By Kelsey Maurine Brickl
Something is rotten in certain spaces online. Across TikTok, comment sections, blog posts, and opinion pieces, the Manchester, UK production of a musical comedy that flourished on Broadway is being excoriated for the alleged use of generative AI in several onstage backdrops and paper props.
I am not joining this pile-on.
The argument condemning this production is taking place inside a very specific online theatre bubble that has mistaken its own shared rage for a settled ethical principle. The outrage is, frankly, divorced from reality.
Theatre was not an AI-free human sanctuary until the suspected use of generative imagery in Something Rotten. In 2018, the National Theatre began using smart caption glasses with speech-following technology so patrons could receive captions from any seat. GalaPro has, for years, marketed closed captioning, audio description, translation, and amplification through patrons’ own devices. Ticketing and audience-development systems have long relied on dynamic pricing, demand prediction, customer segmentation, CRM automation, and audience analytics. Tessitura announced an automated dynamic-pricing partnership with Vatic in 2023. TodayTix openly tells patrons that some shows change prices based on demand. Professional theatre already uses AI and algorithmic systems in ticketing, marketing, access technology, captioning, translation, production planning, and design workflows. Disabled patrons, in particular, are often expected to rely on AI-supported access systems in order to attend performances at all.
Hybrid and augmentative AI did not arrive when consumers gained access to ChatGPT. Entertainment technology has used machine-learning-adjacent and algorithmic tools for years to make technical work faster, cheaper, easier, more scalable, and more predictable: rendering, editing, image cleanup, sound processing, lighting visualization. Most ticket-holders did not know. Many performers did not know. That ignorance does not mean the technology was absent. It means the public is only now noticing it when the output is visible enough to become a screenshot.
So when the argument proceeds as though one suspected visible use of generative imagery has suddenly introduced artificial intelligence into an otherwise untouched human art form, I cannot take it seriously.
That does not make every use of AI good in ethics or quality. It does mean this criticism is being argued from a false premise. Generative and hybrid imagery, adtech, automated and dynamic pricing, seating systems, speech recognition, captioning, translation, labour displacement, disclosure, contractual obligations, licensing, copyright, and poor artistic execution are specific matters requiring specific evidence.
Name the practice, the harm, the obligation, and the breach. Point out who was replaced and when. Explain why the alleged violation is demonstrably worse than an alternative.
One suspected visible use of generative AI with questionable visual quality cannot bear the weight of a referendum on whether AI belongs in theatre while the industry’s existing AI-dependent machinery is left untouched. A backdrop is easier to photograph than a ticketing platform, captioning device, marketing workflow, pricing model, or access system. That does not make it morally unique.
If the claim is copyright, make the copyright argument. If the claim is labour displacement, show the labour relationship. If the claim is nondisclosure, identify the duty to disclose. If the claim is poor design, then say the design is poor. Collapsing all of that into “AI does not belong in theatre” is sloppy, and I am not going to pretend otherwise.
Theatre can ask hard questions about AI. It should. Those questions require more than aesthetic disgust, professional anxiety, and comment-section consensus.
This essay was written without an LLM, but the position is mine either way: I refuse to boycott one production because a small sector of the internet has decided to perform morally superior, technophobic innocence in an industry that has already abandoned it.
Selected Sources
- Arena Stage Company. 2026. “Production Infrastructure and Accessibility Integration (GalaPro Framework).” Arena Stage Performance Catalog, Volume 114: 12–14. https://www.arenastage.org/contentassets/009ff394ac3a4534bd987e015993b21f/inherit-the-wind-full-company.pdf
- Balkin, S., and Metzger, Sean. 2025. “Can AI Read the Room?: Attuning Machines to the Affective Atmospheres of Live Performance.” Theatre, Dance and Performance Training, vol. 16, no. 3: 290–307. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2040610X.2025.2544414
- National Theatre Great Britain. 2022. “Smart Caption Glasses Accessibility Briefing.” National Theatre Access Archive. https://www.nationaltheatre.org.uk/your-visit/access/caption-glasses
- Nasir, H. 2026. “Artificial Intelligence as a Tool for Reimagining Experience: A Structural Analysis of Automated and Algorithmic Dramaturgical Systems.” Central Asian Journal of Literature, Philosophy and Culture, vol. 7, no. 2: 88–99. https://www.cajlpc.casjournal.org/index.php/CAJLPC/article/download/1451/1498
- O’Dwyer, N. 2022. Digital Scenography and Algorithmic Automation in Contemporary Performance. London: Methuen Drama, Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/digital-scenography-9781350193437/
- Oncins, Estelita. 2024. “No Audience Left Behind, One App Fits All: An Integrated Approach to Accessibility Services.” The Journal of Specialised Translation, no. 41: 112–131. https://www.jostrans.org/article/view/7912/7678
- Rachmanto, A., and Supabase Database Consortium. 2025. “Utilizing Generative AI Technology for the Development of Live Entertainment Ticketing and Seat Information Systems.” Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology and Enterprise Systems (INCITEST), vol. 8: 45–52. https://proceedings.unikom.ac.id/index.php/incitest/article/download/825/736
- Rajnai, Sára. 2023. “Digital Technology and Adapting Roles in Contemporary Scenography.” National College of Art and Design Research Repository. https://thesis.ncad.ie/T6415_Digital%20Technology%20and%20Adapting%20Roles%20in%20%20Contemporary%20Scenography_Rajnai_Sara%20AD222%2022-23.pdf
- Reason, Matthew, and Millman, H. 2022. The Routledge Companion to Audiences and the Performing Arts. New York: Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/The-Routledge-Companion-to-Audiences-and-the-Performing-Arts/Reason/p/book/9780367468491
- Teófilo, M. R. S. 2023. “Enabling Deaf or Hard of Hearing Accessibility in Live Theaters through Virtual Reality and Automatic Speech Recognition.” Federal University of Amazonas Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations. https://tede.ufam.edu.br/bitstream/tede/7204/12/Tese_MauroTe%C3%B3filo_PPGI.pdf
- TodayTix Group. 2024. “Terms of Use and Consumer Purchase Policies: Dynamic Scaling and Demand Modeling Disclosure.” TodayTix Legal Index. https://www.todaytix.com/
- Vatic IA / Tessitura Network. 2023. “Strategic Partnership Announcement: Automated Dynamic Pricing and Demand Prediction Systems for the Performing Arts.” Tessitura Network Innovation Briefings. https://www.tessituranetwork.com/