow, market-driven vision of beauty and talent, while Vinson calls out the disingenuousness of those claiming Tilly is “just another creative work.”

"Nobody thinks that it's just, you're gonna put her on the wall like a Picasso... everybody knows what the end game is."
— Vinson ([20:30]) "Who do you think you're fooling with this slick browed broad?"
— Vinson ([20:52])

4. Are There AI Art Projects Worth Admiring?

Hopeful Examples ([21:14–22:03])
- Vinson cites Jacoby Satterwhite, whose video work interrogates digital aesthetics with a recognizably human perspective.
- Alexandra highlights musician Holly Herndon, whose project “Holly+” uses AI to clone and extend her own voice’s creative potential.
“She’s made recordings of her voice that can be used to sing anything...participate in all kinds of collaborations she may not even know about. Brave new world, but I find it fascinating.”
— Alexandra ([22:03])

5. AI in the Human Imagination: From HAL 9000 to Simone ([25:02–39:10])

AI as Fictional Menace:
- Naomi recalls HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey as a chilling model of AI crossing from helpful tool to existential threat. ([25:24-27:55])
- Vinson frames HAL as the embodiment of a technocratic dream gone awry—cool, clinical, and terrifying.
  
  "We have, like, unsheathed our kind of unvarnished longing for precisely this. A machine to tell us what is the way through all this human muck..."
  ([28:52])
AI as Fictional Sympath:
- Naomi and Alexandra discuss “the Pinocchio effect”—AI characters that become moving, even lovable (Blade Runner, Ex Machina).
- Alexandra:
  
  “There’s something about our feeling for other creatures, even if they’re clearly fictional. I mean, this is what art is all about, in a way.”
  ([38:34])

6. The Human Impulse, Meaning, and the “Aura” of Art

Human Authorship vs. Machine Output ([43:10–49:54])
- Alexandra and Naomi both experiment with ChatGPT writing in their style; find the results “uncanny” but ultimately thin—AI is derivative, missing real life’s messiness.
- Vinson:
  
  “It starts on an act of theft. It is just giving you back things that you might have said from reading you.”
  ([46:34])
Theory Corner ([47:09–51:37])
- Alexandra draws a thread from Walter Benjamin (“The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”) and Roland Barthes (“The Death of the Author”)—AI art seems a “death of the author” taken to the extreme, threatening art's unique, human aura.
- Vinson’s rejoinder:
  
  “AI...can replicate the form of things, but cannot pull on the experience of being in the world.”
  ([49:54])
Where is This Headed?
- Alexandra:
  
  “I am waiting for the moment when I love the thing, and I, you know, am deeply moved by the thing. And then it turns out that Tilly was behind it.”
  ([52:46])

7. The Panel’s Ultimate Position

Art made by AI may amuse or disturb, and it can mimic the surface well, but the critics agree: what matters is the "felt" presence of a human life behind art's creation. Without that, both beauty and relevance are diminished.

Memorable Quotes & Moments

On AI Artists:

“She’s to the evidence of the eyes, of course, an unholy monster who will have to make an account for itself before God.”
— Vinson on Tata Taktumi ([08:27])
On AI’s Place in Mass Culture:

“Is that so different from some other stuff we might see nowadays? Aimed at a kind of young audience that is looking for quick product rather than intricate...complex works that serve emotion and creativity to the listeners.”
— Naomi ([10:16])
On Machine Art:

“The only reason I like art is because people make it.”
— Vinson ([32:00])
On the Death of the Author:

“AI is the ultimate death of the author, and not in a good way.”
— Alexandra ([49:54])
On Collective Experience & Meaning:

“AI...can replicate the form of things, but cannot pull on the experience of being in the world.”
— Vinson ([49:54])

Notable Timestamps

[01:40] Alexandra introduces the theme; generative AI’s pervasiveness in arts
[03:03] Nomi introduces AI “actress” Tilly Norwood
[03:35] Vinson introduces AI “artist” Tata Taktumi
[07:06] Vinson’s critique of Tata Taktumi and Stage Zero
[10:14] Naomi discusses cultural trends toward uniformity/AI aesthetics
[12:44] Alexandra on AI art “sliding in” to human experience
[15:20] Vinson on labor issues in AI music
[20:30] Alexandra and Vinson on Tilly Norwood and art as labor replacement
[21:14] Are there any AI projects the panel likes?
[22:03] Holly Herndon as a hopeful AI+human collaboration example
[25:24] Naomi introduces HAL 9000/2001: A Space Odyssey
[28:52] Vinson on technocratic longing/AI’s societal appeal
[32:00] Vinson’s categorical humanism on art
[43:10] Alexandra and Nomi’s ChatGPT writing experiments
[47:09] Benjamin, Barthes, and the “aura” of art discussion
[52:46] Alexandra’s closing thought—waiting to be truly moved by an AI artwork

Conclusion

(Ads, podcast intro/outro, and sponsor mentions have been omitted in accordance with user instructions.)

wavePod

Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Powered by Wave AI

Summary

Critics at Large | The New Yorker

Episode: Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Episode Overview

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Proliferation of Generative AI in Culture

2. AI in Music: The Case of Tata Taktumi

3. AI as “Actor”: Tilly Norwood

4. Are There AI Art Projects Worth Admiring?

5. AI in the Human Imagination: From HAL 9000 to Simone ([25:02–39:10])

6. The Human Impulse, Meaning, and the “Aura” of Art

7. The Panel’s Ultimate Position

Memorable Quotes & Moments

Notable Timestamps

Conclusion

Summary

Critics at Large | The New Yorker

Episode: Art in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Episode Overview

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Proliferation of Generative AI in Culture

2. AI in Music: The Case of Tata Taktumi

3. AI as “Actor”: Tilly Norwood

4. Are There AI Art Projects Worth Admiring?

5. AI in the Human Imagination: From HAL 9000 to Simone ([25:02–39:10])

6. The Human Impulse, Meaning, and the “Aura” of Art

7. The Panel’s Ultimate Position

Memorable Quotes & Moments

Notable Timestamps

Conclusion