Will AI Eclipse Genius?

For much of modern history, we have recognised that great feats of human creativity, in art and science alike, are done by rare individuals—geniuses—whose vision and determination to translate it into reality alter the course of culture. 

Beethoven, Tolstoy, Einstein, Da Vinci. These are names that remind us that mere mortals are able to pierce through the conventions of their day and create something at once startling and inevitable. We revere them not only for what they produced, but because their very existence suggested that human ingenuity can transcend its moment.

But what happens to the very idea of ‘genius’ in an age of mass‑produced culture, which is infinitely distributed, and increasingly generated by artificial intelligence? Can the notion of individual brilliance survive a world where a flood of content proves too much for our mental bandwidth to handle, algorithms curate what we see, and AI composes music, paints portraits, and writes novels that many cannot distinguish from the work of a skilled human?

The Flood of Mass Culture

The sheer volume of cultural production today dwarfs anything witnessed in previous centuries. YouTube uploads more than 500 hours of video content every minute. Streaming platforms release new series weekly, sometimes daily. TikTok births trends so quickly they can peak and die within 24 hours. Art, music, essays, and even poetry are pumped into the digital ecosystem which no human being alive can properly take in, let alone digest.

This abundance creates an odd paradox: we have more creative output than ever before, yet less room for works that demand our undivided attention, which means a certain investment of time and exercising of patience. But this is not what our modern culture runs on. 

Algorithms reward what is instantly gratifying. The slower, risk-taking, idiosyncratic genius is easily drowned out by the churn of content engineered for speed and its ability to go viral. A Gustav Mahler symphony or Thomas Mann novel, would they come out today, could very well struggle to be even noticed in a saturated cultural environment which has far less patience for grappling with such complex works.

AI and the End of Originality?

The advent of artificial intelligence has made this paradox even more pronounced. AI models can now generate convincing works of art, compose music in Bach’s style, or produce essays that could give a passing grade to undergraduates. Already, entire books are being generated by AI; in some cases, that fact is being used by their ‘authors’ as a selling point, even a new way of creative expression. Critics however call this the death of originality. What then becomes of the idea of a singular, irreplaceable genius?

The danger is not per se that AI will create ‘better’ art than humans, but that it will cheapen our relationship to art altogether. When every style can be reproduced instantly, style loses its sense of scarcity. When images can be conjured by a prompt, the act of imagination risks becoming transactional rather than transcendent. The genius may be displaced by the machine that can produce everything we think we want. A true genius (dare we say visionary?) however offers us something we never even knew we wanted or needed. 

The Curse of the Algorithm

And then there remains a deeper risk: that we might no longer recognise genius when it appears. In a world designed for immediacy, genius may simply not register. Original thought often feels strange, difficult, or unsettling at first. But in the online space, where most of us engage with culture, algorithms are designed to filter out discomfort and deliver what is familiar and frictionless. These algorithms are also training the mind of whoever subjects himself to them, creating a de facto comfort zone. The danger is not that we lack geniuses, but that we never see their work because it wasn’t optimised for our feed. And if we do come across them, many would more likely than not scroll right past them. 

While we should recall that many geniuses of the past were misunderstood or ignored in their lifetimes, today, their invisibility could be permanent—not because their work lacks brilliance, but because it never made waves in what literary critic Harold Bloom in 2000 termed ‘the great gray ocean of the internet.’

So what does this mean for us? If we want genius to survive, we must cultivate habits that resist the onslaught of mass culture. That means seeking out work not because it is trending, but because it challenges us. It means preserving the mental space for difficult creative endeavours. Above all, it means remembering that true originality often feels uncomfortable, slow, or even alien. Perhaps the ultimate test of our era is whether we can still tell the difference between the algorithmically familiar and the authentically original. 

In the age of mass culture and AI, the myth of the lone genius is not dead. But it will only endure if we are willing to fight for it—and against sameness and our own addiction to what is easy and gives instant gratification. For if we lose the ability to recognise genius, we risk not only the death of originality but the erosion of what makes human creativity worth cherishing at all.

Statement

As AI floods our cultural landscape with algorithmically generated content, human genius—once revered for its singular vision and defiance of convention—stands on loose sand. Not because machines create better art, but because they swamp our attention with the easily consumable, diluting our capacity to notice the slow, strange, or profound. Algorithms reward what flatters the familiar, numbing our instincts for the truly original. In this system, genius doesn’t disappear—it’s ignored. If we can’t reclaim the will to seek out difficulty, discomfort, and depth, we risk trading transcendence for mere output. AI won’t kill genius. We might, through our neglecting it.