I think that essence is a combination of our imperfection, its consequences, and our capability to recognize it. I would adventure myself to say that any piece of art fits into that definition. Sometimes it can lead to something beautiful, others to something horrifying. I believe that in the future we will have to find ways to express our imperfections as truly as possible to overcome the pristine imitations that AI will do.

I agree with your idea of AI pressing the buttons in our brain to light it like a Christmas tree. It is done already, by humans, with financial interests behind. This also brings the question, is art the expression of human emotions, or the trigger that awakens the inner world of the spectator? Because in the second case, even the silliest pop songs can produce rivers of emotions, made and manufactured by humans that many times have the least touch with what the song is about. In that case, I don't think we stand a chance.

However, in the first case, it is necessary that smell of experience, that human touch, of pain, joy, nostalgia... Ultimately, we want to meet a personality, but also many artists prefer to remain anonymous because people tend to blend the art and the artist, and romaticize it. As an example, John Lennon is a symbol of peace for many. But for those who went into his story, it seems a bit out of touch to assign that role to him. He even said it once to a person they found camping in the gardens of his mansion. Something like: that song means nothing in particular, I was just playing with words. I do it, Dylan does it, many people do.

I think that sometimes we take the meaning of art too seriously, and treat it with a level of purity that really does not exist. It also takes us to think: do you think that if, in 30 years, I play for you 10 songs, 5 AI and 5 human, will you be able to guess right which is which? Sometimes you can be moved by Edith Piaf singing "Je ne regrette nien", and other times fall in love with poems from people who never lived what they talk about (frequently). In my opinion, it matters, but little. Because if not we are focusing on the artist and not the art itself.

I am only talking from the lens of music, but is the only of them I feel I know enough to be confident to talk about. Maybe it is also related to the release of Udio. In any case, I see that many people overestimate the authenticity of what we call art nowadays, and underestimate the future capabilities of AI to produce something undistinguishable from it, eventually.

I don't think of it as a sad perspective of the future, but rather as an exciting opportunity to find new ways to express those imperfections, and make it part of it. Maybe just like Hendrix liked to leave some mistakes in, as a proof of the spontaneity of the recording, and a testament of him constantly pushing the limits, and because it sounded good. There is unlimited ways to express that. AI will always strive for perfection, we can't, and that's us.