In the age of AI, do libraries remain the same? Photo: PROVIDED TO CSST

Literary criticism is an essential part of literary activity. Through the analysis, interpretation, and evaluation of literary works, it feeds back into literary creation, promotes literary development, and helps shape and guide the aesthetic tastes of the era.

In the age of AI, human thought and behavior are undergoing profound changes, and many tasks once exclusive to humans are gradually being taken over by AI. In today’s literary landscape, literary creation is also being “invaded” by various AI tools. Faced with this unprecedented transformation, is literary criticism headed toward its “end?”

Double-edged sword

The primary advantage of AI lies in its efficiency. So, can the integration of AI into literary criticism enhance the efficiency of critical writing? Can AI become a “sharp blade” in the hands of critics?

First, AI-assisted literary criticism demonstrates a high degree of professionalism. As The Literary Mind and the Carving of Dragons puts it: “Only after playing a thousand tunes can one understand music; only after observing a thousand swords can one recognize quality.” AI-powered criticism has the potential to become a form of skilled craftsmanship. Drawing on statistical analysis, information theory, and cybernetics, AI can develop a deep familiarity with the object of critique while also mastering critical methodologies.

For instance, if we ask DeepSeek to write a review of the novel Red Sorghum from a cultural studies perspective, issues of ideology, class, and social structure—central to cultural studies—will naturally be presented in a formulaic yet effective manner. AI can easily complete an evaluative task through close textual analysis, reflecting its “professionalism.” This is also evident in its polished critical language, its ready application of methods, and its coherent logical structure. In this sense, AI-generated reviews may surpass the level of most general readers’ literary criticism.

Second, AI-driven literary criticism is marked by contingency. While criticism is a rational activity, it also depends on sensory and emotional experience. With AI’s involvement, the keywords of criticism may no longer be limited to literary works and critical methods, but could also include the diverse experiences of different social groups, varying historical contexts, or trending topics. Even the choice of model and its training data can lead to divergent outputs. These variations can yield widely divergent conclusions. We often emphasize that literary creation is a creative act— but so is literary criticism. Generative AI, drawing on deep learning across multiple databases, is capable of self-learning and producing criticism that is not only analytical and patterned but also creative in nature.

Third, AI’s presence in literary criticism signals a move away from humanism and toward post-anthropocentrism. Literary criticism emerged from the rise of humanist thought and reflects human cognition and values through the critique of literature. Yet such understanding and value judgment are rooted in human experience and needs. Amid growing awareness of biodiversity and climate change, anthropocentrism is increasingly seen as a potential source of various crises. AI-based literary criticism is no longer solely driven by human concerns, as it may also engage with broader biological or ecological perspectives. This imaginative methodological shift could spur the rise of interdisciplinary criticism—and, more importantly, foster a post-anthropocentric approach to literary analysis.

Absence of ‘human touch’

At its core, literature is a study of humanity. The “literary” (wen) emphasizes the meaning and value that human thought and agency bring to literary works. So, does AI-empowered literary criticism risk falling short of human expectations?

On one hand, AI-generated literary criticism lacks the true essence of critique. Criticism entails both analysis and judgment. Lu Xun once described essays as “daggers and spears that, together with readers, can carve a bloody path to survival.” But can AI criticism convey human empathy? Outstanding criticism breathes with the times and shares its destiny. When too much “AI flavor” seeps into literary discourse, our thinking becomes wrapped, guided, even disciplined and restrained by data. Though we may appear to wield the weapons of criticism, we may, in losing empathy and moral conviction, have also lost our critical edge. Literary criticism without thought is like a splendid ruin: technically brilliant and methodologically cutting-edge, yet soulless. Such criticism cannot form a literary movement, nor can it truly drive literary development forward.

On the other hand, AI-driven criticism blurs the boundaries of reality. For a long time, the relationship between literature and the world has followed the theory of mimesis. From Plato and Aristotle to Engels and Chernyshevsky, literary criticism has upheld “truth” as a key criterion. As romanticism rose, expressionism flourished, and abstract expressionism and conceptual art emerged, the “real” in literature shifted from material truth to spiritual truth. With the advent of technological civilization and postmodern culture, the material world ceased to obey the principles of realism. The arrival of the “surreal” has fundamentally overturned the foundations of objective reality. The future world constructed by AI may become a “society of spectacle”—a reality built upon layers of simulation. In immersive VR or MR experiences, what humans acquire is no longer truth, but a sense of truth. Will AI-led literary criticism become lost between the real and the seemingly real, ultimately resulting in the loss of meaning?

Triple transformation and human-centered steering

AI-driven literary criticism is bound to become more efficient and more rapid. Due to the convenience it offers, it is foreseeable that more and more people will abandon traditional modes of writing in favor of using AI for analyzing literary content and style, establishing critical frameworks, and summarizing relevant data. If humans are still somewhat cautious in their current use of AI, it is only a matter of time before this trial phase resolves enough concerns to give way to widespread adoption. In the near future, we may witness an explosion of AI-generated literary criticism across various online platforms. This trend could fundamentally reshape the overall structure of literary criticism in three key ways.

First, “AI-style” literary criticism will reshape the identity of the critic. With AI’s assistance, literary criticism becomes accessible to all, transforming it from an elite discourse into a more democratized practice. AI can help individuals articulate their personal interpretations, and through deep learning and self-training across vast datasets, some AI-supported critiques may even stand out amid the sea of homogenized commentary.

Second, AI is altering the criteria for selecting works of criticism. In the pre-AI era, the objects of literary criticism were typically prominent works, chosen with clear cultural or ideological orientations, either by the mainstream or the market. Evaluating these works often carried a clear cultural mission and value agenda. In the future, however, the critical focus may shift to works that rank highly in data analysis powered by computational core metrics—in other words, those that AI “notices” first.

Finally, the AI era will also reshape the language of criticism. As Marx once said, “Language is the direct reality of thought.” Even in the age of AI, literary criticism must still rely on conventional language to express itself. Yet how can language convey meaning efficiently if it lacks human thought behind it? In digital spaces, language is bound to mutate in unpredictable ways. These linguistic shifts will in turn be absorbed into new language systems. “Constant renewal” and “uncontrollability” may become the new norms of critical language in the AI era.

In sum, AI is shaping a new cultural space, but this space still belongs, fundamentally, to humanity. AI’s victory over Go world champion Lee Sedol did not destroy the game of Go—on the contrary, it heightened awareness of human limitations while deepening their appreciation for the game itself. Likewise, AI-powered literary criticism remains literary criticism. It continues to play an indispensable role in the literary world. With AI, literary criticism may unlock richer interpretive dimensions and embrace an open horizon of future possibilities.

Weng Zaihong is deputy dean and professor from the School of Humanities and Museology at Nanjing University of the Arts.